Search results for ‘Subject term:"mental health problems"’ Sort:
Results 1 - 10 of 18
Reflections from the MEAM Approach Network: transforming services and systems for people facing multiple disadvantage
- Author:
- MAKING EVERY ADULT MATTER
- Publisher:
- Making Every Adult Matter
- Publication year:
- 2022
- Pagination:
- 19
- Place of publication:
- London
Explores some of the 'key ingredients' that MEAM Approach areas and the MEAM team see as essential to successful work, and consider what is needed next for the future. The content of the report reflects five facilitated conversations held at the MEAM Approach network annual conference in March 2022. Since 2010, MEAM has supported over 50 local authority areas to transform services and systems for people facing multiple disadvantage. The key ingredients of success discussed in this paper include: partnership and leadership; coproduction and power; new operational approaches; developing trauma-informed systems; and intersectional approach; shaping the wider environment. (Edited publisher abstract)
Revolving doors: report of the telethon enquiry into the relationship between mental health, homelessness and criminal justice
- Author:
- JONES Helen
- Publisher:
- National Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders
- Publication year:
- 1992
- Pagination:
- 36p.
- Place of publication:
- London
Makes recommendations and proposes a pilot project which could help divert people out of a cycle of prison, psychiatric hospital and homelessness.
MEAM Approach evaluation: final report
- Author:
- CORDIS BRIGHT
- Publisher:
- Cordis Bright
- Publication year:
- 2022
- Pagination:
- 65
- Place of publication:
- London
Final report from a five-year national evaluation of the MEAM Approach, a non-prescriptive framework to help local areas design and deliver better coordinated services for people experiencing multiple disadvantage that is being used by cross-sector partnerships of statutory and voluntary agencies across England. Our evaluation took a mixed methods approach in which we collaborated with an expert research group of eight people who have lived experience of multiple disadvantage. The evaluation indicates that support for people experiencing multiple disadvantage is improved in local areas which work with the MEAM Approach. This improved support enables people experiencing multiple disadvantage to make positive changes in their lives, such as improvements in their accommodation situation and progress towards personal goals. There is also emerging evidence of some changes to systems in local areas involved in the MEAM Approach network. Future delivery and evaluation should focus on better understanding the key components of more effective systems, and of how to achieve necessary systems change. (Edited publisher abstract)
MEAM Approach evaluation: year 3 report
- Author:
- CORDIS BRIGHT
- Publisher:
- Cordis Bright
- Publication year:
- 2020
- Pagination:
- 42
- Place of publication:
- London
This is the year 3 report for the longitudinal evaluation of the MEAM Approach, exploring the implementation and impact of local work using the MEAM Approach in 27 areas. The Making Every Adult Matter (MEAM) coalition is formed of the national charities Clinks, Homeless Link, Mind and associate member, Collective Voice. In 2013, MEAM developed the MEAM Approach, a non-prescriptive framework to help local areas design and deliver better coordinated services for people facing multiple disadvantage. As at July 2020, it is currently being used by cross-sector partnerships of statutory and voluntary agencies in 31 local areas across England. The evaluation finds that clients are making improvements in key areas of their life, and especially in their accommodation situation. The available quantitative evidence of these improvements is more robust than in previous years. There is also evidence of decreased A&E attendance and arrests, which is associated with cost reductions. The successful transition of many clients from rough sleeping into accommodation generates an increase in accommodation costs for those clients but constitutes a positive outcome of the MEAM Approach work. The report indicates that local areas in the MEAM Approach network have developed a range of operational and strategic partnerships and structures to support their work – co-production is a key facet of the MEAM Approach and areas are progressing in implementing it. Finally, the evaluation finds that coordination of support for individuals has improved and there are signs that this is achieved by input from both operational and strategic staff. Long-term sustainability is closely connected to achieving and maintaining systems change, but securing sustainability of local work using the MEAM Approach remains challenging. (Edited publisher abstract)
Opportunity knocks: a briefing on devolution and multiple needs in England
- Authors:
- DRINKWATER Nicola, THOMAS Sam
- Publisher:
- Making Every Adult Matter
- Publication year:
- 2016
- Pagination:
- 12
- Place of publication:
- London
This briefing paper explores the opportunities that devolution could bring to local areas in England to better support people with multiple needs, focusing on those who experience overlapping issues with homelessness, substance misuse, mental ill health and contact with the Criminal Justice System. The briefing introduces the idea of devolution and how it is developing in England, explains why it is relevant to people experiencing multiple needs, and explores experiences of devolution in local areas so far. It also identifies a number of challenges around devolution which need to be overcome. These include decisions being taken too quickly without sufficient consultation, local frontlline services finding it difficult to participate and a lack of input from people with lived experience. It then suggests how devolution can be useful tool, although not a prerequisite, for joining up local services to better support people with multiple needs. Based on MEAM's work with local areas, the briefing makes recommendations for those authorities with devolved powers and recommendations to help those without new powers to make further progress towards more coordinated and effective services. (Edited publisher abstract)
Evaluation of the MEAM pilots: update on our findings
- Authors:
- BATTRICK Tim, et al
- Publisher:
- FTI Consulting
- Publication year:
- 2014
- Pagination:
- 40
- Place of publication:
- London
Reports on the findings of a two year evaluation of three service pilots which aimed to improve the coordination of local support to individuals suffering from multiple needs such as, homelessness, substance misuse, mental health problems and offending. The three pilots were in Cambridgeshire, Derby and Somerset. The findings are discussed in relation to client wellbeing and service use costs. The study also discusses the concept of survirorship bias and how this can result in programmes appearing more or less successful than they actually are. The evaluation highlights the considerable wellbeing improvements and financial savings that a more coordinated approach can deliver, including one pilot which reduced service use costs by 26.4% over the study period. Appendices include details of service use and unit costs. (Edited publisher abstract)
What are the barriers and facilitators to running an employment scheme for offenders?
- Author:
- KEIL Joanna
- Journal article citation:
- Prison Service Journal, 189, May 2010, pp.15-20.
- Publisher:
- Her Majesty's Prison Service of England and Wales
This article looks at the Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health’s study on employment opportunities for offenders with mental health problems, and identifies barriers and facilitators observed during 32 visits to 8 prisons, 4 probation areas, 10 voluntary agencies, 2 forensic services, 1 police-led scheme and 1 employer. Support was diverse and dependent on where an offender was within the criminal justice system. Some prisons have departments offering NVQ training in catering skills (e.g. HMP Durham, Newcastle College and Marriot Hotels), invite voluntary organisations (e.g. Thames Reach) to provide ‘through the gate’ support, use release on temporary licence (ROTL) to allow work experience (e.g. HMP Dartmoor and the Forestry Commission), and have individual placement schemes. The probation service plays a role in some, geographical areas. Some schemes observed were specifically for ex-offenders, people with mental health problems or the homeless. Barriers included lack of awareness/support of mental health problems by schemes and employers, ROTL, schemes too focused on training while in prison, poor continuity on release and poor outcomes. Facilitators included support once employed, payment of ex-offenders, involvement of employers within prisons, and motivated and enthusiastic professionals. There was evidence of the social exclusion of mentally disordered offenders from some schemes, and poor support, when accepted onto employment training. Good practice, by some employers was seen and often yielded successful employment outcomes for those with mental health problems.
Making funding work for people facing multiple disadvantage. Second report: Roundtable write up
- Author:
- MAKING EVERY ADULT MATTER
- Publisher:
- Making Every Adult Matter
- Publication year:
- 2022
- Pagination:
- 10
- Place of publication:
- London
This briefing draws on our previous report and a roundtable of civil servants to offer a series of recommendations for improving the way funding works for people facing multiple disadvantage. It is informed by interviews with civil servants working at the Home Office, the Ministry of Justice, the Department of Health and Social Care, and the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. MEAM brought this group together at a roundtable in May 2022 to discuss the challenges of cross-departmental work and to identify solutions to the challenges identified in the previous report. The discussion focused on three of the most pressing issues: coordination between programmes and gaps in provision; remit of funding programmes; nature of funding allocation. The briefing summarises our findings from the previous report, sets out what we heard at the roundtable and offers a series of recommendations and next steps directed at those within and outside government interested in leading change. Attendees largely accepted the findings of the report around coordination, stating that these were problems they were aware of and actively engaged in trying to remedy. Duplication is a well-recognised issue among officials, but their capacity to address it is frequently curtailed by the demands of a reactive political context and its effect on the policy development process. Despite the challenges and constraints raised, there was some recognition of the opportunities to push for change. The Changing Futures programme and the Joint Combatting Drugs Unit are still relatively new initiatives with cross-departmental coordination firmly on their agenda. The structural changes to the health system also present an opportunity (as well as a risk) to better coordinate support for people experiencing multiple disadvantage. (Edited publisher abstract)
Making funding work for people facing multiple disadvantage
- Author:
- MAKING EVERY ADULT MATTER
- Publisher:
- Making Every Adult Matter
- Publication year:
- 2022
- Pagination:
- 22
- Place of publication:
- London
This report explores the way in which national funding streams are made available to local areas to tackle homelessness and rough sleeping, substance misuse, mental health and criminal justice. Such funding streams are important and welcome. They are delivered by committed teams of civil servants and create positive impact for many people. However, the way in which government funding streams are traditionally designed, offered, coordinated and monitored can limit the collective impact they have for people facing multiple disadvantage. In many cases, funding streams are not helping local areas to create long-term changes to the way that services and systems work for people facing multiple disadvantage, or to address the underlying problems that cause people to experience the issues that the funding streams seek to address. This report considers the views of local areas across the MEAM Approach and Fulfilling Lives networks, with a focus on the national funding streams that have been made available over the last 18 months. Civil servants recognise and understand the issues raised in this report and many are seeking to address them. The report suggests that for many areas the level of funding is not the only issue, and there are a number of practical issues with the way funding is made available to local areas which directly impacts on their ability to plan, fund and mobilise services for people experiencing multiple disadvantage. The issues identified in this briefing have shown how the structures, processes, mechanisms and cultures associated with national funding streams can hamper as well as help local areas' ambitions for systems change, despite many of the funding streams recognising the need for such change. (Edited publisher abstract)
Vaccine uptake amongst people with personal experience of multiple disadvantage in Birmingham: research findings
- Author:
- REVOLVING DOORS AGENCY
- Publisher:
- Revolving Doors Agency
- Publication year:
- 2021
- Pagination:
- 35
- Place of publication:
- London
This report presents findings from a piece of research about vaccine uptake amongst people with experience of multiple disadvantage in Birmingham. It is based on two focus groups with staff working at organisations in contact with people with personal experience of multiple disadvantage; and one-to-one interviews with 27 people about their views of the Covid-19 vaccine. The research aimed to explore whether there is a problem with the uptake of the vaccine amongst people with lived experience of a combination of homelessness, substance use, contact with the criminal justice system, mental ill health and domestic violence; understand how widespread this problem is, and the reasons behind it; think about possible ways in which people with such lived experience can be supported to make informed decisions about the vaccine. Key findings include: just under half of the people we spoke to do not want to take the vaccine and there were many reasons for this; many of those who did not want the vaccine did not think anything would change their mind, and a few were open to learning more about this from trusted sources; where people had chosen to have the vaccine, this was often linked to concerns about them or their loved ones becoming seriously ill from Covid-19; there were commonalities in who people trusted to tell them more information about Covid-19 and the vaccine and who they did not; some respondents, particularly older people, were critical about the conspiracy theories circulating online, whereas others found this to be an easy and quick way to access information; several factors helped people to have the vaccine if they wanted it – this included having vaccines available in a location that was considered ‘safe’, nearby and easy to get to; wider barriers making it more difficult for people to have the vaccine included the reliance on access to technology. (Edited publisher abstract)