http://hdl.handle.net/1893/28720 Electronic copies of Faculty of Social Sciences reports and discussion papers. 2026-10-03T09:50:40Z http://hdl.handle.net/1893/37535 Title: Barnardo’s B-Wild Practitioner Training Programme Final Evaluation Report Author(s): Engstrom, Sandra; Mannion, Greg Abstract: Introduction: Barnardo’s is a UK-wide charity that seeks to achieve better outcomes for children. In this report, we provide a summary account of a research-informed evaluation of the training aspects of the B-Wild programme which forms part of a wider array of services in this area for the charity. Our focus here is to evaluate when and how the facilitators of the B-Wild programme benefited from this training and how it impacted on their practice. There is inevitably the opportunity here too to see how the programme was experienced in practice via the accounts of the B-Wild staff. However, we are not evaluating the effectiveness of B-Wild for its recipients. We did not gather evidence from young people, or families. Similarly, we did not observe B-Wild provision in situ. The report outlines our aims and methodology. We provide a short findings summary at the outset. Thereafter, in ‘Analysis Level 1’ we provide four key themes that emerged from our analysis providing more in-depth evidence. In Analysis Level 2, we provide more of an overarching view of the key features of the B-Wild programme. We provide a short conclusion with reflections based on the findings and some selected literature. 2024-10-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/1893/37531 Title: Home Improvement Services in England: National Evaluation. Final Report Author(s): Rolfe, Steve; Mccall, Vikki; Harris, Catherine; Gilbertson, Jan; Pearson, Sarah; Smith, Rose; Wilson, Ian; Marshall, Michael; Preece, Jenny; Robinson, David; Brown, Jamie; McGregor, Sion; Roberts, Gwyn; Smith, Paul Abstract: First paragraph: This report presents the main findings from the national evaluation of home improvement services in England. The Centre for Ageing Better appointed the Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research (CRESR) at Sheffield Hallam University, in partnership with the UK Collaborative Centre for Housing Evidence (CaCHE), the University of Sheffield, the University of Stirling, the Building Research Establishment (BRE), and Foundations, to conduct the evaluation which ran for 18 months between May 2023 and October 2024 2025-02-25T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/1893/37496 Title: Supporting the Workforce in Health and Education to Improve Moves in Children’s Care Author(s): Cleary, Jessica; Burns, Andrew Abstract: First paragraph: Between 2016 and 2020, driven by those with experience in care, the Scottish Government commissioned an Independent Care Review (ICR) to understand what is needed to ensure Scotland is the best place to grow up in ‘care’. At the conclusion of the ICR, six reports were published. Amongst the six reports, The Promise (2019) details a new vision for a national ‘care system’, informed by what the ICR heard from over 5500 care-experienced children, young people, families, and workers across Scotland. The ICR heard from children and young people who had experienced moves in their care about the importance of understanding the processes, receiving consistent support, and being enabled to maintain relationships with all those important to them throughout these significant moments. Parents also stressed the importance of professionals properly planning transitions and sensitively handling moves and endings. As a result, the Promise (2019: 68) stipulated that “any transition in a care-experienced child’s life must be limited, relational, planned and informed”. To achieve this vision, the workforce who support children, young people and their families during moves in their care must be supported to take active responsibility for care-experienced young people during these transitions through a joined-up approach to meeting their needs. 2025-05-19T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/1893/37485 Title: Highlighting alcohol use in medication appointments with clinical pharmacists: the CHAMP-1 mixed methods research programme Author(s): Stewart, Duncan; Madden, Mary; Bartlett, Andrew; Dhital, Ranjita; Gough, Brendan; Haining, Shona; O'Carroll, Ronan; Ogden, Margaret; Whittlesea, Cate; McCambridge, Jim Abstract: Background Brief interventions have been the cornerstone of alcohol prevention in the NHS, but there are important limitations to the underpinning evidence-base and implementation has been problematic. We completed the first community pharmacy brief intervention trial and found no effect. A different approach was needed. This programme proposed to integrate attention to alcohol clinically within existing pharmacy service delivery, supporting pharmacists to discuss alcohol as a toxic psychoac_ve drug in the contexts of potential impacts on treatments, conditions and health. Aims The aims were to: (1) work with pharmacists and patients to design and evaluate an intervention that develops the health and wellbeing role of pharmacists in relation to alcohol consumption, specifically within the context of an existing medication review service; (2) engage with policy makers throughout the duration of the programme about the intervention and wider systemic and workforce development needs for the pharmacy profession. Design and methods Methods incorporated reviews, qualitative observational and interview studies, coproduced intervention development and process studies, and a cluster pilot randomised controlled trial. During the programme, national policy decisions moved NHS commissioned medication reviews from community pharmacy into newly created Primary Care Networks of general practices, in the form of a new service, the Structured Medication Review. With funder approval, we adapted the programme and the intervention to the general practice setting. This included early studies of Structured Medication Review implementation, and feasibility study of using primary care datasets for evaluation purposes. Setting Community pharmacies initially, and subsequently general practice. Participants Pharmacists and medication review patients Interventions The Medicines and Alcohol Consultation was developed to support pharmacists to integrate attention to alcohol within routine medication reviews. Results The programme comprised three phases, reflecting major, unanticipated changes in the organisation of NHS medication review services, and thus to the research plan. Phase 1 developed the intervention with patients and community pharmacists, informed by the conceptual work, reviews, observational and interview studies. Feasibility studies established the planned trial methods, and the external cluster pilot trial met main trial progression criteria for rates of recruitment and follow-up. In Phase 2, now in general practice, we studied how national policy was being translated into practice, in order to understand contextual factors influencing the early implementation of Primary Care Networks and the Structured Medication Review, including substantial COVID-19 related delays. Interviews with senior staff, clinical pharmacists and patients indicated that Structured Medication Review practice had fallen short of the original person-centred policy vision for the service, and clinical pharmacist role development in Primary Care Networks was limited. The quality of national Structured Medication Review data was uncertain. In such circumstances, it was decided that it was not possible to undertake a definitive trial. In Phase 3 the Medicines and Alcohol Consultation programme was delivered to a cohort of 10 clinical pharmacists in general practice, with data from pharmacists, patients, practice development coaches and audio-recordings triangulated. Progress towards more skilful, person-centred practice was observed for the pharmacists who completed the programme, with acknowledged limitations. This was particularly the case for alcohol itself. The local policy and service contexts were examined in an Integrated Care System stakeholder interview study that laid bare major challenges to be faced in addressing alcohol. Limitations The programme has comprised predominantly qualitative studies within the North East and Yorkshire region, so transferability to other regions is not known. Conclusions Pharmacists can be supported to increase skilfulness in working clinically on alcohol with patients. Workforce development and systemic pressures make this more difficult than it needs to be. The idea that alcohol should be regarded as a drug, to be discussed alongside prescribed medications, is foundational for clinical pharmacists. The new thinking about how health care professionals more broadly talk about alcohol with patients has been articulated as a new paradigm, Brief Interventions 2.0, for advancing future research.