Information about the jury
Reports from the Fit for the Future public consultation citizens’ jury
You can download and read the Jurors’ Report from the 18 members of the citizens’ jury. It was constructed using the words of the jury members, from observations and statements they prepared together. A draft version was reviewed by jury members as part of the jury process on 28 January. The 18 jury members also completed an on-line end of jury questionnaire where they assessed whether there was any bias, and described their experiences. You can download the questionnaire results from the 18 jury members. Results are also available of the daily feedback questionnaires by jury members which were completed at the end of each of the first seven days.
The Report of the Jury provides further information (e.g. jury recruitment) about the jury.
How the 18 jury members were selected
The opportunity for local people to be part of the citizens’ jury was advertised, and 332 people living within Gloucestershire applied to be members of the jury. The selection process for the citizens’ jury was designed to select a broadly representative sample of adults living in Gloucestershire. 18 members of the citizens’ jury and three reserves were selected (to see how we select juries, click here). Three people withdrew either just before or just after the jury began, and so the three reserves stepped in. Despite the late withdrawals, the jury maintained a good geographical spread across Districts in Gloucestershire. Click here for a spreadsheet showing the jury’s demographic characteristics.
What the citizens’ jury did
An overview of what happened over the eight days of the jury is described in the Jurors’ Report. The questions the jury had to answer and the other requirements of the jury are set out in the jury specification.
A variety of witnesses were invited to give presentations to jurors in line with the brief for expert witnesses.
The independent oversight panel
The witness slides and other materials were reviewed prior to the jury by an oversight panel who were briefed to check that the jury was being provided with a fair balance of relevant information. The oversight panel members, chosen for their interest in the topic and lack of conflict of interest in any particular jury outcome, were: Karen Newbiggin, Reader in Healthcare Policy and Management, Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham; Ben Stokes, Chair of Health and Wellbeing Board, South Gloucestershire Council; and Helen Webb, Healthwatch Gloucestershire Manager.
The oversight panel reviewed the jury specification, the expert witness brief, the juror agreement, and the slides of all witnesses. Changes were made to documents as a result, including the slides of witnesses before the jury began. Each panel member completed a short questionnaire at the end of the process assessing the potential bias and giving their reasoning.