Evaluation report of the implementation of the Crisis Care Concordat, an England-wide national agreement between the different agencies and services involved in the care of people experiencing, or at risk of experiencing, a mental health crisis. The Concordat focuses on improving the quality and availability of help and support for acute mental health crises, as well as prevention and recovery. This evaluation looks at the implementation of the Concordat at local level to assess its progress, factors contributing to success in local areas, and produce recommendations for how local partners can work effectively together. The evaluation involved: an analysis of a sample of local area action plans (32 selected from a total of 96); observations and interviews with key stakeholders in 4 local areas; interviews with the National Steering Group; and surveys of the experiences and views of service users and carers. Results from the survey of service user and carer experiences indicated improvements in the experience of accessing and receiving care in a crisis over the past 12 months. Results from the local area evaluations found the Concordat had been successful in initiating and sustaining multi-agency working across partners. However, finding a shared language and negotiating cultures from different sectors were identified as challenges to partnership working. While there was evidence of service user and carer involvement, there had been some challenges to integrating lived experience expertise within Concordat groups. The development of crisis care for children and young people was also an area requiring more work. Recommendations include the need to agree mechanisms and responsibilities at national level for embedding mental health crisis care in current and future policy and funding landscapes.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Evaluation report of the implementation of the Crisis Care Concordat, an England-wide national agreement between the different agencies and services involved in the care of people experiencing, or at risk of experiencing, a mental health crisis. The Concordat focuses on improving the quality and availability of help and support for acute mental health crises, as well as prevention and recovery. This evaluation looks at the implementation of the Concordat at local level to assess its progress, factors contributing to success in local areas, and produce recommendations for how local partners can work effectively together. The evaluation involved: an analysis of a sample of local area action plans (32 selected from a total of 96); observations and interviews with key stakeholders in 4 local areas; interviews with the National Steering Group; and surveys of the experiences and views of service users and carers. Results from the survey of service user and carer experiences indicated improvements in the experience of accessing and receiving care in a crisis over the past 12 months. Results from the local area evaluations found the Concordat had been successful in initiating and sustaining multi-agency working across partners. However, finding a shared language and negotiating cultures from different sectors were identified as challenges to partnership working. While there was evidence of service user and carer involvement, there had been some challenges to integrating lived experience expertise within Concordat groups. The development of crisis care for children and young people was also an area requiring more work. Recommendations include the need to agree mechanisms and responsibilities at national level for embedding mental health crisis care in current and future policy and funding landscapes.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Subject terms:
joint working, interagency cooperation, severe mental health problems, community mental health services, crisis resolution, mental health care, outcomes, access to services, user views;
This paper challenges the current domination of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews of RCTs in mental health research and evidence-based healthcare, suggesting that we need to populate the landscape with alternative sources of knowledge and evidence from a survivor researcher perspective. Of greatest concern is that the uncritical reification of the RCT marginalises the knowledge or evidence produced by mental health service users and survivors. The report contends that survivor research (user-controlled research) has a major contribution to make to the knowledge base about mental health and to the debate about what constitutes acceptable evidence in mental health care and argues that the existing research structures and the evidence hierarchy, in which RCTs are held to be the 'gold standard', are preventing this contribution from being realised.
(Edited publisher abstract)
This paper challenges the current domination of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews of RCTs in mental health research and evidence-based healthcare, suggesting that we need to populate the landscape with alternative sources of knowledge and evidence from a survivor researcher perspective. Of greatest concern is that the uncritical reification of the RCT marginalises the knowledge or evidence produced by mental health service users and survivors. The report contends that survivor research (user-controlled research) has a major contribution to make to the knowledge base about mental health and to the debate about what constitutes acceptable evidence in mental health care and argues that the existing research structures and the evidence hierarchy, in which RCTs are held to be the 'gold standard', are preventing this contribution from being realised.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Subject terms:
research methods, randomised controlled trials, user participation, participatory research, systematic reviews, mental health problems, mental health;
This short briefing paper aims to raise awareness of the potential benefits of a wellbeing network approach to supporting recovery for people with long term mental health needs. It provides an approach to supporting the recovery based on understanding the importance of social networks and relationships, as well as places and activities. The paper also explains how this approach relates to recover, mental health and asset- and strength-based approaches. It draws on the findings of the Community Health Networks study, which mapped the social networks of 150 people with long term mental health needs, as well as their activity and place connections on order to explore the types of resources people access for wellbeing. The study found that it was possible to map wellbeing networks and that people found the process of mapping these networks therapeutic, with some people making changes to their wellbeing network as a result of the project. The project found little evidence of practitioners referring people to new places and activities, with most of them being instigated by the person themselves. The briefing paper looks at why wellbeing networks might be important for recovery, outlines key findings of the study, looks at next steps for developing the wellbeing networks approach, and provides ideas for practitioners who want to explore wellbeing connections when working with people with mental health needs.
(Edited publisher abstract)
This short briefing paper aims to raise awareness of the potential benefits of a wellbeing network approach to supporting recovery for people with long term mental health needs. It provides an approach to supporting the recovery based on understanding the importance of social networks and relationships, as well as places and activities. The paper also explains how this approach relates to recover, mental health and asset- and strength-based approaches. It draws on the findings of the Community Health Networks study, which mapped the social networks of 150 people with long term mental health needs, as well as their activity and place connections on order to explore the types of resources people access for wellbeing. The study found that it was possible to map wellbeing networks and that people found the process of mapping these networks therapeutic, with some people making changes to their wellbeing network as a result of the project. The project found little evidence of practitioners referring people to new places and activities, with most of them being instigated by the person themselves. The briefing paper looks at why wellbeing networks might be important for recovery, outlines key findings of the study, looks at next steps for developing the wellbeing networks approach, and provides ideas for practitioners who want to explore wellbeing connections when working with people with mental health needs.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Subject terms:
severe mental health problems, mental health problems, recovery, strengths-based approach, social networks, leisure activities, communities, person-centred care, social capital;
...where commissioners, provider organisations and communities work together to develop a range of approaches to peer support and where people are enabled to take control of how and when they engage with the peer support. The evaluation team was a partnership that included a mental health research team from St George’s, University of London, the McPinFoundation.
(Edited publisher abstract)
An evaluation of the Side by Side programme, which aimed to increase the availability and quality of community based peer support for people experiencing mental health problems across England. The programme was led by the mental health charity Mind, in collaboration with Depression Alliance and Bipolar UK. The evaluation covered four areas: developing and testing a set of values and principles for peer support; examining the effectiveness of peer support, including changes in wellbeing; building capacity for peer support; and commissioning peer support. It also explored how peer support took place within Side by Side projects specifically aimed at peers from a Black and Minority Ethnic background. The evaluation found that peer support was valued and helpful to people involved. It also identified six core values that appeared to underpin all forms of peer support - experience in common, safety, choice and control, two way interactions, human connection, and freedom to be oneself. The findings suggest that peer support enabled people to recover a sense of personal agency and usefulness, which was beneficial to their wellbeing. The evaluation also suggests that peer support works best where commissioners, provider organisations and communities work together to develop a range of approaches to peer support and where people are enabled to take control of how and when they engage with the peer support. The evaluation team was a partnership that included a mental health research team from St George’s, University of London, the McPinFoundation.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Subject terms:
peer support, evaluation, mental health problems, values, capacity building, commissioning, black and minority ethnic people, co-production, outcomes;