Resources and Studies

Policies, frameworks, guides and tools:

Statewide Engagement Framework and Toolkit, Mental Health Commission

This co-designed Engagement Framework and Toolkit aims to assist government, non-government organisations (including private enterprise), and the community to effectively engage and work together to achieve better outcomes for people whose lives are affected by mental health issues and/or alcohol and other drug use. Consumers, families and carers can also use the Engagement Framework and Toolkit as a guide to what they can expect from services in relation to their participation in the service. 

Children of Parents with a Mental Illness. (2012). COPMI lived experience partnership policy and COPMI staff selection participation policy. North Adelaide.

These documents provide examples of an organisation’s policies to involve and engage people with lived experience.

Children of Parents with a Mental Illness. (n.d.). Effective participation: how to involve people with lived experience of mental illness. North Adelaide.

This webpage offers information on how to involve people with lived experience in planning, delivery and evaluation.

Faulkner, A. (2015). 4Pi National Involvement Standards. Involvement for influence. Full report. London: National Survivor User Network.

The aim of the 4Pi standards (principles, purpose, presence, process, impact) is to provide a framework, both for establishing good practice in the involvement of service users and carers in mental health care, service delivery and policy, and for monitoring and assessing that involvement. The framework builds on the work of many people: service users and carers and others who have lived and breathed involvement and shared their experiences in various ways, both written and unwritten. Additional resources about the standards are available from

National Development Team for Inclusion. Personalisation - don’t just do it - co-produce it and live it! A guide to co-production with older people. Dorset, United Kingdom.

This short guide summarises the key messages from a co-production team who worked together to identify what co-production with older people means, what it involves, and what it looks and feels like when it really happens at a local level. The group identified seven key principles which are described in this booklet. The guide also contains stories that describe how individuals and communities have worked in partnership with public services to co-produce services and change lives.

Perkins, R (n.d.). From consumer involvement to co-production.      

This presentation offers a view from Perkins’ perspectives based on her personal and professional experiences: 33 years working in NHS Mental Health Services - from clinical psychologist to director; 25 years using mental health services (both inpatient and outpatient); and over 20 years involvement in policy development on various United Kingdom Government committees and advisory groups.

Perkins, R. (2015). Engaging in co-production and developing team recovery implementation plans. PowerPoint presentation from workshops held in Queensland in May 2015.

Perkins leads participants to explore and practice evidence-based processes such as co-production and Team Recovery Implementation Plans (TRIP) as tools to guide client-centred, self-directed practice. Perkins explores how services can move from more traditional ‘consumer involvement’ to genuine partnership/co-production in both design and delivery that brings together the professional and lived-experience expert on equal terms.

Perkins, R. (2013). Paths to personalisation in mental health. United Kingdom. The National Development Team for Inclusion and Think Local Act Personal.

In this 15 minute video Dr Rachel Perkins talks about the connections between personalisation and recovery in mental health.

Scottish Co-Production Network. (n.d.). Co-production – how we make a difference together. Scotland.

This website provides a suite of resources - videos, case studies and information - to help spread understanding of co-production. These resources give examples of the different ways in which co-production approaches can be used, and attempts to draw together the principles of co-production and the practicalities of working in this way.

Social Care Institute for Excellence. (2013). Co-production in social care: What it is and how to do it. SCIE Guide 51. London: Social Care Institute for Excellence.

This guide is organised in two sections. The first examines what co-production is and the principles on which co-productive approaches should be based. It also outlines the policy context, the economic impacts and describes key issues associated with co-production. The second gives guidance on how to put co-production approaches in organisations and projects into action. It gives clear recommendations on the key changes that organisations need to make to develop co-production approaches.

Case studies and co-production in context:

NESTA. (2012). People Powered Health Co-Production Catalogue. London: NESTA.  

The purpose of this catalogue is to showcase a range of case studies of co-production in action. It enables practitioners to reflect on their own practice and the extent to which it represents co-production. It also enables them to learn about what co-production looks like in practice.

New Economics Foundation (2011). Stories of co-production. London.

This is a link to an 8 minute video that shows some of the various contexts in which co-production has been implemented.

Scottish Co-Production Network. (n.d.). Co-production – how we make a difference together. Scotland.

This website provides a suite of resources - videos, case studies and information - to help spread understanding of co-production. These resources give examples of the different ways in which co-production approaches can be used, and attempts to draw together the principles of co-production and the practicalities of working in this way.

Slay, J. (2011). In This Together. Building knowledge about co-production. London: New Economics Foundation.

This report tells the stories of people who are improving public services by working with the people who use them and delivering public services in a radically different way. It describes a range of practical projects and includes personal testimonies from individuals directly involved.

Research and literature reviews:

Article: Co-production: Putting principles into practice in the mental health context and accompanying resource.

Alakeson, V., Bunnin, A. & Miller, C. (2013). Coproduction of health and wellbeing outcomes: the new paradigm for effective health and social care. London: OPM.

This paper highlights the common philosophy that underpins the different approaches to co-production and shared decision making, the similarities in the processes that are used, and the wide range of circumstances in which they are being applied.

Boyle, D. & Harris, M. (2009). The challenge of co-production: how equal partnerships between professionals and the public are crucial to improving public services. London: NESTA.

This paper provides the basis for both a better understanding and a stronger evidence base for co-production. Given the current diversity of uses of the term, this paper also explains what co-production isn’t. It diagnoses why public service reform is stalled, and why a radically new approach – sharing the design and delivery of services with users – can break this logjam and make services more effective for the public, more cost-effective for policymakers, and more sustainable for all of us.

Boyle, D., Coote, A., Sherwood, C. & Slay. J. (2010). Co-production: right here right now. London: NESTA.

This report examines how people's needs are better met when they are involved in an equal and reciprocal relationship with professionals and others. It discusses the barriers to co-production and provides recommendations on how it can be implemented.

Cameron, A. (May, 2015). Classics: Co-Production – Radical roots, radical results. The Edge. (Issue 8). United Kingdom: NHS Improving Quality.

Cameron comments that co-production has become something of a buzzword often used as a rebadging of patient/service user involvement. The author goes back to the radical roots of co-production to question when genuine co-production is present and when it is being talked about but is there in name only.

Realpe, A. & Wallace, L.M. (2010). What is co-production? United Kingdom: Coventry University Co-creating Health Evaluation Team.

This report establishes the origins of co-production in health, economic and social arenas. How the concept is used in relation to people with long-term health conditions, how it can be defined, and how clinicians can capture the quality of co-production in consultations are also discussed.

Slay, J. & Stephens, L. (2013). Co-production in mental health: A literature review. London: New Economics Foundation.

This literature review focuses upon literature that has a research or evaluation component about the outcome or impact of co-production. It offers a definition of co-production, outlines its six key principles, analyses the evidence offered in the literature and discusses the value of co-production.