Multiple instruments meant at planning evaluation projects and to track progress; develop interviews, focus groups, questionnaires, surveys etc. ; promote good practice and assure staff-led Patient Focus and Public Involvement work; ensure that learning points and actions are identified and implemented or taken forward appropriately; plan, check and/or audit actions for evaluation findings; and improve practices of involvement.


Scottish Health Council, “Evaluating Participation. A guide and toolkit for health and social care and practitioners”, 2014. 34p

Download* : http://www.scottishhealthcouncil.org/patient__public_participation/participation_toolkit/idoc.ashx?docid=6ebf824e-82fb-4205-8a2e-95301c6abafe&version=-1

* Tools can be found at p. 145 to p. 151 151


Scientific Rigour
Patient and Public Perspective

Assessment Grid

We provide a five-point rating for each of the following four criteria:

  • Scientific Rigour: Was the development of the evaluation tool scientifically rigorous and based on existing evidence on patient and public engagement?
  • Patient and Public Perspective: Does the evaluation tool take into account the views of patients and the public (both in its development and use)?
  • Comprehensiveness: Is the tool comprehensive in evaluating the context, process, outcomes and impacts of patient and public engagement?
  • Usability: Is the evaluation tool easy to use?

Each criterion has 5 question-items. We gave 1 point per item if the answer to the question was YES, 0 points if the answer was NO or CANNOT ANSWER.