Search results

This article aims to consider recent changes to policy and practice in relation to joint working by returning to the authors' original article published in 2003 to ask what has happened in the intervening years.

The original article was based on research commissioned by the NHS shortly after New Labour came into office, at a time of increasing interest in the role of joint working in the provision of public services. The authors were commissioned to conduct a systematic review of the existing research literature about joint working in adult services between health and social services in order to identify broad lessons, which could inform future activity in this area. Here, they undertake an informal review of the progress made.

Having reviewed the original research, the authors move on to consider the reforms implemented by New Labour to better support joint working and the recent policies of the Coalition government. They argue that whilst the focus of government policy remains largely the same, some subtle changes have emerged. Finally, they consider more recent reviews of the evidence base which suggest that, whilst some progress may have been made, certain difficulties remain, specifically with regards the evaluation of the outcomes of joint working.

Having been approached by the Editor of JICA, the authors submit this paper for the 20th anniversary issue of the journal because of the impact and continuing relevance of their original article.

The purpose of this paper is to explore government efforts to enhance the autonomy of community health services (CHS) in England through the creation of Foundation Trusts status. It considers why some CHS elected to become nascent Community Foundation Trusts (CFTs) while others had not and what advantages they thought increased levels of autonomy offered.

Data are drawn from the evaluation of the Department of Health’s CFT pilot programme. Participants were purposively selected from pilot sites, as well as from comparator non-pilot organisations. A total of 44 staff from 14 organisations were interviewed.

The data reveals that regardless of the different pathways that organisations were on, they all shared the same goal, a desire for greater autonomy, but specifically within the NHS. Additionally, irrespective of their organisational form most organisations were considering an almost identical set of initiatives as a means to improve service delivery and productivity.

Despite the expectations of policy makers no CFTs were established during the course of the study, so it is not possible to find out what the effect of such changes were. Nevertheless, the authors were able to investigate the attitudes of all the providers of CHS to the plans to increase their managerial autonomy, whether simply by separating from PCTs or by becoming CFTs.

As no CFTs have yet been formed, this study provides the only evidence to date about increasing autonomy for CHS in England.

Appropriate housing for the growing population of older adults is becoming an international concern. The purpose of this paper is to report on a review of UK and international literature carried out as part of a project exploring the commissioning and delivery of social care in housing with care settings. The paper also considers housing with care in the context of UK policy and practice.

The peer literature review process used a range of academic databases as well as government and third sector web sites, drawing on relevant material in English published from 1990 to 2012.

Findings are presented within three main themes: how care and support is provided; the role of the built environment; and the benefits for resident well-being. The review found a paucity of literature focusing specifically on care and support in housing with care settings, particularly in terms of how social care is delivered, but the evidence base suggests that housing with care is in a strong position to deliver on most if not all UK government aspirations.

Despite a growing literature both in the UK and internationally exploring the characteristics and benefits of housing with care for older people, substantial gaps remain in the research evidence.

This paper presents an up to date review of the housing with care literature in the context of current UK policy.

Providing housing with care may seem to be integration at its best. This paper investigates the workforce implications of this form of provision with a focus on older people with high support needs.

The purpose of this paper is to review the recent literature on housing with care in England where a longitudinal approach has been adopted and to identify possible new research projects that focus on gaps in the existing literature.

The review of the relevant research literature draws in part on an earlier overview of the broader literature on housing with care, part of an NIHR School for Social Care Research project, Adult Social Services Environments and Settings (ASSET).

The literature review suggests that the findings from longitudinal studies on housing with care in England have usually been based on administrative sources (such as assessments) rather than the primary focus being on the voice of residents and frontline staff. It is therefore suggested that further studies are required to reflect the views of everyday life in housing with care settings.

This literature review and the longitudinal qualitative framework for undertaking further inquiry forms the basis for a major bid for funds from the NIHR School for Social Care Research. This is a collaborative endeavour between the University of Bristol’s School for Policy Studies, the Association for Dementia Studies at the University of Worcester, the Personal Social Services Research Unit at the University of Kent and the Housing and Learning Improvement Network. The limitations of this paper reflect the paucity of past investigations on the contribution of social care to the quality of life of elderly residents in extra care housing.

As noted above, the reviews of this draft paper have helped to determine the form of the bid for research funds. Informal discussions with commissioners and providers of extra care housing for older people indicate that access for fieldwork along the lines proposed should not prove to be a major barrier. One of the important implications is to add to the weight of evidence about the working conditions of care staff in extra care housing. The research is likely to highlight both good and poor practices, not least with consequences for the quality of life of elderly residents.

As indicated above, the paper draws attention to the need for a longitudinal qualitative study on the contribution of social care to the quality of life of older residents in extra care housing. Such a study would focus both on the details of everyday lives experienced by residents and the interaction in this setting between frontline staff and residents. In the context of major demographic change in the UK and planned further substantial cuts in public expenditure, this research is of high relevance for both policy and practice in this field of social care.

The review indicated a reliance on administratively derived information about residents rather than focusing on the voice of residents and frontline staff. Future longitudinal research should pay attention to the latter.

Partnership working across health and social care is considered key to manage rising service demand whilst ensuring flexible and high-quality services. Evidence suggests that partnership working is a local concern and that wider structural context is important to sustain and direct local collaboration. “Top down” needs to create space for “bottom up” management of local contingency. Scotland and Norway have recently introduced “top down” structural reforms for mandatory partnerships. The purpose of this paper is to describe and compare these policies to consider the extent to which top-down approaches can facilitate effective partnerships that deliver on key goals.

The authors compare Scottish (2015) and Norwegian (2012) reforms against the evidence of partnership working. The authors foreground the extent to which organisation, finance and performance management create room for partnerships to work collaboratively and in new ways.

The two reforms are held in place by different health and social care organisation and governance arrangements. Room for manoeuvre at local levels has been jeopardised in both countries, but in different ways, mirroring existing structural challenges to partnership working. Known impact of the reforms hitherto suggests that the potential of partnerships to facilitate user-centred care may be compromised by an agenda of reducing pressure on hospital resources.

Large-scale reforms risk losing sight of user outcomes. Making room for collaboration between user and services in delivering desired outcomes at individual and local levels is an incremental way to join bottom up to top down in partnership policy, retaining the necessary flexibility and involving key constituencies along the way.