The PSTA / Commissioning Compass / Reading
Key questions
Aspect of Commissioning 4: citizen, place, and outcome centred. Teaching text from June 2025.
June 2025 teaching template, slide 49
Citizen, place, and outcome centred (1/2)
Is the work led by the people or place who need it, and measured according to the outcomes they get?
Are we commissioning and working together in a way that drives real change on the ground, as measured by real impact and reported by citizens and communities?
Are we taking outcomes-led approaches, learning from real change on the ground, tracking and learning from impact, and reports from citizens and communities?
Do we have real engagement with and understanding of actual needs, demand as different from need, including active identification of unmet needs or unmet demand? For economy, infrastructure, citizens and community, seeking to identify real needs rather than our belief about what is needed?
Give each question a score and once completed document some observations and examples for each aspect 0 – 24 Poor (significant risk), 25 – 49 Fair (lesser/lower risk, improvement required) ,50 – 74 Good (shortfalls identified/need to be addressed) 75 – 100 Excellent (no action required)
June 2025 teaching template, slide 50
Citizen, place, and outcome centred (2/2)
Are equity and sustainability at the heart of our commissioning approach?
Do we have co-production, co-design, or engagement at all stages of the commissioning cycle? Do we know when to use each type?
Do we have a commitment to co-producing analysis, design, decision-making, delivery, and governance with all citizens, stakeholders, promoting inclusion and equality, especially from underrepresented groups?
Do we look at the whole experience of from the citizen community side, as opposed to a narrow organisational, structural, service, or process silo?
Are we making access to interventions, support and infrastructure clear and accessible to all? Including those who wish to pay?
Are we influencing the approach of the whole organisation and partners in a way consistent with citizen, community, and outcome-centred working?
Give each question a score and once completed document some observations and examples for each aspect 0 – 24 Poor (significant risk), 25 – 49 Fair (lesser/lower risk, improvement required) ,50 – 74 Good (shortfalls identified/need to be addressed) 75 – 100 Excellent (no action required)