‘What I really want is academics who want to partner and who care about the outcome’: findings from a mixed-methods study of evidence use in local government in England

Background Local government (LG) is ideally placed to influence the determinants of public health (PH) and reduce inequalities, but opportunities are routinely missed. Aims and objectives The aim of the Local Authority Champions of Research (LACoR) study was to explore ways to embed a culture of evidence use in LG. Methods Five linked work packages were undertaken using mixed methods. In this paper, we report data from semi-structured interviews with UK local authority (LA) staff (n=14). Findings Findings show a changing culture of LG: embedded researchers can enhance connectivity and interaction, build linkages, use levers of influence, and learn alongside LG navigators. Understanding the diverse microcultures of evidence use in LG is critical. Research champions can help to navigate the social, financial, political and regulatory context of LG and academia, influencing change dynamically as opportunities emerge. Discussion Changing organisational subcultures is ambitious and unpredictable given the complexities of, and variability in, local contexts. Cumulative changes appear possible by recognising existing assets, using relational approaches to respond to LG priorities. In-house capacity remains underestimated and underutilised in efforts to embed evidence use in LG decision making. Co-located embedded researchers can use contextually specific knowledge and relationships to enhance evidence use in LG in collaboration with system navigators. Conclusions There is a need for academics to adapt their approach, to take account of the context of LG to achieve meaningful health and social impacts with LG and test the contribution of embedded approaches to wider system change

Innovative local authority public health interventions to support the mental health of children and young people

Purpose – Mental Health Champions (MHCs) and Young Health Ambassadors (YHAs) are two innovative public health interventions. MHCs are practitioners who work in schools and other youth settings and aim to be the ‘go to’ person for mental health in these settings. YHAs are a linked parallel network of young people, who champion mental health and advocate for youth involvement, which was co-produced with young people across all stages of development implementation. This paper aims to identify the potential benefits, barriers, and facilitators of these interventions. Methodology – Semi-structured qualitative interviews (n=19) were undertaken with a purposive sample of n=13 MHCs, and n=6 YHAs, between June 2021 and March 2022. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, anonymised, and then analysed following a thematic approach. Ethical approval was granted by Newcastle University’s Faculty of Medical Sciences Ethics Committee. Findings – Our findings are organised under five key themes: 1) Motivating factors and rewards for MHCs and YHAs; 2) Outcomes for CYP and others; 3) Impact on youth settings and culture; 4) Facilitators of successful implementation; and 5) Implementation challenges and opportunities. Originality – The interventions reported on in the present paper are novel and innovative. Little research has previously been undertaken in order to explore similar approaches, and the individual experiences of those involved in the delivery of these types of interventions. Practical Implications – These findings are intended to be of relevance to practice and policy, particularly to those exploring the design, commissioning, or implementation of similar novel and low-cost interventions, which aim improve mental health outcomes for children and young people, within the context of youth settings