Golden key local evaluation - Phase 3: System change

This report presents findings from Phase 3 of UWE’s Local Evaluation of Golden Key (GK), focused on understanding how GK’s system change activity has developed. The evidence is based on interviews conducted in summer 2018, with a sample of people closest to GK’s system change activity. Interviews were complemented by ongoing fieldwork, a document analysis of action experiment reports and selected GK system change related reports, followed by a small workshop with key system change stakeholders.The UWE Local Evaluation Team has identified four main areas of system change progress, alongside three areas which present challenges to GK. A number of key areas are then proposed for further consideration, along with associated recommendations

Golden Key local evaluation: Review of phase 4 system change case studies

This report summarises findings, insights and recommendations from Phase 4 of the local evaluation of Golden Key, a partnership of statutory and not-for-profit agencies across Bristol who are piloting new approaches to service delivery and mobilising systems change to ensure a lasting legacy for the city and its most vulnerable residents. This report compiles insights from eight retrospective case study research areas of GK system change activity, including the Call In, Creating Safe and Inclusive Spaces, Creative Solutions Board, Emergency Accommodation Team and the Recall Group, with additional insights from UWE’s evaluation of Housing First project. Each of the case studies demonstrated some evidence of change for organisations and/or people with multiple complex needs. The strongest evidence of change involved individual staff (values, behaviours, beliefs, skills, knowledge), with good evidence for some case study areas of coordination/structural changes within organisations and some limited evidence of coordination/ structural changes between organisations in several cases

Building connections: Golden key local evaluation phase 2 report

This report summarises findings from Phase 2 of the UWE Local Evaluation of Golden Key (GK) in Bristol (March 2016 to Feb 2017). GK is one of 12 Big Lottery funded Fulfilling Lives partnerships across the UK, where local organisations are working together to improve services for people with multiple and complex needs. This is a formative evaluation that will inform learning about how, when and why change happens for individuals, groups and organisations across the City. We will be supporting the initiative throughout its 8-year duration, engaging with different stakeholders to capture a diverse range of perspectives and experiences to produce a multi-faceted understanding of the issues and to stimulate reflection and learning amongst partners.This phase of the evaluation has focused primarily on the client experience pathway, including the experiences of GK clients, Service Co-ordinators, and members of the Independent Futures (IF) Group (experts by experience). Within this report, the ‘Key findings’ sections include insights from our evaluation research, as well as our analysis of client demographics and assessment scores. ‘Activity progress summary’ sections provide a brief update on other aspects of GK’s work, such as the systems change strategy and approach, and are informed by GK documents and meetings.Findings from this phase of the evaluation will be shared with key stakeholders and used to inform the next phase of GK activity. We anticipate that the next phase of the local evaluation will involve exploring how GK is facilitating and enabling systems change (including the role of PIE and innovation pilots), capturing evidence of impact (including economic and social return on investment), and engaging with partner organisations (police, health, council, voluntary sector, etc.) to gain their perspectives on the contribution of GK

Reaching out: Golden Key local evaluation phase 1 full report

This report presents a preliminary analysis of the evidence collated for Phase 1 of the local evaluation of Bristol Golden Key. Evidence has been collected between November 2014 and March 2016 through a variety of means, including interviews with around 40 key stakeholders, observation at over 25 key meetings and events, and review of documentation.Golden Key is a long-term, complex initiative and at this relatively early stage the evaluation is primarily formative in focus – providing observations and reflections on how Golden Key has developed since inception and emerging indicators of how it is perceived and experienced by different stakeholders. The main aim of this report is to ‘capture the learning’ so far and to raise issues and questions that should inform further development as Golden Key progresses. It does not purport to give an objective assessment of progress against project aims given the paucity of quantitative data to support such an analysis at this stage.The report is informed by the evaluation framework developed to support this investigation, which uses a realist approach to identifying how behaviours, processes, outcomes and impacts develop in relation to three main pathways: client engagement; the Golden Key partnership and processes; and citywide engagement and systems change. Chapters are presented for each of these areas, concluding with a set of key learning points and discussion questions

Reaching out: Golden Key local evaluation phase 1 summary report

This report summarises the findings from Phase 1 of the local evaluation of Golden Key though the first 18 months of initial development, progress towards delivery and operational services delivery from Autumn 2014 to Spring 2016.Bristol Golden Key is one of 12 programmes across the UK to have received funding from the Big Lottery Fund Fulfilling Lives programme to support the development and provision of services for people with multiple complex needs

The choice to disclose (or not) mental health ill-health in UK Higher Education Institutions: a duoethnography by two female academics

Purpose: We review how the mental ill-health of academic staff is regarded in Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) and explore the decision to disclose (or not) a mental health condition whilst working in this sector. Design: The choice to disclose is explored by using duoethnography undertaken by two female academics working in this context who both experience mental ill-health. Both authors recorded their experiences, which were then shared with each other and analysed using thematic analysis. Findings: The themes that emerged from our reflections comprise: a discussion of the connection between work-life identities and the impact of mental ill-health in the workplace; a consideration of the elements which influence our decision to disclose (or not) mental health diagnoses within HEI; and an examination of the potential additional burden of identity work for those who experience mental ill-health. Originality: The article contributes to this evidence base by exploring the choice to disclose a mental health diagnosis in HEIs. It investigates this highly personal decision and suggests that this choice depends on the context in which we are located and how we experience our different identities in the workplace. Furthermore, it highlights the importance for HEIs to develop positive employment practices to support academic staff with mental ill-health to disclose a mental health condition and to achieve a good workplace environment; whilst emphasising the need for more empirical work to explore the decision to disclose (or not) in this sector

Revisiting the potential of community empowerment within UK neighbourhood policing meetings

Police attempts to engage with communities and involve the public in decision-making within co-governance meetings has a long history in the UK. This paper examines the most recent initiative for such engagement, exploring the potential and problems for community empowerment in meetings set up as part of the development of neighbourhood policing in the UK. The paper contributes to existing research by offering a more nuanced understanding of how co-governance is constructed in meetings, drawing on a longitudinal ethnography of the experience of these meetings in advantaged and disadvantaged communities. Our findings demonstrate the complex reality and practice of co-governance meetings between the police and community members and the paper explores three key themes in relation to these meetings. First, in examining the potential for community empowerment, we show that while these meetings may have some regressive effects, core attendees fully embrace them and seek to establish an active citizen identity. Secondly, we offer some support for a radical communitarian thesis, demonstrating how residents even in disadvantaged communities are able to have their voices heard. Finally, the research demonstrates that while the police attempt to control these meetings, this control is not uncontested with frequent challenges against police and partner (in)actions. The paper concludes by identifying critical areas of change for improving community empowerment in co-governance meetings with the police

Revisiting the potential of community empowerment within UK neighbourhood policing meetings

© 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Police attempts to engage with communities and involve the public in decision-making within co-governance meetings has a long history in the UK. This paper examines the most recent initiative for such engagement, exploring the potential and problems for community empowerment in meetings set up as part of the development of neighbourhood policing in the UK. The paper contributes to existing research by offering a more nuanced understanding of how co-governance is constructed in meetings, drawing on a longitudinal ethnography of the experience of these meetings in advantaged and disadvantaged communities. Our findings demonstrate the complex reality and practice of co-governance meetings between the police and community members and the paper explores three key themes in relation to these meetings. First, in examining the potential for community empowerment, we show that while these meetings may have some regressive effects, core attendees fully embrace them and seek to establish an active citizen identity. Secondly, we offer some support for a radical communitarian thesis, demonstrating how residents even in disadvantaged communities are able to have their voices heard. Finally, the research demonstrates that while the police attempt to control these meetings, this control is not uncontested with frequent challenges against police and partner (in)actions. The paper concludes by identifying critical areas of change for improving community empowerment in co-governance meetings with the police

Systems change for multiple complex needs: A practical tool

This tool is intended to be used by anyone who is developing or running a systems change activity or project for people with multiple complex needs. We encourage you to use the tool to identify practical actions in seven key areas which can improve the likely success of your activity