Search results

It is obvious to many, but unproven to others, that community development has a positive impact on the mental health and well‐being of those who are touched by it. In our recent study, Connect and Include (Seebohm & Gilchrist, 2008), we found strong evidence that individuals, groups and communities can benefit from the community development process. Positive outcomes included greater democracy and social justice, but in this article we focus on the contribution of community development to social inclusion and the benefits to mental health.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how conflict-affected communities in Ukraine (the Lugansk region) can develop sustainable mental health services in decentralised settings. The main interest focuses on community stakeholders’ perception of their problems and solutions that communities can create to achieve better mental health coverage.

A series of roundtables (RTs) (4 RTs, 62 participants overall), accompanied by interactive brainstorming techniques, were conducted with communities’ representatives/stakeholders from the East of Ukraine (Lugansk region, a government-controlled area) during the year 2021. Participants (health, mental health, social care workers and administration representatives) were provided with the opportunity to discuss mental health services’ development challenges and create affordable solutions for their communities. Results of discussions were submitted to qualitative analysis and offered for review by participants.

Decentralisation in Ukraine led to allocating funds alongside responsibilities for developing the services to communities. Most of the communities appear not to be ready to acknowledge the role of mental health services, entirely relying on the existing weak psychiatric hospital-based system. Awareness-raising interactive capacity-building activities for the community leaders and decision-makers effectively promote community-based mental health services development. Five clusters of challenges were identified: leadership, coordination and collaboration problems; infrastructure, physical accessibility and financial problems; mental health and primary health-care workforce shortage and lack of competencies; low awareness of mental health and available services and high stigma; war, crises and pandemic-related problems. Communities stakeholders foresaw seven domains of action: increasing the role of communities and service users in the initiatives of governmental bodies; establishing in the communities local coordination/working groups dedicated to mental health service development; developing the community-based spaces (hubs) for integrated services provision; embedding the mental health services in the existing services (social, administrative and health care); mental health advocacy and lobbying led by local leaders and service users; increasing capacity of communities in financial management, fundraising; developing services by combining efforts and budgets of neighbouring communities.

The study has potential limitations. Participants of the roundtables were mostly appointed by local authorities, so some of them didn`t have a motivation for mental health services development. Service users were involved only from the facilitators` side, not from the side of communities; therefore, it was impossible to include their view of problems and solutions. Obtained data were limited to the opinion of local professionals, administration workers and other local stakeholders. The human rights aspect was not clearly articulated in the tasks of the roundtables.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the paper is original in terms of its topic (connecting decentralisation and local stakeholders’ engagement for understanding the challenges of mental health services development) and research strategy (engagement of Ukrainian communities, qualitative analysis of the discussion results and applying the best practices and international recommendations to the local context).

English governance has repeatedly had a tendency to veer between national, regional and local centres of power and influence. This has often led to profound disagreements, sometimes even open conflict. National policy guidance is usually helpful, if developed through consultation, to steer a clear, coherent direction for the system. But a narrow, excessively top‐down, mechanistic target‐driven approach can lead to a prevailing culture of ticking boxes at the expense of real patient priorities. Government ministers and civil servants, however, are often caught in a tension between being too dogmatic, or alternatively too flexible and giving responsibility to local agencies, whereupon people may complain about a ‘postcode lottery’ in services. Balancing perspectives and narratives in a coherent way for policy development and implementation and service improvement is a major challenge of leadership. The creation of the National Institute for Mental Health in England (NIMHE) was designed to bring together the local, regional and the national in a form that would see policy and practice mutually developed and nurtured at all levels of governance.

The purpose of this paper is to describe and critique the methodology used to develop a core competency framework for mental health professionals working with people with an intellectual disability and co-occurring mental ill health.

A multi-phase, multi-method design was used to collect qualitative and quantitative data, including a scoping survey, modified online Delphi, and consultation with multiple stakeholders. The implementation phase involved a launch forum and workshop, toolkit development, and evaluation strategy.

Results from the scoping survey and consultation process informed the development of a core competency framework with 11 domains. An accompanying toolkit was also developed with practical guidance to assist with the implementation of the core competencies. In total, 93 professionals attended the launch forum, and the framework has been downloaded 998 times during the first year it has been available.

Detailed information specific to each profession cannot be included when a whole of workforce approach is used. The ways in which to use the framework in conjunction with other core competency frameworks is discussed.

This framework can be utilised by mental health workers including clinicians, managers, service developers, and educators, from multiple professional backgrounds. The approach taken can also be used by others to develop similar frameworks.

This is the first core competency framework, to the authors’ knowledge, specifically designed for public mental health professionals from varied backgrounds working with people with an intellectual disability. Consulting with multiple stakeholders, not just experts, elicited new information that may otherwise have been overlooked.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the development and experience of the Mental Health Professionals’ Network (MHPN) in building and supporting a national interdisciplinary professional development platform in community mental health to enhance practitioner response to the needs of consumers.

The key components of the MHPN model are described highlighting effective ways of engaging practitioners and supporting interdisciplinary practice. The MHPN has two key programs – Face-to-Face Interdisciplinary Practitioner Networks and an Online Professional Development Program.

The MHPN model has had significant uptake in communities across Australia and continues to grow. Practitioners report positive outcomes in engaging with other practitioners, improving their professional knowledge and having gained increased confidence in the provision of mental health care to patients.

The progress and learnings to date offer some useful insights that can be applied to other settings to support integrated care for patients with mental health problems through enhancing collaborative care among practitioners at the primary care level.

MHPN is a unique, national, successful platform delivering opportunities for interdisciplinary professional development in the primary mental health sector. The model is cost effective, practitioner driven, and transferable to other settings.

Indigenous populations and communities around the world confront historical, cultural, socioeconomic and forced geographic limitations that have profound impacts on mental wellness. The impacts of colonialism and, for some indigenous populations, forced residential schooling and the resulting loss of culture and family ties, have contributed to higher risks of mental illness in these groups. In addition, there are barriers to healing and mental wellness, including inconsistent cultural competence of mainstream mental health professionals, coupled with the limited numbers of indigenous mental health professionals. The Wharerata Declaration is a proposed framework to improve indigenous mental health through state‐supported development of indigenous mental health leaders, based on a new indigenous leadership framework. Developed by the Wharerata Group (original membership noted in the acknowledgements section at the end of this article), the framework will be presented for support to the member countries of the International Initiative for Mental Health Leadership (IIMHL) in 2010.

This paper, which builds on the findings of WHO's Report on Mental Health and Development, aims to highlight the health, social, economic, and human rights effects of unaddressed mental disorders in low and middle income countries (LMICs) and to propose effective strategies to address mental disorders and their impacts as part of an overall development strategy.

The paper first reviews the findings of relevant research on mental disorders and poverty and then proposes solutions that can be adopted by countries to promote development.

This evidence of strong links between poverty and mental disorder supports the argument that mental disorders should be an important concern for development strategies. Mental disorders have diverse and far‐reaching social impacts, including homelessness, higher rates of imprisonment, poor educational opportunities and outcomes, lack of employment and reduced income. Targeted poverty alleviation programmes are needed to break the cycle between mental illness and poverty. These must include measures specifically addressing the needs of people with mental health conditions, such as the provision of accessible and effective services and support, facilitation of education, employment opportunities and housing, and enforcement of human rights protection.

The paper highlights that four out of every five people suffering from mental disorders are living in LMICs. Many LMICs have identified mental health as an important issue, yet lack the finances and technical expertise to address the problem. Having mental health on the agenda of development organizations will be a critical step for overcoming the negative development consequences of mental disorders.

The scale of current demand on primary care services from people seeking help with common mental health problems places enormous pressure on the existing front line workers in general practice. The paucity of training opportunities and competing pressures to deliver improved services across a range of general practice targets remains a major challenge for primary care professionals. The impact of government policy, to improve both access to and choice of treatments, has raised public expectations.The commissioning of the graduate workforce, the graduate worker in primary care mental health (GWPCMH), commenced in 2002, in response to the publication of target numbers detailed in the Priorities and Planning Framework, (DoH, 2002). It signalled a determination to expand the workforce provision and improve the quality of care for service users with common mental health problems.This paper examines the scale of common mental health problems, the policy response and the commissioning process. Particular attention is given to examining the barriers that have been shown to affect implementation, identifying the key influencers and the resources required to train these workers.

The concept of social inclusion features prominently in current policy and practice developments in mental health services. The Social Exclusion Unit (2006) highlighted the need for mental health day services to promote inclusion and participation, by integrating with the wider community, and by supporting and encouraging users to access opportunities in the local community. The Leeds i3 (inspire, improve, include) project aimed to modernise local mental health day services accordingly. The aim of our study was to develop and validate a measure of social inclusion to be used in mental health day services in Leeds. The underlying assumption was that recent changes in mental health day service provision would substantially improve social inclusion of the service users.The social inclusion questionnaire was developed through extensive iterative consultation with mental health service users and staff, and its reliability was proven using test‐retest statistics. It was shown to be a simple, inexpensive, user‐friendly and repeatable measure that could be used routinely by mental health day services. Factor analysis of the questionnaire showed that social inclusion had seven important components. We suggest that these components form a useful basis for discussion with service users, as well as for planning and evaluating services.

With the recent release of the National Standard for Mental Health and Well-Being for Post-Secondary Students, there is increased interest to integrate research and practice for mental health services on post-secondary campuses. Participant-oriented research is a useful framework to bridge this gap. This paper aims to describe the program development and evaluation process and reports challenges and lessons learned to inform future implementation strategies for similar endeavours.

A participant-oriented research approach was used to revise and evaluate an innovative interdisciplinary resilience program, entitled Roots of Resiliency, for post-secondary students.

This case analysis used the development and evaluation of Roots of Resiliency to demonstrate some of the strategies and challenges that exist for participant-oriented research related to mental health in the post-secondary context. Collaborative relationships among the various development team members contributed to an overall positive experience. Some challenges that others who work in post-secondary mental health field may consider include the need for content expertise, the ongoing need for communication among team members and the need for an effective system to give voice to all participants.

Any mental health program has a cultural component and is best co-developed by the particular students (e.g. indigenous students) who are to be served by the program. In this regard, the co-design and shared development and evaluation of the current mental health program is an example that can be emulated in other programs within the post-secondary context.