Beverley Searle introduces the National Performance Indicators in the context of the history of measuring wellbeing and Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, before introducing a group activity involving assessing the relevance and importance of a selection of indicators.
Feedback from group exercise
The indicators were useful but focused on minimising dissatisfaction and increasing satisfaction. Some issues and groups were not well catered for: home and connectivity/transport and wellbeing for transient groups, such as asylum seekers. And there should be a place for commonsense.
Removed indicators based on improving perceptions. Generally happy with indicators, in particular focus on mental health wellbeing and improving self assessed general health, children’s deprivation and people living in poverty. Would like to see a focus on life course rather than life stages.
High level targets hard to disagree with but there are competing agendas. Unsure how wealthier and fairer work together: eg safer and stronger could conflict with ‘green agenda. Also a question of context and who is asking the question – can they be neutral?
Concern about focus on sustainable economic growth as the measure of success.In contrast to group 2 , this group felt perceptions were important. Desire to see more emphasis on assets rather than deficits.
Ni big issues with the indicators but concerned about their measurement. There was a lack of housing measures in social care. Issues raised about scale: national, local and community. There was feeling that the individual was a bit detached from the process.