Bassetlaw Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise Services Listening Exercise

Background

The way voluntary organisations in Bassetlaw are funded is different to other parts of Nottingham and Nottinghamshire. This is due to commissioning arrangements that were in place before two separate organisations merged to become NHS Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Integrated Care Board (ICB).

Nottingham and Nottinghamshire ICB are now reviewing these arrangements in order to consider the best way of spending limited NHS funding to make sure we meet the health needs of local people. It will help us to address any inconsistencies in different geographical areas and reduce duplication of some services.

Nottingham and Nottinghamshire ICB is currently operating 10 different grants across Bassetlaw to support the local community. The current providers are:

• Bassetlaw Action Centre
• Bassetlaw Community Voluntary Service
• Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice
• Barnsley Premier Leisure
• Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire
• Royal Voluntary Service
• Children’s Bereavement Service
• In Sam’s Name
• Muddy Fork
• The Sleep Charity

To support the review, an engagement exercise commenced on the 6 May 2025 and concluded on the 28 May 2025 to understand people’s experiences of these services to inform future commissioning decisions. A range of different methods were used to listen to citizens and stakeholders, to understand their views. In total, over 400 individuals participated.

Key findings

• Most VCSE organisations received strong positive feedback from both the public and professionals.
• Across all services, the majority of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that services were high quality, recommendable, and beneficial to community health and wellbeing.
  • Bassetlaw Action Centre was valued for transport and wellbeing services, though concerns were raised about volunteer reliance and service accessibility.
  • BCVS was recognised for its role in social prescribing and volunteer coordination, but some noted a decline in personal support for volunteers.
  • Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice was highly regarded for holistic family support, though usage was limited to those with specific needs.
  • Barnsley Premier Leisure was felt to deliver health benefits, especially for cardiac rehab, but cost was a barrier for some.
  • Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire was praised for practical support and accessibility, with a few concerns about inconsistent advice.
  • Royal Voluntary Service was seen as valuable for hospital discharge support, though some overlap with other services was noted.
  • Children’s Bereavement Centre was felt to deliver strong emotional support with positive outcomes for children and families.
  • In Sam’s Name was believed to provide vital peer support for men’s mental health, with high satisfaction.
  • Muddy Fork was celebrated for its therapeutic gardening model and social impact.
  • The Sleep Charity was seen to deliver effective sleep interventions, though some mixed outcomes were reported.
• Most respondents continued to refer or signpost to these services, with non-referral often due to lack of current need rather than dissatisfaction. Some noted gaps in communication, eligibility criteria, or service alignment with specific client needs.

Conclusion

The voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) sector in Bassetlaw plays a vital role in supporting the health, wellbeing, and social care needs of local residents – particularly those who are vulnerable or underserved. These services are not only valued by the communities they serve but are also recognised by professionals as integral to the delivery of integrated care.

While overall satisfaction with the services is high, this Listening Exercise highlighted opportunities to improve consistency, accessibility, and coordination. In particular, issues around volunteer dependency, communication gaps, and affordability were noted as areas for attention.

As Nottingham and Nottinghamshire ICB considers future commissioning arrangements, it will be important to ensure that any decision is not only informed by this engagement but also clearly aligned with strategic priorities. While the feedback reflects strong support for the VCSE sector, it also highlights that some current activity appears disconnected from broader system goals. 

Next steps

This report will be submitted for consideration through the relevant ICB decision making process. A copy of the final report will be published on our website and shared with those who have participated.

The way in which Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE) organisations in Bassetlaw are funded is different to other parts of Nottingham and Nottinghamshire. This is due to historic arrangements that were in place before the two Clinical Commissioning Groups in our area merged to become NHS Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Integrated Care Board (ICB) in July 2022. The ICB are now reviewing these arrangements in order to consider the best way of spending limited NHS funding to make sure we meet the health needs of local people. It will help us to address any inconsistencies in different geographical areas and reduce duplication of some services.

We strongly recognise and highly value the contribution of our voluntary sector partners. We are keen to work with them on a more sustainable basis, using population health data to target those communities experiencing health inequalities. This will involve longer term planning around how we commission voluntary sector services across the whole of Nottingham and Nottinghamshire to meet the aims of our Integrated Care Strategy.

Organisations in the scope of the review

Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Integrated Care Board (ICB) are currently operating 10 different grants across Bassetlaw to support the community in accessing groups and services around various aspects.  The current providers are listed below:

• Bassetlaw Action Centre
• Bassetlaw Community Voluntary Service
• Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice
• Barnsley Premier Leisure
• Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire
• Royal Voluntary Service
• Children’s Bereavement Service
• In Sam’s Name
• Muddy Fork
• The Sleep Charity

Further information on these organisations and the services they deliver are described in sections 2.2.1 – 2.2.10.

Bassetlaw Action Centre (BAC)

BAC is a community resource agency offering help and support to individuals and organisations throughout Bassetlaw; promoting the independence of older and vulnerable people and supporting individuals with long term conditions. The services which receive funding from the ICB are: 

• Staying Well – Expert Patient Programme (EPP) – Delivery of the NHS England EPP, providing and promoting a series of self-management patient programmes for individuals with long-term conditions, including Long COVID. The programme provides patients with the knowledge, skills and tools to manage their health early; support to prevent co-morbidities, reducing dependency on statutory services, and supporting long-term independence.
• Promoting Independence – Works in collaboration with the Royal Voluntary Service (RVS), Home from Hospital Service, supporting patients after hospital discharge for up to 12 weeks. BAC identifies individuals requiring extended support beyond RVS’s six-week limit, helping vulnerable patients remain safe and well at home while reducing readmissions. 
• Community Transport Service – Provides door-to-door transport for individuals unable to attend hospital, GP, or community service appointments due to mobility issues or lack of public transport in rural areas of Bassetlaw. The service includes waiting for up to an hour to ensure return trips, reducing missed appointments. 
• Befriending Service – Offers support to socially isolated individuals, promoting health and wellbeing through community engagement. This includes safe and well checks for those living alone, ensuring timely intervention when needed to prevent escalation and reduce reliance on secondary or primary care services.

Bassetlaw Community Voluntary Service (BCVS)

Bassetlaw Community Voluntary Service is a registered charity that works to challenge deprivation, health inequalities and social exclusion through supporting local residents and voluntary and community groups across Bassetlaw and Bolsover. They work to create, support and develop a sustainable and vibrant third sector, and involves both direct support and communicating and facilitating strong and effective community voices which will have an influence locally, regionally and nationally. The services which receive funding from the ICB are: 

• Social Prescribing Link Worker (Bassetlaw Hospital) – 1.45 FTE SPLW based at Bassetlaw Hospital who support patients attending Accident and Emergency and patients who are discharged or awaiting discharge. Also provides support for high intensity service users and works closely with the mental health team. 
• Bassetlaw Voices – Bassetlaw Voices provides support for a sustainable, inclusive and healthy voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE). The funding supports volunteering, increasing the visibility and understanding of the VCSE sector; supporting inclusion, representation and advocacy at system meetings; providing a communication function of information and guidance for the VSCE sector; providing support to evidence effectiveness of the VCSE sector; supporting sustainability. The service supports volunteer training, opportunities, and outreach to vulnerable and multicultural communities. Together, they provide rapid responses to local needs, such as assisting Ukraine guests, Hong Kong arrivals, and Polish and Roma citizens in Bassetlaw. This facilitates proactive preventative intervention delivery and self-care support growth locally that reduces presentation across health and social care.

Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice

Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice provide a range of care and support for people with life-limiting conditions, ensuring that they get the care they need, when they need it, within their local community. The service supports the whole family and gives them opportunity to benefit from a positive environment of care, carer support and respite.

Barnsley Premier Leisure

Barnsley Premier Leisure is a not-for-profit charitable trust that manages a variety of leisure facilities and activities, primarily in Barnsley, Yorkshire, and Nottinghamshire. They operate under a model that aims to make people feel good through fun, friendly, and innovative leisure experiences:

• Exercise on Referral Scheme (including cardiac rehabilitation) – This service provides Long Term Exercise and Cardiac Rehabilitation programme for patients with cardiac/vascular related conditions. This includes patients leaving the hospital based Cardiac Rehabilitation scheme, patients who have fallen or are at risk of falling, cancer patient’s pre-treatment and those who are ready to commence exercise post treatment. The service also covers patients on the long Covid pathway, stroke and long-term neuro conditions and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. Patients are referred into the service from GPs, community teams and hospital-based services.

Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire

Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire are a charity that provides free and expert advice to people.  They provide debt and income maximisation support to individuals with cancer, terminal illness, mental health issues, long-term health conditions, or those at end of life. The service aims to improve quality of life, engage patients with services, support recovery, and enhance wellbeing. 

Royal Voluntary Service

Royal Voluntary Service is one of Britain’s largest volunteering organisations, they partner with companies, charities, and the NHS to expand support where it’s needed most:

• Home from Hospital Service – Provides support to facilitate the discharge of patients from acute care. The service staff and volunteers help individuals to retain their independence through support to return home, reducing the number of individuals remaining in hospital longer than they need once their medical and nursing requirements have been met, and reducing the number of patients who are readmitted to hospital when not medically necessary. The service provides short-term low-level support for up to 6 weeks at home to older people primarily aged 55 years and over following a stay in hospital or intermediate care. The service is provided by volunteers who have received appropriate training and are managed by a service coordinator.

Children’s Bereavement Service 

The Children’s Bereavement Service provides one-to-one bereavement support for children and young people aged 3-18. The service enables children to talk about their anxieties and feelings to allow them to normalise their grief. They are encouraged to compile a memory/feelings book and undertake individual support in order to understand how they feel and to come to terms with their loss. The service also provides advice and support for families affected by terminal illness. This service enables families to talk to their children following the devastating news of terminal illness diagnosis.

In Sam’s Name

In Sam’s Name, is a peer support group for men who are 18+ suffering from mental health issues throughout Nottinghamshire. The aim is to break the stigma of talking about mental health and prevent suicide within males.

The group was set up in Bassetlaw following the death by suicide of a local Bassetlaw citizen. The group has expanded its provision wider than Bassetlaw and operates across Nottinghamshire. The aim of the group is to prevent suicide and break the stigma of talking about mental health, particularly with males, through conversation, friendship and additional support. The group holds meetings in Worksop, Retford, Ollerton and Kirkby in Ashfield and holds a monthly Walk & Talk in Worksop. The success of the In Sam’s Name group led to the development of In Sam’s Name – For Her; a group for ladies that are struggling with mental health and can receive support from other ladies in a similar situation, with their meetings held in Worksop. 

Muddy Fork 

Muddy Fork is a charity that uses volunteer gardening and conservation activities to improve mental health and wellbeing. They provide a supportive environment where people can engage in meaningful work in nature, helping them to take back control of their lives and improve their mental state. 

Muddy Fork provides wellbeing for people with mental health issues, including those relatively low-level anxiety depression and stress through to those with severe mental illness. The project addresses other issues with which its participants must deal with – poverty (most are on benefits), social isolation, lack of self-esteem, and family problems. The service is also very popular with volunteers and is often oversubscribed. The volunteering and mental health support provided had supported many of these individuals to gain the confidence to enter employment and interact within their own communities.

The Sleep Charity

The Sleep Charity, incorporating The Sleep Council, provide advice and support to empower the nation to sleep better. they campaign to improve sleep support and access to high quality information, raise awareness of the value of a good night’s sleep and promote understanding around the complexities of sleep. 

The Sleep Charity provides appropriate sleep advice and support for parents/carers of disabled and non-disabled children and educates people on the importance of sleep for children’s physical, mental and emotional wellbeing. They support children to get a better nights sleep through behavioural and cognitive intervention (rather than pharmaceutical) and will signpost to secondary care services where necessary.

Engagement aims and objectives

The overarching aim of the listening exercise was to gather feedback and perspectives from both citizens and stakeholders, particularly those who have accessed these services being considered as part of the review. This can be broken down into the following objectives:

• To hear from the public, stakeholders and health, care and voluntary sector staff about how they interact with the Bassetlaw voluntary organisations we fund. 
• To understand what is working well for service users, where improvements could be made and the possible impact of the review.
• Ensure that our engagement is transparent and meets best practice guidelines.
• Undertake meaningful and appropriately targeted engagement with local stakeholders, enabling the involvement of the Bassetlaw community.
• Create a thorough audit trail and evidence base of feedback.
• Develop a comprehensive programme of communications and engagement activity that delivers these objectives.

The listening exercise began on 6^th May 2025 and concluded on 28^th May 2025 (30 days).

A range of different methods were used to listen to citizens and stakeholders, to understand their views. In total, 425 individuals participated by either responding to our survey, attending a public meeting or community group meeting or providing a response to the promotion of the engagement on social media (see Appendix 1).

To ensure consistent messaging across all methods utilised, a narrative describing the proposals was developed.  This formed the basis for all content in the engagement materials, including stakeholder presentations, events and media briefings.

Alternative versions and formats of the public engagement document, including in languages other than English, were available upon request. 

Community group visits and meetings with organisations have continued past the conclusion date to ensure that all feedback and experiences are evidence in the engagement report for consideration. 

Our approach

All engagement activity was undertaken in line with our statutory duties and with The Gunning Principles, which are:

• That engagement must be a time when proposals are still at a formative stage.
• That the proposer must give enough reasons for any proposal to permit intelligent consideration and response.
• That adequate time is given for consideration and response.
• That the product of engagement is conscientiously taken into account when finalising the decision.

To ensure meaningful engagement with patients and the public, we:

• Tailored our methods and approaches to specific audiences as required and make all public information accessible, in line with the Accessible Information Standard.
• Provided accessible documentation suitable for the needs of our audiences.
• Offered accessible formats, including translated versions relevant to the audiences we wanted to engage with.
• Identified and used the best ways of reaching the largest amount of people and provide opportunities for underserved groups to participate.
• Produced a poster to promote the engagement opportunities.
• Undertook equality monitoring of participants to review the representativeness of participants and adapted activity as required.
• Used different virtual/digital methods or direct and 1-1 telephone activity to reach certain communities where we become aware of any under representation.
• Arranged our engagement activities so that they cover the geographical areas.
• Ensured stakeholder mapping considers underserved communities and smaller communities.
• Attended relevant public events and groups where and when necessary.
• Ensured that any meetings that were held have meeting notes recorded including a record of comments and questions.
• Provided language interpreters (including BSL) at meetings and common language translations where necessary and on request.
• Included equality monitoring data on surveys and feedback forms.
• Produced a Frequently Asked Questions document and published this on our website.
• Included information in our Staff Newsletter.
• System Partners shared information in their relevant newsletters and social media platforms.

A comprehensive activity and impact log was produced to evidence all communication and engagement activity during the engagement period.

Public Meetings

Three public meetings were arranged for members of the public and stakeholders to give feedback about how they interact with the Bassetlaw voluntary organisations we fund and to ask any questions they had to ICB representatives. All meetings were conducted online via Microsoft Teams in order to enable access across a geographically dispersed and rural population in Bassetlaw.

To help us understand how many people to expect at public meeting, an MS Forms registration link was created[1], which could be accessed from the ICB website. This let people know that registration was preferable, but not necessary. People also had the opportunity to telephone to register their interest in attending a public meeting. Instructions were shared on how to access the online meetings via MS Teams for those who may not know how to do so. If individuals were unable to attend a public meeting but had a question to ask, they were encouraged to submit this via email or telephone. Recordings of the sessions were shared with members of the public and stakeholders who were unable to attend.

Adjustment to our approach during the listening exercise   At a meeting on 14th May 2025 with Bassetlaw Place Based Partnership colleagues to discuss Health Inequalities, the timing of the scheduled public meetings was questioned as they may excluded many working age citizens from engaging. An additional evening meeting was therefore arranged, taking place on 21st  May, 6.30pm – 7.30pm.    We also heard feedback during the delivery of the initial public meetings that the format of the meeting wasn’t quite right. In response to this, we offered further sessions (both in person and virtual) to groups on request and facilitated questions verbally as well as in writing in the remaining public meetings.

In each public meeting, ICB spokespeople described the background and purpose of the review and organisations in scope. Attendees were then given the opportunity to ask questions or provide any comments they had.

In total, 20 individuals attended a public meeting. 

Stakeholder meetings

Meetings with VCSE organisations

A meeting was convened with Bassetlaw VCSE organisations coordinated by Bassetlaw CVS (13^th May 2025).  This meeting was shared with all organisations in scope of the review to participate in discussions and share their views. 

Bassetlaw Place Based Partnership Health Inequalities Meeting

The ICB Engagement Team attended the Bassetlaw Health Inequalities Meeting vis MS Teams (14^th May 2025).  This meeting was organised by the Bassetlaw Place-Based Partnership.  25 attendees were at the meeting including patient representatives, VCSE Colleagues, Clinical Leads and Local Authority colleagues.  At the meeting an overview of the engagement plan was shared with an opportunity for colleagues to ask questions and provide feedback. Colleagues were encouraged to promote the listening exercise and ways in which members of the public, communities and stakeholders could share their views.

Mid Nottinghamshire Place Based Partnership Health Inequalities Meeting

The ICB Engagement Team provided a written update regarding the engagement activities which was shared with members who attended this meeting.  

Engagement Practitioners Forum

The ICB Engagement Team chaired the ICS Engagement Practitioners Forum Meeting which was held via MS Teams (15^th May 2025).  Fifteen engagement professionals from across our system attended the meeting.  At the meeting an overview of the engagement plan was shared and colleagues on the call were encouraged to promote the engagement activities and encourage members of the public and communities to participate. This information was also shared within the minutes and via email after the meeting to maximise participation. 

Elected member briefing

One virtual briefing with District councillors was arranged by ICB representatives, providing information about the review, methods of engagement and requesting any support in dissemination to constituents.  Ten Councillors attended this meeting. 

Member of Parliament briefing

Following on from a previous discussion in February 2025, on 3^rd June 2025, senior members of the ICB leadership team met with the Member of Parliament for Bassetlaw.  In this discussion, the rationale for the review of the grants programmes was reconfirmed and a discussion was held about the risks presented by the review.  ICB colleagues confirmed the extensive engagement undertaken as part of the process which closed on 28^th May but confirmed a willingness to continue to engage with relevant VCSE groups who had not yet fed in should the MP be aware of any such groups.  One contact was made following this discussion and a meeting was held with the group. 

Community events and groups

The ICB Engagement Team visited 8 groups located across Bassetlaw including: 

• UKSPF Arts and Heritage group Bassetlaw Museum
• UKSPF Arts and Heritage group Harworth and Bircotes Town Hall
• Carlton in Lindrick
• UKSPF Arts and Heritage group John Church Worksop
• UKSPF Arts and Heritage group Clay session Bassetlaw Museum
• UKSPF Arts and Heritage group Lego session Bassetlaw Museum
• Bassetlaw CVS LGBTQ+ Group
• Move More in May, Kings Park

In total we spoke to 58 people through attending community events and visiting community groups.

Visits to organisations in scope of the review

Bassetlaw Action Centre

The ICB Engagement team visited Bassetlaw Action Centre to meet with staff members and understand more around the services provided and delivered (22^nd May 2025).  The engagement opportunity provided insight into the work and services provided by Bassetlaw Action Centre and how they work in partnership with neighbouring organisations and the District Council.

During the visit, an invitation was also extended to visit the Staying Well Programme members and volunteers. 

Bassetlaw CVS

ICB engagement team visited Bassetlaw CVS to meet with their staff and hear more around the services delivered from both their offices and within the community (27^th May 2025). 

Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire

The ICB Engagement Team visited Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire to meet with the Chief Executive Officer and the Macmillan Welfare Benefits Team Leader, tour the facilities and meet and hear from staff members (28^th May 2025).

Barnsley Premier Leisure

The ICB Engagement Team visited Worksop Leisure Centre to meet with Barnsley Premier Leisure’s Health and Wellbeing Manager and Contracts Manager to learn and understand more around the services offered and delivered (28^th May 2025). The team were invited to tour the centre and speak with individuals participating in the Cardiac Rehabilitation Service.

Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice

The ICB Engagement team visited Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice to meet with their Chief Executive Officer and Head of Community to learn and understand more around the services provided and delivered (29 May 2025).  During the visit, an invitation was extended to walk around the facilities and meet with staff and volunteers. 

Children’s Bereavement Centre

The ICB Engagement team visited the Children’s Bereavement Centre in Newark to meet with their Chief Executive Officer to learn and understand more around the services provided and delivered (5 June 2025).

Muddy Fork

The ICB Engagement team visited Muddy Fork to meet with their General Manager and service users to learn and understand more around the services provided and delivered. (6 June 2025). During the visit there was an opportunity to understand more about the work and referrals to Muddy Fork and walk around the facilities. It should be noted that these three meetings fell outside of the official period of the listening exercise and this flexibility to feed in outside of the official period was extended to other groups in Bassetlaw too. 

Survey

Citizens and stakeholders were invited to complete an online survey to share their views (see Appendix 2). The survey was circulated electronically to individuals and groups whose details were held on our stakeholder database. This included ICB staff, patients, members of the public and carers, service providers, VCSE Organisations, Healthwatch Nottingham and Nottinghamshire, LGBTQ+ communities and networks, Ethnic Community Groups, local authorities (including district councils), NHS Trusts, and charities

Paper surveys were also available which contained the same questions as the online survey. There were no requests for other languages or formats.

Adjustment to our approach during the listening exercise   Bassetlaw District Councillors requested that paper copies of the survey be posted to the ten VCSE organisations in the scope of the review.   We printed and posted copies to all ten VCSE organisations as requested.   Following a further request raised during a public meeting, additional copies were printed and hand-delivered to ensure timely distribution.   All feedback and survey responses collected through these channels were gathered and included in the overall analysis to ensure every voice was heard.

The survey comprised a number of questions, where responses could be made via rating scales or through free text. In total, 237 individuals provided a response to the survey (205 online surveys and 32 paper surveys completed).

Interviews

Where individuals were unable to complete a digital or paper survey and were unable to attend one of the sessions, the Engagement Team were available to undertake interviews, over the telephone or face-to-face. No interviews were conducted.

Written responses from stakeholders

We also encouraged stakeholders to submit written responses to the listening exercise. In addition, we invited organisations within the scope of the review to share case studies that support this work and provide additional evidence for consideration (see Appendix 4).

Communications

A press release was sent to Bassetlaw media on 7 May which was covered by the Worksop Guardian: https://www.worksopguardian.co.uk/community/bassetlaw-voluntary-sector-community-grants-engagement-5117607 and Your World: https://www.yourworld.net/nottinghamshire/worksop/news/bassetlaw-voluntary-sector-community-grants-engagement-102450  

The article was also posted on the ICB website: https://notts.icb.nhs.uk/2025/05/07/bassetlaw-voluntary-sector-community-grants-engagement/ and included in the May ICB stakeholder update: https://sway.cloud.microsoft/eXe9HXvJVYKfrueQ?ref=Link

Social media posts were also shared on Facebook, X, LinkedIn and BlueSky. The highest level of engagement was via Facebook, with 9 shares over two posts. There was one share via X and no engagement via LinkedIn or BlueSky.

Data analysis and reporting

All written notes taken during the public meetings, community group meetings, and qualitative responses from the survey were thematically analysed. Quantitative data was analysed to produce descriptive statistics.

---

[1] Newark Hospital Urgent Treatment Centre Opening Times: Public Session Tickets | Eventbrite

This section provides a detailed summary of the feedback received, organised by individual service.

Bassetlaw Action Centre (BAC)

Summary of respondents  

134 people provided feedback on the services provided by this organisation.

Of those, 94 people (64%) told us that they were responding as members of the public and 40 people (36%) were responding as professionals.

69% (n = 27) told us that they had current experience referring patients or service users to use the services provided by Bassetlaw Action Centre, 46% (n = 10) said that they had previous experience and 5% (n = 2) told us they had no experience.

45% (n = 38) of the respondents had experience of accessing the services delivered with 38% (n = 31) indicated that they had not.

Referral patterns and service gaps

We wanted to know from respondents if they had recently stopped referring patients or service users to this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by Bassetlaw Action Centre and why.

1. Service Quality: Respondents highlighted the value of the Community Transport Service, the Staying Well Programme, and the organisation’s broader support and signposting for people in the community.

“I see Bassetlaw Action Centre’s community transport services as an important part of the area’s support for residents less able to access private and public transport. As a volunteer driver, I see and really appreciate the benefits the Action Centre’s transport services bring to the local community. Whether its social trips aimed at minimising isolation, medical appointments or other trips I know the Action Centre provides an invaluable service which must be maintained and expanded if at all possible.”

Some concerns were raised, highlighting a potential duplication with other services, waiting times and communications

• Cost and Accessibility: Professionals and neighbouring organisations continue to refer and signpost patients in need to the organisation to receive support. Concerns were noted about the costs for services (e.g., mileage charges for befriending) to people and some accessibility challenges to some services (community transport), such as difficulty booking or restrictive criteria for service eligibility.
• Volunteers: There was recognition of volunteers in the organisation and the support they provide and highlighted the work that they do to support the community.  Concerns were also raised about the organisation’s reliance on volunteers, which may affect the consistency of service delivery and the overall user experience.

Experience of the service

We wanted to understand people’s experiences of the service and asked them to rate the following statements related to BAC.

Please indicate how much you agree with the below statements	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly agree
The services provided by Bassetlaw Action Centre are high quality	68% (n = 91)	17% (n = 22)	7% (n = 9)	3% (n = 4)	5% (n = 7)
I would recommend the services provided by Bassetlaw Action Centre	73% (n = 96)	12% (n = 15)	8% (n = 10)	2% (n = 3)	5% (n = 7)
The services provided by Bassetlaw Action Centre benefit the health and wellbeing of the local community	75% (n = 97)	13% (n = 16)	5% (n = 7)	2% (n = 3)	5% (n = 7)

1. Transportation Services: Feedback highlighted the importance of the BAC car service in enabling access to medical appointments, reducing stress, and providing reliable and friendly drivers. Users appreciated the convenience and reliability of the service.

“The voluntary car scheme is excellent.”

• Support for Health and Wellbeing: BAC was praised for its role in supporting individuals with health challenges, including mental health and physical health issues. Services like signposting for dementia and organising hospital transport for cancer treatment were valued.

“Bassetlaw Action Centres Staying Well changed my life, I joined the course not knowing what to expect and I can honestly say I thoroughly enjoyed it. “

• Positive Impact on Daily Life: There was gratitude for the broader impact of Bassetlaw Action Centre, including assistance with benefit forms, organised trips, and overall stress reduction. The services contribute to improved quality of life.

“I regularly refer patients to Bassetlaw action centre and they are very helpful.”

Bassetlaw Community Voluntary Service (BCVS)

Summary of respondents

103 people provided feedback via a survey on the services provided by this organisation.

Of those 103 people, 59% (n = 61) told us that they were responding as members of the public and 41% (n = 42) were responding as professionals.

70% (n =31) told us that they had current experience referring patients or service users to use the services provided by Bassetlaw Community and Voluntary Service,16% (n=7)  had previous experience and 14% (n =6 ) told us they had no experience.

Referral patterns and service gaps

We wanted to know if respondents had recently stopped referring patients or service users to this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by Bassetlaw Community and Voluntary Service and why.

1. Referring to alternate services: When asked about using alternative services, Bassetlaw Action Centre and Social Prescribing Services were chosen as replacement services by two respondents.

• Quality of the service: Reasons for not referring to Bassetlaw Community and Voluntary service included e-mails not being responded to, clients not being successful in voluntary roles, and one comment stated that the standards of other services were preferred.

• Support for Volunteers: One referrer commented that there appeared to be a change in the level of support provided to those wishing to volunteer. Contact is currently via e-mail including providing volunteer opportunities and follow ups. The referrer stated that previously, volunteer coordinators met in person, shared opportunities and supported with applications. This approach improved the confidence in individuals and led to employment in some instances.

• Signposting: Two referrers stated that they do not directly refer individuals, but instead signpost people to the service, which they are continuing to do and have not replaced by Bassetlaw Community and Voluntary Service with other services.

• Carers Team: An ex-employee praised the carers team stating that they were an invaluable resource and would highly recommend them.

“I have moved job roles within the Nottinghamshire which does not involve direct referrals to this organisation however I still signpost to the service and it is an integral part of the partnership working across Bassetlaw.”

“Other services are of a very high standard.”

Experience of the service

We wanted to understand people’s experiences of the service and asked them to rate the following statements related to BCVS.

Please indicate how much you agree with the below statements	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree
The services provided by Bassetlaw Community & Voluntary Service are high quality	71% (n = 74)	19% (n = 20)	5% (n = 5)	1% (n = 1)	4% (n = 4)
I would recommend the services provided by Bassetlaw Community & Voluntary Service	74% (n = 77)	16% (n = 17)	4% (n = 4)	2% (n = 2)	4% (n = 4)
The services provided by Bassetlaw Community & Voluntary Service benefit the health and wellbeing of the local community	79% (n = 82)	12% (n = 13)	4% (n = 4)	1% (n = 1)	4% (n = 4)

1. Positive experience and outcomes: Once individuals had received support for a variety of concerns, they no longer needed to access the service. Individuals were signposted to other services, given brief advice on specific queries, advised on help for family members struggling to cope and other matters such as advice on moving from a community group to CIC charity status. 

“The service I used was excellent and satisfied my needs at the time.”

“Not a continuous need, no alternatives available.”

Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice

Summary of respondents

Of the 231 surveys received, a total 18 % (n = 9) professionals and 82 % (n = 41) members of the public, provided feedback via a survey on the services provided by this organisation.

Of the respondents, 10% (n = 4) currently have experience of accessing services provided at Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice, 10% (n = 4) respondents had accessed the service within the last 12 months and 80% (n = 32) respondents confirming they had not accessed the service.

Referral patterns and service gaps

We wanted to know respondents had recently stopped referring patients or service users to this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice.

33% (n = 3) told us that they currently have experience of referring people to the services with 22% (n = 2) of the respondents stating that they had not within the last 3 months.  33% (n = 3) of the respondents had not referred to the service within the last 6-12 months with 11% (n = 1) person stating they had not referred to this service.  

1. No Current Need for Services: Responses like “Haven’t had any service users in need at this time” and “No current requirement” indicate that some respondents have not required the services recently.
2. Ongoing Signposting: Some respondents mention that they continue to signpost individuals to the service but do not make formal referrals.
3. No Replacement of Services: There was an emphasis on not replacing the hospice’s services with alternatives.
4. Gratitude: Respondents commented “Not stopped referring but thankfully, haven’t had cause to refer to the service recently”.

“I have attended a presentation conducted by Bluebell Wood, which was a brilliant insight into the amazing work they do.”

Experience of the service

We wanted to understand people’s experiences of the service and asked them to rate the following statements related to Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospitals

Please indicate how much you agree with the below statements	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree
The services provided by Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice are high quality.	68% (n = 34)	24% (n = 12)	4% (n = 2)	0%	4% (n = 2)
I would recommend the services provided by Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice	68% (n = 34)	24% (n = 12)	4% (n = 2)	0%	4% (n = 2)
The services provided by Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice benefit the health and wellbeing of the local community	76% (n = 38)	16% (n = 8)	4% (n = 2)	0%	4% (n = 2)

Though qualitative feedback about services provided by Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice was limited, there was a view that they are of high quality and they go above and beyond the services delivered to meet the needs of the children and young people in their care and the families:

“My 14-year-old nephew uses Bluebell Wood. He has quadriplegic cerebral palsy and a heart problem. He absolutely loves Bluebell Wood and they provide a fantastic service to my brother and sister-in-law who are his parents. They need this place. Do not remove its funding. It’s a lifeline”

Barnsley Premier Leisure

Summary of respondents

92 people provided feedback via a survey on the services provided by this organisation. Of those 92 people, 74% (n = 68) told us that they were responding as members of the public and 26% (n = 24) were responding as professionals

64% (n = 16) told us that they had current experience referring patients or service users to use the services provided by Bassetlaw Action Centre, 20% (n = 5) that they had previous experience and 16% (n = 4) told us they had no experience.

Referral patterns and service gaps

We wanted to know why respondents had recently stopped referring patients or service users to this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by Barnsley Premier Leisure and why.

1. Cost barriers: The most common reason why people had stopped referring to or accessing Barnsley Premier Leisure was due to cost barriers. 

“Still a cost associated with the service which does not serve the most deprived areas of Bassetlaw, in which many can’t afford this service.”

• Current need: Others indicated that the reason why they had not referred people to the service was because they had no current need for the service or they were using the service as needed, rather than stopping entirely.

• Alternative solutions: One respondent expressed that the general nature of the sessions didn’t align with their referral requirements for a woman with a learning disability. Some people were referred to alternate programmes, such as ABL or GP-led health and weight-loss schemes, particularly when initial engagement with Barnsley Premier Leisure’s services did not meet their expectations or needs.

• Lifestyle factors: Reasons such as being too busy, personal circumstances, or irregular gym attendance also contributed to disengagement.

One professional clarified that they do not make formal referrals but continue to signpost to Barnsley Premier Leisure where appropriate, based on individual needs.

Experience of the service

We wanted to understand people’s experiences of the service and asked them to rate the following statements related to Barnsley Premier Leisure.

	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree
The services provided by Barnsley Premier Leisure are high quality	76% (n = 68)	13% (n = 12)	2% (n = 2)	1% (n = 1)	8% (n = 7)
I would recommend the services provided by Barnsley Premier Leisure	78% (n = 70)	11% (n = 10)	2% (n = 2)	1% (n = 1)	8% (n = 7)
The services provided by Barnsley Premier Leisure benefit the health and wellbeing of the local community	81% (n = 73)	7% (n = 6)	3% (n = 3)	1% (n = 1)	8% (n = 7)

1. Health benefits: Community members shared positive experiences with the service, highlighting a range of benefits. Participants reported noticeable improvements in their physical health, such as reduced blood sugar levels and increased fitness. They felt healthier, more active, and better able to enjoy daily life.

“This service is important to support with both physical and mental health needs”

“My indirect experience of using the service is when I was a trustee of Focus on Young People in Bassetlaw, (only recently resigned) and I found the service we provided was exceptional and invaluable to the young people we helped.”

• Recovery and managing medical conditions: Individuals recovering from serious health issues, including cancer and cardiac conditions, found the GP referral and cardiac rehab classes particularly helpful in understanding and managing their health. Although one person found the classes challenging at first, they noted steady improvement over time, with helpful advice and encouragement from staff.

• Social benefits: Beyond physical health, the service was described as a “lifeline”, offering valuable social connections, a sense of community, and emotional support.

Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire

Summary of respondents

110 people provided feedback via a survey on the services provided by this organisation.

Of those 110 people, 57% (n = 63) told us that they were responding as members of the public and 43% (n = 47) were responding as professionals.

85% (n = 41) told us that they had current experience referring patients or service users to use the services provided by Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire, 10% (n = 5) that they had previous experience and 4% (n = 2) told us they had no experience.

Referral patterns and service gaps

We wanted to know respondents had recently stopped referring patients or service users to this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire and why.

1. Current need: The majority of respondents indicated that they had not referred or used CANN recently simply because there was no current need. Many shared that their own or their clients’ issues had been resolved through previous support from CANN, highlighting the service’s effectiveness.

“Not needed advice lately but have used on a number of times in the past”

• Signposting and referrals: A few noted changes in their roles or work responsibilities, which meant they no longer had the opportunity to refer individuals. Others mentioned signposting directly to services or resolving issues through other routes.

• Service quality concern: While most feedback was positive, one respondent reported dissatisfaction due to receiving incorrect advice and lack of follow-up, leading them to seek help independently.

Experience of the service

We wanted to understand people’s experiences of the service and asked them to rate the following statements related to Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire. 

Please indicate how much you agree with the below statements	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree
The services provided by Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire are high quality	72% (n = 79)	16% (n = 17)	3% (n = 3)	1% (n = 1)	8% (n = 9)
I would recommend the services provided by Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire	74% (n = 81)	15% (n = 16)	2% (n = 2)	1% (n = 1)	8% (n = 9)
The services provided by Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire benefit the health and wellbeing of the local community	77% (n = 84)	13% (n = 14)	2% (n = 2)	0	8% (n = 9)

1. Positive experiences: Community members shared positive feedback about their experiences with Citizens Advice, highlighting the service’s accessibility, responsiveness, and practical support in resolving complex issues. Several individuals recalled past interactions where Citizens Advice played a crucial role, such as helping to track down NHS pensions, resolve benefit claims, and provide legal or family-related guidance. The professionalism and knowledge of staff was also praised.

“I refer people to this service for support on regular basis and they find it helpful”

“Very professional staff.  Excellent knowledge and customer service. Provided valuable help and support for an Attendance Allowance application and also previously supported for a blue application via MacMillan service there.”

• Efficiency and adaptability: Respondents appreciated how quickly and effectively Citizens Advice staff resolved long-standing issues, particularly when other agencies were unhelpful or overly reliant on online systems, which some users found inaccessible or confusing.

Many valued the flexibility of support options, including in-person and email communications, as well as the willingness to accommodate preferences such as avoiding phone calls or receiving hard-copy documents. This flexibility helped build trust and made the service feel more approachable and personalised.

• Wider impact of service: There was also strong recognition of Citizens Advice’s broader role in supporting health and wellbeing. This included assisting with eligibility for welfare benefits, enabling access to care, and supporting transport to medical appointments through blue badge applications. The service’s work with partners such as Macmillan has also provided holistic and specialist support when needed.

Respondents described Citizens Advice as taking “a big worry off” their minds, offering peace of mind and timely support when other systems had failed them. Even among those who had only accessed support once, they would recommend the service to others.

Royal Voluntary Service

Summary of respondents

47 people provided feedback via a survey on the services provided by this organisation.

Of those 47 people, 55% (n = 26) told us that they were responding as members of the public and 45% (n = 21) were responding as professionals.

62% (n = 13) told us that they had current experience referring patients or service users to use the services provided by Royal Voluntary Service, 28% (n = 6) that they had previous experience and 10% (n = 2) told us they had no experience.

Referral patterns and service gaps

We wanted to know if respondents had recently stopped referring patients or service users to this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by Royal Voluntary Service and why.

1. Needs of the Client Caseload: Feedback reflected that the reason referrals were not currently being made, was due to clients not currently needing services offered by Royal Voluntary service.

“Not stopped but personally haven’t needed to refer. My team uses the services though.”

“Not had the need very recently, but it is good to know we have the option to refer.”

• Alternate services used: One comment indicated that Bassetlaw Action Centre can provide the same services as the Royal Voluntary service.

Experience of the service

We wanted to understand people’s experiences of the service and asked them to rate the following statements related to Royal Voluntary Service.

Please indicate how much you agree with the below statements	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree
The services provided by Royal Voluntary Service are high quality	59% (n = 28)	28% (n = 13)	4% (n = 2)	0	9% (n = 4)
I would recommend the services provided by Royal Voluntary Service	59% (n = 28)	28% (n = 13)	4% (n = 2)	0	9% (n = 4)
The services provided by Royal Voluntary Service benefit the health and wellbeing of the local community	64% (n = 30)	23% (n = 11)	4% (n = 2)	0	9% (n = 4)

We wanted to know if respondents had recently stopped accessing this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by Royal Voluntary Service and why:

1. Eligibility criteria: One respondent indicated that they were no longer eligible to access the Royal Voluntary Service

Children’s Bereavement Centre

Summary of respondents

59 people provided feedback via a survey on the services provided by this organisation.

Of those 59 people, 23% (n = 39) told us that they were responding as members of the public and 12% (n = 20) were responding as professionals.

67% (n = 12) told us that they had current experience referring patients or service users to use the services provided by Children’s Bereavement Service, 17% (n = 3) said that they had previous experience and 17% (n = 3) told us they had no experience.

Referral patterns and service gaps

We wanted to know if respondents had recently stopped referring patients or service users to this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by Children’s Bereavement Service and why.

1. Needs of the Client Caseload: Respondents indicated that they were still referring to the service when needed, although had not recently made referrals because current clients were not in need of the service.

Experience of the service

We wanted to understand people’s experiences of the service and asked them to rate the following statements related to Children’s Bereavement Centre.  

Please indicate how much you agree with the below statements	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree
The services provided by Children’s Bereavement Service are high quality	68% (n = 40)	22% (n = 13)	0	0	10% (n = 6)
I would recommend the services Children’s Bereavement Service	73% (n = 43)	17% (n = 10)	0	0	10% (n = 6)
The services provided by Children’s Bereavement Service benefit the health and wellbeing of the local community	78% (n = 46)	12% (n = 7)	0	0	10% (n = 6)

We wanted to know if respondents had recently stopped accessing this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by Children’s Bereavement Service and why.

1. No longer accessing the service: Respondents stated thattheir reasons for no longer accessing the service included, having completed the set number of counselling sessions or no longer needing the support.

• Positive Outcomes: Respondents to the survey stated that the counselling sessions provided by the service were helpful, the children gained coping strategies, and their mental health improved.

“My son is doing well and doesn’t need any more support at this time, although I know we can access more if he needs it.”

“I’m so grateful for their help and support, I hope other children get access to this should they need it.”

“The bereavement service work was done. Helped me and my boys amazing staff”

Feedback on the Children’s Bereavement service was not shared at community group visits made by the ICB Engagement Team.

In Sam’s Name

Summary of respondents

73 people provided feedback via a survey on the services provided by this organisation.

Of those 73 people, 62% (n = 45) told us that they were responding as members of the public and 38% (n = 28) were responding as professionals.

66% (n = 19) told us that they had current experience referring patients or service users to use the services provided by In Sam’s Name, 17% (n = 5) that they had previous experience and 17% (n = 5) told us they had no experience.

Referral patterns and service gaps

We wanted to know if respondents had recently stopped referring patients or service users to this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by In Sam’s Name and why.

1. Needs of the Client Caseload: The reason referrers had not recently referred individuals to In Sam’s Name was due to not currently working with people in need of the service.

Experience of the service

Please indicate how much you agree with the below statements	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree
The services provided by In Sam’s Name are high quality	82% (n = 60)	14% (n = 10)	1% (n = 1)	0	3% (n = 2)
I would recommend the services In Sam’s Name	82% (n = 60)	14% (n = 10)	1% (n = 1)	0	3% (n = 2)
The services provided by In Sam’s Name benefit the health and wellbeing of the local community	85% (n = 62)	11% (n = 8)	1% (n = 1)	0	3% (n = 2)

1. No longer in need of the service: Support was received from the service and individuals felt they no longer were in need. One individual found provision via a counsellor and stopped accessing In Sam’s Name.

• Not suited to the individual: The group setting didn’t suit one individual who stopped attending after 3 sessions. They were offered an option to have phone calls. They were unsuccessful in making contact after trying a few times and the call was not answered.

• Positive experience: In Sam’s name was valued for offering men a space to talk. The positive impact on wellbeing was recognised from an individual whose friend had accessed the service.

“He wouldn’t be here without them. It has helped his wellbeing a lot”

“They say men don’t cry, but they do, we just do it in private”.

Muddy Fork

Summary of respondents

62 people provided feedback via a survey on the services provided by this organisation.

Of those 62 people, 62% (n = 38) told us that they were responding as members of the public and 36% (n = 21) were responding as professionals with 1% (n= 1) responding on behalf of someone else and 1% (n = 1) from the Local Authority.  

81% (n = 21) told us that they had current experience referring patients or service users to use the services provided by Muddy Fork, none had previous experience and 19% (n = 5) told us they had no experience.

Referral patterns and service gaps

We wanted to know why respondents had recently stopped referring patients or service users to this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by Muddy Fork and why.

1. Current need: The reason why people had stopped using or referring into Muddy Fork was due to no current need for the service. This either would be because the service was not appropriate for their clients, they moved to work in another area, or they had no need to at present.

Experience of the service

We wanted to understand people’s experiences of the service and asked them to rate the following statements related to Muddy Fork.

Please indicate how much you agree with the below statements	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree
The services provided by Muddy Fork are high quality	73% (n = 45)	18% (n = 11)	2% (n = 1)	0	7% (n = 4)
I would recommend the services provided by Muddy Fork	80% (n = 49)	11% (n = 7)	2% (n = 1)	0	7% (n = 4)
The services provided by Muddy Fork benefit the health and wellbeing of the local community	82% (n = 50)	11% (n = 6)	2% (n = 1)	0	7% (n = 4)

1. Social impact and wellbeing: Community feedback highlighted Muddy Fork as a service that supports social connection and wellbeing. Participants noted its positive impact both personally and on others, particularly in building confidence and reducing isolation, for example one previously withdrawn individual who now engages socially and uses the woodland space as a coping strategy when overwhelmed.
2. Positive reputation: Those that have not used the service themselves acknowledged the services positive reputation via word-of-mouth.

The service users who attended the service valued the support that the services provides and continue to use the service following referrals. 

“Muddy Fork provides a friendly and supportive service where participants can work at their own level to regain social skills and confidence and some resume work.”

“As a long term user of Muddy Fork I cannot recommend it enough.”

The Sleep Charity

Summary of respondents

20 people provided feedback via a survey on the services provided by this organisation.

Of those 20 people, 45% (n = 9) told us that they were responding as members of the public and 55% (n = 11) were responding as professionals.

88% (n = 8) told us that they had current experience referring patients or service users to use the services provided by The Sleep Charity, no respondents had previous experience and 11% (n = 1) told us they had no experience.

Referral patterns and service gaps

We wanted to know if respondents had recently stopped referring patients or service users to this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by The Sleep Charity and why.

1. Needs of the Client Caseload: Feedback stated that, the reason referrals had not recently been made was because the current caseload of clients did not require the service.

“Again, my response is not reflective of need but my caseload requirements at this time. I have referred many residents who report back good outcomes which, if the service were not available, they would require GP services.”

Experience of the service

We wanted to understand people’s experiences of the service and asked them to rate the following statements related to The Sleep Chairty. 

Please indicate how much you agree with the below statements	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree
The services provided by The Sleep Charity are high quality	68% (n=40)	22% (n=13)	0	0	10% (n=6)
I would recommend the services provided by The Sleep Charity	73% (n=43)	17% (n=10)	0	0	10% (n=6)
The services provided by The Sleep Charity benefit the health and wellbeing of the local community	78% (n=46)	12% (n=7)	0	0	10% (n=6)

1. Positive results and sleep issues resolved: One respondent commented positively that support was received, and sleep issues were resolved. Therefore, they no longer needed to access the service.

• Support received: Feedback observed by friends or family members of families who had accessed The Sleep Charity, noted that the Sleep Charity was a good service, however, didn’t solve the sleep issues in one case.

“I completed their course to help my child sleep better and it worked wonders. They do fantastic work and I’m glad to say that I no longer need their support.”

This report will be submitted for consideration at the ICB Committee Meetings.

We would like to thank all of the citizens and stakeholders who engaged and spoke with us during this listening exercise. In particular, we would like to thank all the organisations who invited the ICB Engagement Team to their offices and to all staff, volunteers and group members who took the time to provide feedback to the team. 

Appendix 1: Overview of participants

	Number of people directly engaged
Public meetings	20
Stakeholder meetings	49
Elected member briefings	10
Community events and groups	58
Organisations in scope of review	51
Survey	237
Total	425

Appendix 2: Survey questions

Bassetlaw VCSE Grants Community Engagement

The way Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE) organisations in Bassetlaw are funded is different to other parts of Nottingham and Nottinghamshire. This is due to arrangements that were in place before the two Clinical Commissioning Groups in our area merged to become NHS Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Integrated Care Board (ICB) in July 2022. We are now taking a look at these historic arrangements in order to consider the best way of spending limited NHS funding to make sure we meet the health needs of local people.

NHS Nottingham and Nottinghamshire ICB want to hear from people in Bassetlaw who have used services from these voluntary organisations. We are checking each community service one by one, looking at how much money they need, their impact, and if they fit with our health system’s goals. Your feedback is important and will help us decide on future services.

You can get involved by completing this online survey or if you would like a member of the team to come and talk to your community group or network to obtain feedback please do let us know by emailing us at nnicb-nn.engagement@nhs.net or please call 07385 360071. Please feel free to share this email with your colleagues and communities.

The survey will close on Wednesday 28 May 2025 at 23:59pm.

It is not necessary to fill out each section of the survey if you do not feel like it is relevant to you. The first question in each section will ask if you wish to complete the section. Please continue until the end of the survey even if you have completed all sections you are interested in or your answers will not be processed by the form.
Will my taking part be kept confidential? This survey contains some questions where you can write freely. When providing responses to these, please do not write any information that may identify you (for example, name or address). Your responses may be recorded but the data you provide will be anonymised, so we will not analyse or share any information that will make you identifiable. To read about our privacy notice visit https://notts.icb.nhs.uk/privacy-policy/

Should you require a hard copy of the survey or the survey in an alternative format or language, please contact nnicb-nn.engagement@nhs.net, or call 07385 360071 to request a copy.        

About You     

How are you responding to the survey? (Please tick all that apply)

• NHS ICB
• Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise Sector
• Local Authority 
• On behalf of someone else (e.g I am a carer)
• Other, please state ______________________________

• Which organisation are you from? 

Respondents were asked to give feedback on the following services:

• Bassetlaw Action Centre 
• Bassetlaw Community Voluntary Service 
• Bluebell Wood Children’s Hospice 
• Barnsley Premier Leisure 
• Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire 
• Royal Voluntary Service 
• Children’s Bereavement Service 
• In Sam’s Name 
• Muddy Fork 
• The Sleep Charity 

Each of the 10 services had a short descriptive paragraph outlining what they do, followed by the same questions for each service:

• Do you wish to give feedback on these services?

• Do you wish to provide feedback as a member of the public or a professional who may refer into the service?

• Do you have experience referring patients or service users to use the services provided by [name of service]?

• If you have recently stopped referring patients or service users to this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by [name of service] please let us know why.

• Do you have experience using the services provided by [name of service]?

• Yes, I currently use the service
• Yes, but I have not in the last 3 months
• Yes, but I have not in the last 6 months
• Yes, but I have not in the last 12 months
• No 

• If you have recently stopped accessing this service or used alternate service(s) to replace those provided by [name of service] please let us know why.

Please indicate how much you agree with the below statements	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree
The services provided by [name of service] are high quality
I would recommend the services provided by [name of service]
The services provided by [name of service] benefit the health and wellbeing of the local community

1. Further comments

Demographics

Answering these questions help us to ensure we are hearing from a wide group of people and will allow us to see where the gaps in our knowledge are

Do you consent to providing some further demographic information?

• Yes
• No

How old are you?

• Under 20
• 20- 39
• 40 -54
• 55-64
• 65-74
• 75-84
• 65-74        
• Over 85
• Prefer not to say

Which of these, best describes your identity?

• Female
• Male
• Intersex
• Nonbinary
• Transgender Male
• Transgender Female
• Other ______
• Prefer not to say

Is your gender the same as the sex you were assigned at birth?

• Yes
• No
• Prefer not to say

What is your relationship status?      

• Single
• Married
• Living with partner
• Divorced
• Widowed
• Prefer not to say

Which of these, best describes your sexual orientation?

• Asexual
• Bisexual
• Gay
• Heterosexual/ Straight
• Lesbian/ Gay Woman
• Pansexual
• Other, please state______
• Prefer not to say

Which of these, best describes your ethnicity?

• A White
• English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish, or British
• White Irish
• Gypsy or Irish Traveller
• White Roma
• Mixed White and Black Caribbean
• Mixed White and Black African
• Mixed White and Asian
• Indian
• Pakistani
• Bangladeshi
• Chinese
• Black British
• Black Caribbean
• African background
• Arab
• Other

Which of these, best describes your religion or belief?

•       No religion
•       Christian
•       Buddhist
•       Hindu
•       Jewish
•       Muslim
•       Sikh
•       Other
•       Prefer not to say