Exploring the feasibility of evaluating a community alliance welfare advice programme co-located in primary care in Bradford: an uncontrolled before and after study.

BACKGROUND: Welfare advice services co-located in health settings are known to improve financial security. However, little is known on how to effectively evaluate these services. This study aims to explore the feasibility of evaluating a welfare advice service co-located in a primary care setting in a deprived and ethnically diverse population. It seeks to investigate whether the proposed evaluation tools and processes are acceptable and feasible to implement and whether they are able to detect any evidence of promise for this intervention on the mental health, wellbeing and financial security of participants. METHODS: An uncontrolled before and after study design was utilised. Data on mental health, wellbeing, quality of life and financial outcomes were collected at baseline prior to receiving welfare advice and at three months follow-up. Multiple logistic and linear regression models were used to explore individual differences in self-reported financial security and changes to mental health, wellbeing and quality of life scores before and after the provision of welfare advice. RESULTS: Overall, the majority of key outcome measures were well completed, indicating participant acceptability of the mental health, wellbeing, quality of life and financial outcome measures used in this population. There was evidence suggestive of an improvement in participant financial security and evidence of promise for improvements in measured wellbeing and health-related quality of life for participants accessing services in a highly ethnically diverse population. Overall, the VCS Alliance welfare advice programme generated a total of £21,823.05 for all participants, with participants gaining an average of £389.70 per participant for participants with complete financial outcome data. CONCLUSIONS: This research demonstrates the feasibility of evaluating a welfare advice service co-located in primary care in a deprived and ethnically diverse setting utilising the ascribed mental health, wellbeing and quality of life and financial outcome tools. It provides evidence of promise to support the hypothesis that the implementation of a welfare advice service co-located in a health setting can improve health and wellbeing and reduce health inequalities.

Providing men at risk of suicide with emotional support and advice with employment, housing and financial difficulties: a qualitative evaluation of the Hope service.

BACKGROUND: Men at risk of suicide often face difficulties with finances, employment, or housing, yet support services are usually psychologically based. This study evaluated the Hope service which provides integrated psychosocial support alongside practical, financial and specialist advice. AIMS: To examine how the Hope service supports men at risk of suicide and factors that influence its impact and usefulness. METHODS: Twenty-six qualitative interviews with 16 service users, six Hope staff, two specialist money advice workers funded to work for Hope and two NHS referral staff, thematically analysed. RESULTS: The Hope service provided an essential service for men at risk of suicide, with complex needs including addiction, job loss, homelessness, debt, relationship-breakdown and bereavement who often would otherwise have fallen through service provision gaps. Working in a person-centred, non-judgemental way elicited trust and specialist advice tackled problems such as housing needs, debt, benefit claims and employment, enabling men to regain a sense of control over their lives. Some men shared histories of abuse, for which specialist counselling was hard to access. CONCLUSIONS: Hope provides an effective integrated support package for suicidal men. Funding for services like Hope are important to tackle structural issues such as homelessness and debt, alongside emotional support.

A review of the effectiveness and experiences of welfare advice services co-located in health settings: A critical narrative systematic review.

We conducted a narrative systematic review to assess the health, social and financial impacts of co-located welfare services in the UK and to explore the effectiveness of and facilitators and barriers to successful implementation of these services, in order to guide future policy and practice. We searched Medline, EMBASE and other literature sources, from January 2010 to November 2020, for literature examining the impact of co-located welfare services in the UK on any outcome. The review identified 14 studies employing a range of study designs, including: one non-randomised controlled trial; one pilot randomised controlled trial; one before-and-after-study; three qualitative studies; and eight case studies. A theory of change model, developed a priori, was used as an analytical framework against which to map the evidence on how the services work, why and for whom. All studies demonstrated improved financial security for participants, generating an average of £27 of social, economic and environmental return per £1 invested. Some studies reported improved mental health for individuals accessing services. Several studies attributed subjective improvements in physical health to the service addressing key social determinants of health. Benefits to the health service were also demonstrated through reduced workload for healthcare professionals. Key components of a successful service included co-production during service development and ongoing enhanced multi-disciplinary collaboration. Overall, this review demonstrates improved financial security for participants and for the first time models the wider health and welfare benefits for participants and for health service from these services. However, given the generally poor scientific quality of the studies, care must be taken in drawing firm conclusions. There remains a need for more high quality research, using experimental methods and larger sample sizes, to further build upon this evidence base and to measure the strength of the proposed theoretical pathways in this area.

Co-located welfare advice in general practice: A realist qualitative study.

General practitioners (GPs) engage with patients about a variety of social issues distinct from direct clinical work ("non-health" issues), such as health-related benefits and debt. Co-located welfare advice services could provide support to practices but have usually been considered in terms of patient rather than practice outcomes. We aimed to develop an initial programme theory for how the provision of co-located advice supports specific practice outcomes, and to identify salient barriers and enabling factors. Twenty-four semi-structured interviews with general practice staff, advice staff and service funders in two UK urban localities were conducted between January and July 2016. Data were thematically analysed and a modified Realist Evaluation approach informed the topic guide, thematic analysis and interpretation. Two outcomes are described linked to participant accounts of the impact of such non-health work on practices: reduction of GP consultations linked to non-health issues and reduced practice time spent on non-health issues. We found that individual responses and actions influencing service awareness were key facilitators to each of the practice outcomes, including proactive engagement, communication, regular reminders and feedback between advice staff, practice managers and funders. Facilitating implementation factors were: not limiting access to GP referral, and offering booked appointments and advice on a broader range of issues responsive to local need. Key barriers included pre-existing sociocultural and organisational rules and norms largely outside of the control of service implementers, which maintained perceptions of the GP as the "go-to-location". We conclude that co-location of welfare advice services alone is unlikely to enable positive outcomes for practices and suggest several factors amenable to intervention that could enhance the potential for co-location to meet desired objectives.