All Categories
Array
(
[0] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 18
[name] => Building Connections Fund: Evaluation and Learning
[slug] => building-connections
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 18
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Understanding the impact and sharing learning to tackle loneliness The £11.5m Fund which is a partnership between Government, The National Lottery Community Fund and the Co-op Foundation is providing grants to 126 voluntary, community and social enterprise organisations between 2019 and 2021. To evaluate and share learning from the Fund, we are working with New Philanthropy Capital, Centre for Youth Impact, Brunel University London, Bryson Purdon Social Research, and expert David Pritchard. The work will be carried out with groups of all ages and backgrounds across England.
Reducing or preventing loneliness , by enabling projects tackling loneliness to be more effective and evaluate their impact. Build on our existing knowledge to better understand the most effective approaches to measure, reduce and prevent loneliness. Once complete in 2021, findings from the project will be used to improve the evidence base on loneliness. This will inform longer-term policy and funding decisions.
The resources and findings on this page are created and maintained by our partners New Philanthropy Capital.
If you are a Building Connections Fund grant-holder and have any enquiries, please email: BCFevaluation@thinknpc.org For grant-holders You can find resources to support your work in the tabs below, including our guidance on measuring loneliness. Building Connections grant-holders will also be able to register for upcoming events, sign up for workshops or webinars and receive the latest learning from the programme.
You can also sign up to the Centre’s weekly evidence alerts below to read the latest wellbeing evidence and insight. It’s not just for Fund grant-holders; anyone can subscribe!
10 tips to help your project reduce loneliness
Download
This paper brings together emerging findings from the existing evidence to offer practical help to Building Connections Fund grant holders and other projects working on reducing loneliness.
These tips focus on how services are delivered, rather than what they deliver. The aim is to help you plan and implement projects so that they work more effectively to reduce loneliness.
As many of your activities are already underway, these tips focus on opportunities to incorporate best practice. The diversity of types of loneliness, types of interventions, target beneficiaries and locations are such that there will never be a one-size-fits-all approach to fighting loneliness. Here, we draw out promising factors, mechanisms and approaches that make existing interventions more likely to be effective. As some tips emphasise, approaches should be personalised and localised to tackle loneliness.
Therefore, these tips should be taken as ideas to explore, rather than as a prescriptive checklist.
Guidance on evaluation for grant holders
Download
This guide brings together NPC’s pioneering impact practice resources to offer practical guidance to Building Connections Fund Grant Holders and others working on reducing loneliness. It is designed to complement the What Works Centre for Wellbeing’s guidance A Brief Guide to measuring loneliness. We need to understand more about the factors associated with loneliness, what the effects of loneliness are for different people and how we can prevent or alleviate it. Currently, there is limited evidence on loneliness. We have some data on loneliness in older people, but less for other age groups including children and young people. This guidance is designed to help you evaluate your activities tackling loneliness and improve the sector’s understanding of what works. You do not need to have any prior knowledge of impact measurement or evaluation.
Evaluation is about asking and answering some of the most fundamental questions: Are we making a difference? How can we improve? Are we reaching the right people? How does our programme lead to change? It is about developing an approach to learning about what changes occur, how change happens, and what causes change.
Please note that though this guide will help you collect data for your project, Building Connections Grant Holders who are chosen to take part in our smaller evaluation cohorts will be given extra support by NPC.
This document has been produced for Building Connections Fund grant-holders but can be applied to any activities aimed at reducing loneliness.
This guidance consists of three sections:
Section 1 outlines the national measures of loneliness. All organisations working on tackling loneliness should consider if they can use these to evaluate their work.
Section 2 takes you through five steps for developing and implementing a measurement framework for evaluating your work.
Section 3 offers practical advice for using different approaches and methods for data collection and analysis. It also outlines key evaluation considerations relating to research ethics and data protection.
Guidance on co-design and community spaces Download
This document offers practical guidance on co-design, evaluation of co-design and evaluation of community spaces. It includes an introduction to co-design and why it matters, top tips and tools for creating and monitoring a co-design process, and advice on how to evaluate it.
We need to understand more about loneliness: the factors associated with it, the effects it has on different people, and how we can prevent or alleviate it. Currently, the evidence base is very limited – we have some data on loneliness in older people, but less for other age groups (including children and young people).
This document offers guidance on co-design, evaluation of co-design and evaluation of community spaces. It includes three main sections:
A brief introduction to co-design and why it matters Top tips and tools for creating and monitoring a co-design process Advice on how to evaluate co-design by reflecting on: the benefits of co-design for staff and young people; the quality of the co-design process; and insights into addressing loneliness and social isolation.
This guidance was developed for the Building Connections Fund grant-holders who are working specifically on co-design and community spaces, but can be used by any organisation looking to design or improve its co-design process. It builds on the Guidance on Evaluation for Building Connections Fund Grant-holders, which offers practical guidance for understanding evaluation and evaluating your activities.
Co-design and community spaces - Final Report NPC has conducted a qualitative evaluation of these projects to better understand the role of co-design and community spaces in reducing loneliness for young people.
Visit their website to download the report More about the Fund
The Carers’ Music Fund targets women and girls who are isolated because of their caring responsibilities. The 10 projects will engage them in music activities with the aim of reducing loneliness, improving their mental health and wellbeing.
The ten projects – seven of which are in England, with one each in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland – vary hugely in their approaches to engaging female carers. In Birmingham, Midlands Arts Centre (MAC), through partnerships with Midland Mencap and Quench Arts, will engage with a range of existing groups who focus on areas such as mental health, disability and specific cultural communities, while also trying to reach those who may not consider themselves to be carers.
Loneliness among carers is extremely high: 8 in 10 say they are socially isolated because of their caring responsibilities, and according to ONS figures carers are 22% more likely to experience mental ill health than the general population.
[parent] => 10
[count] => 1
[filter] => raw
)
[2] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 94
[name] => Covid-19
[slug] => covid
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 94
[taxonomy] => category
[description] =>
Covid-19, wellbeing and inequalities - crowdsourcing evidence
Although the whole of the UK has been affected by Covid-19 and its social and economic consequences, the impact has been different for different people.
To support a wellbeing-centred recovery, we are looking at how the pandemic and responses to it have impacted all drivers of our wellbeing - not just examining the health and fatality risk.
We value a diversity of valid evidence types, particularly during times of unprecedented change and where a rapid response is necessary.
Have a look at the wellbeing evidence crowdsourced so far. You can view and comment, but will currently need to request permission to edit.
Do you know of any evidence to add?
We are crowdsourcing:
statistical analysis based on official data or surveys on key wellbeing determinants - for instance, relationships with others, unemploymentqualitative insights - for example, from interviews or case studies
expert analysisprojections on the likely impacts on different groups - such as research looking at risk factors for mental illness.
We have organised this evidence under six main domains, or wellbeing determinants. We would very much appreciate it if you could add any evidence that you are aware of that you think is relevant to one or more of these domains.
Health (directly covid related, plus other physical and mental health)
What we do (jobs, care responsibilities, activities)
Money (income, wealth, debt)
Education (access and quality)
Where we live (housing, local environment, community)
Relationships (family, social networks)
Other
You can send us any evidence you know of - with a reference and hyperlink to the original source - in the form below, or email it to evidence@whatworkswellbeing.org .
What happens next?
We will map the wellbeing drivers against personal characteristics and risk factors to provide relevant analysis. This will help inform Covid-19 response strategies.
We will also use the evidence gathered as a source document, referring to the individual studies and findings that are relevant:
to specific audiences for specific at risk groups To those responsible for policies connected to specific determinants.
This document will remain accessible to contributors to also use as a resource.
Submit any research
[gravityform id="4" title="false" description="true" ajax="true"]
[parent] => 0
[count] => 17
[filter] => raw
)
[3] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 10
[name] => Culture, arts and sport
[slug] => culture-arts-and-sport
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 10
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Spending our leisure time doing things we enjoy may be good for our wellbeing. But when it comes to carrying out projects and programmes to improve wellbeing, what works to make the biggest wellbeing impact? Do all interventions work for everyone, and under what conditions?
The Centre has carried out evidence reviews on the wellbeing impact of :
[parent] => 0
[count] => 46
[filter] => raw
)
[4] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 90
[name] => Data and analysis
[slug] => data-and-analysis
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 90
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => The following blogs are a useful starting point
Happy people wear seatbelts if you’re more interested in outcomes such as, say, reducing deaths in road traffic accidents, wellbeing findings have something to offer and sometimes they’re not so obvious.
What the hidden happiness gap tells us about wellbeing inequalities in the UK What do we know about the drivers of wellbeing inequality? All the Centre's blogs and guest blogs on the UK wellbeing data How is the UK, as a whole, doing? Deborah Hardoon, our Head of Evidence , looks at the UK's performance in relation to other countries in the European Union and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). How did a major event like Brexit impact wellbeing? There are 1.9 million adults enrolled in further education colleges, and 2.34 million students studying at UK higher education institutions, according to Association of Colleges HESA . And thousands of employees in the UK participate in work-based training and development courses each year.
Our evidence reviews, practice maps, and data analysis has focussed on:
[parent] => 0
[count] => 51
[filter] => raw
)
[6] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 89
[name] => Employee wellbeing snapshot survey
[slug] => employee-snapshot-survey
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 89
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => What gets measured, gets managed.
So that you can support your workforce in the ways that are the most useful to them at this time, we recommend that you regularly ask your employees how they are doing.
We have developed this suggested set of questions in collaboration with The Department for Work and Pensions, to give a quick snapshot of how people are doing with respect to different aspects of wellbeing.
Collecting this data at regular intervals will help you to identify individuals and groups who are at risk of low wellbeing, as well as specific aspects of work (physical hazards) or aspects of wellbeing (mental health) which could be improved with well-designed interventions.
Find out how your survey results compare to these benchmarks .
The recommended questions and scales
Download the survey as a Word document.For each of these questions I’d like you to give an answer on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is “not at all” and 10 is “completely”...
Overall, how satisfied are you with your life nowadays?
Overall, to what extent do you feel that the things you do in your life are worthwhile?
Overall, how happy did you feel yesterday?
Overall, how anxious did you feel yesterday?
Recommended response scale
0 (Not at all) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (completely)
On a scale of 1 to 7 where 1 means 'Completely dissatisfied' and 7 means 'Completely satisfied', how dissatisfied or satisfied are you with your present job overall?
Recommended response scale
1 - Completely dissatisfied
2 - Mostly dissatisfied
3 - Somewhat dissatisfied
4 - Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
5 - Somewhat satisfied
6 - Mostly satisfied
7 - Completely satisfied
I would recommend my organisation as a great place to work
1 - Strongly disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither agree nor disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly agree
How would you rate your overall physical health now?
1 - Very good
2 - Good
3 - Fair
4 - Bad
5 - Very bad
How would you rate your overall mental health now?
1 - Very good
2 - Good
3 - Fair
4 - Bad
5 - Very bad
I feel safe from threats and physical hazards in my work environment
1 - Strongly disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither agree nor disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly agree
I am satisfied with my physical working environment
1 - Strongly disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither agree nor disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly agree
For each of the following statements, please select the response which best describes your work situation...
‘Your manager helps and supports you’
‘Your colleagues help and support you’
‘Your job gives you the feeling of work well done’
[parent] => 7
[count] => 5
[filter] => raw
)
[7] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 9
[name] => Environment
[slug] => environment
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 9
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Our report Drivers of wellbeing inequalities showed that the lower your wellbeing, the bigger the impact access to green and blue ( blue is rivers, canals, seaside) spaces, waterscapes, and heritage makes. Greater engagement in heritage activities and the use of green space for health, exercise or recreation is associated with lower inequality in life satisfaction in local areas. There are practice examples of interventions that work with different communities to improve wellbeing through natural environments on land and water.
Recent surveys in England have found that 95% of adults think it is important to look after heritage buildings; 73% had visited a heritage site over twelve months; over 315,000 people were heritage volunteers; and 80% of people thought that local heritage makes their area a better place to live (DCMS, 2015; Historic England, 2017).
This section looks at the evidence on the broader wellbeing impacts of the environment and heritage on wellbeing.
You can learn more on the Place and community page to learn more about wellbeing impacts on heritage and environment in local communities.
[parent] => 0
[count] => 14
[filter] => raw
)
[8] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 3
[name] => Government and public policy
[slug] => governance-and-democracy
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 3
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Our evidence reviews, analysis, and guidance focuses on:
Good governance for wellbeing looks likely to be governments and organisations that are competent, fair and caring. Our relationship with our government affects, and is affected by, our wellbeing. When people are satisfied with the way they are governed, wellbeing is higher and more equal. Using the World Bank indicators , analysis shows that what ranks highest in importance for people are ‘effectiveness of government services and efficiency of government and policy delivery’. How we do government matters too.
This is particularly important at lower GDP levels, but still holds true in richer countries. The European Social Survey suggests that once a country reaches a good level of GDP, other governance factors become important, particularly ‘voice and accountability’, ‘political stability’ and ‘absence of violence and terrorism’. The latter highlights the importance of feeling safe.
There is also evidence suggesting that people who participate in their communities are also active in political life .
[parent] => 0
[count] => 52
[filter] => raw
)
[9] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 88
[name] => Guidance for better workplace wellbeing
[slug] => guidance-workplace-wellbeing
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 88
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => This online guidance builds on the existing evidence of what works to improve wellbeing in the workplace .
When it comes to improving wellbeing in the workplace, context matters. The guidance sets out three questions to ask yourself when thinking about how you can improve wellbeing. It then outlines five principles for action that can underpin any activities, policies, or approaches to make them more likely to be sustainable.
Making wellbeing improvement cost-effective We are developing a cost-effectiveness calculator for anyone carrying out, or planning to carry out, activities or projects to improve workplace wellbeing.
Sign up below to get advance access when we launch the calculator in the coming months.
[gravityform id="3" title="true" description="true"]
[parent] => 7
[count] => 9
[filter] => raw
)
[10] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 71
[name] => Higher education: student and staff wellbeing and mental health
[slug] => he-mental-health
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 71
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => There is a lot of interest in what can be done to improve student mental health and wellbeing in higher and further education. We have been working with Universities UK, Student Minds, Student Mental Health Research Network (SMaRteN ) Office for Students and Universities of East Anglia and Liverpool and Brunel University London to support learning from what's being done so well-intentioned action doesn't do harm and we build on what's already know. From our work on adult learning with University of East Anglia we identified an evidence gap on student mental health and wellbeing interventions.
We worked with University of Liverpool to do a Review of Reviews on Student Mental Health and Wellbeing interventions.
Here is an overview of other evidence relevant for Higher and Further Education in partnership with Universities UK.
Mental health matters to overall wellbeing at all stages of life and its impact is relatively big. There is growing interest in taking action to improve mental health, and promote wellbeing, in a wide range of organisations including in Higher and Further Education.
Through research and clinical education universities and colleges play an important role in improving mental health and wellbeing in the UK. How universities and colleges create the conditions for those studying and working there, like in schools, workplaces and communities, is now getting greater
attention and funding.
Making sure that what is done is effective, cost-effective and, even if well-intentioned, doesn’t cause harm, is now a priority. This research aims to establish the global evidence base for all sectors to build on.
The biggest drivers of adult wellbeing (16 years and up) are:
Emotional and physical health
Partner relationship
Employment
Find out more about the
Centre’s work on lifelong wellbeing
From the Centre
From other sources:
From the Centre:
From other sources:
Evidence from the Centre:
Evidence from other sources:
[parent] => 6
[count] => 3
[filter] => raw
)
[11] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 87
[name] => HMT Green Book Appraisal Guidance
[slug] => hmt-green-book-appraisal-guidance
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 87
[taxonomy] => category
[description] =>
Even though your department has specific objectives, your overarching aim in central or local government is to improve people’s lives.
Good advice for decision-making should consider all the important impacts on people’s lives. There is a large research literature that has identified the statistical predictors of human wellbeing, which we can use to develop and deliver better policies.
What do you do differently when you include wellbeing?
Considering the wellbeing evidence changes decisions at three levels:
Strategic level
Define the objective: a focus on improving people’s lives, improving wellbeing
Policy or project level
Design in wellbeing when developing options
Design options which improve wellbeing, based on the evidence
Use the wellbeing evidence to better achieve outcomes, since wellbeing in turn improves productivity, health and pro-social behaviours
Appraising options
Understand and compare the wellbeing impacts in appraisal. Support the estimates in social cost benefit analysis by:
Consider the full potential impacts
Quantify wellbeing impacts and monetising where possible
Reflect the impacts on different groups
In some cases, wellbeing will fully capture all the outcomes affected by a proposal. For example, improving social relations or improving wellbeing in a classroom.
In this case, we can consistently compare options using wellbeing as the unit of benefit, rather than translating via monetary benefits. This means that subjective wellbeing can be used as the outcome variable for Social Cost Effectiveness Analysis.
[parent] => 3
[count] => 2
[filter] => raw
)
[12] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 2
[name] => Income and economy
[slug] => income-wealth-and-economy
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 2
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => All things being equal, economic growth is good for wellbeing. But this is not automatic and can miss other things that matter. GDP is the fifth biggest driver of difference between high and low wellbeing countries. Growth gives us choices but is no guarantee of wellbeing. It is clear that:
The higher our income the less influence an increase has on our wellbeing and we get used to increases (we adapt). For example, £10 makes a much bigger difference to someone on minimum wage compared to someone already earning £35,000 a year. This means we need to balance with other sources of wellbeing.
We feel loses more than gains - You lose more wellbeing from a fall in income than you gain in wellbeing from an equal rise in income.
Our perception of other people’s wealth, relative to our own, makes a difference to how we rate our wellbeing.
Expenditure has a greater impact than level of income alone.
There is no clear relation between average rate of economic growth and average employment rate. It is clear that unemployment has surprisingly big impacts on wellbeing, similar to that of bereavement and larger than can be explained by loss of income alone; and that we do not adapt, or get used to, being unemployed.
Community levels of deprivation matter for our individual wellbeing , over and above our own personal situation.
[parent] => 0
[count] => 20
[filter] => raw
)
[13] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 92
[name] => Joint decision making, co-production and democracy
[slug] => joint-decision-making-co-production-and-democracy
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 92
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Wellbeing in practice can be:
A goal for society or progress like the HMT Green Book describes wellbeing as 'social welfare'.
A framework, often based ongoing conversation about what matters , using outcomes and indicators .
Personal agency, power, responsibility and control are a part of our wellbeing: freedom to choose what we do in our life is second biggest driver of wellbeing. How organisations work with people to feel control and agency over their lives and communities can make a difference.
Joint decision-making encompasses or overlaps with concepts like democracy, devolution, open policy making,
community empowerment , co-creation,
co-production , inclusion and diversity, voice and accountability, rights, power and responsibilities, agency and control.
[parent] => 3
[count] => 10
[filter] => raw
)
[14] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 93
[name] => Knowledge use & implementation
[slug] => knowledge-use-and-implementation
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 93
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Knowledge use and implementation - why is it important?
What is the use of research evidence if it is then not used?
Whilst knowing ‘What Works’ is important, it is only part of the journey. It is important to know ‘How it works’ and most importantly ‘how to use and implement what we know works’.
We are building a learning system for wellbeing.
We are aiming for there to be effective, do-able, affordable wellbeing improving projects, programmes and approaches. These can be done by everyone, or offer learning for those trying them.
This means that people who can and need to use evidence
know about it, and can find it
find it useful, and can use it
can contribute to what is known.
Decisions are made all the time . They will be made with or without evidence. Better decisions can be made if they are informed by good evidence. Evidence helps us learn, and can take a wide range of forms, some are more useful than others.
How do we improve how evidence informs decision-making in governments, businesses, communities and for individual people?
Using the Science of knowledge mobilisation at the Centre
Setting up the Centre we did four things to ensure that what we did is evidence informed, relevant and useful:
Evidence review of What Works for Research Use Public dialogues Stakeholder engagement
Delphi approach to culture & sport programme led by Brunel University LondonMethods Guide for our reviews
[parent] => 0
[count] => 17
[filter] => raw
)
[15] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 86
[name] => Local authorities strategic support
[slug] => local-authorities-support
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 86
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Wellbeing is a relevant, credible and measurable way to connect policy goals with policy outcomes in a way that matters to people’s lives.
We have partnered with the Health Foundation to deliver a programme of support for local authorities and their partners to place wellbeing evidence at the heart of policy and practice.
We do this by:
measuring, exploring and understanding the distribution of wellbeing in an area
using wellbeing analysis to shape policy and practice
understanding how existing powers and duties can be used to maximise wellbeing impact
measuring the wellbeing impact of policy and projects
providing opportunities for collaboration and learning
To find out more about our programme of work with local government, please contact Joanne Smithson , Local Government & Health Sector Lead. You can also sign up to our evidence alerts to find out more as our work progresses.
[parent] => 4
[count] => 8
[filter] => raw
)
[16] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 11
[name] => Loneliness
[slug] => loneliness
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 11
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Our relationships and positive social connections are essential for us to thrive.
Having someone to rely on in times of trouble is the top driver of difference between high and low wellbeing countries. Our partner relationship is the second biggest driver of overall life satisfaction.
The quality of our relationships and friendships at home, at work and in our communities matter.
Loneliness and wellbeing
If we feel lonely most or all of the time, it can have a serious impact on our wellbeing, and our ability to function in society. As loneliness has been linked to poor physical health, mental health, and poor personal wellbeing - with potentially adverse effects on communities - it is an issue of increasing interest to national and local government, as well as internationally.
Loneliness and social isolation
Loneliness is different to social isolation, in that we can have any number of connections with family, friends, or other people, and still feel lonely. Loneliness can also be usefully distinguished from solitude - which has positive associations for the person experiencing it.
We have been building the evidence base on the different types of loneliness, and what works to reduce it across the lifecourse.
[parent] => 0
[count] => 18
[filter] => raw
)
[17] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 49
[name] => Measuring wellbeing
[slug] => measuring-wellbeing
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 49
[taxonomy] => category
[description] =>
[parent] => 0
[count] => 70
[filter] => raw
)
[18] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 91
[name] => Measuring wellbeing series
[slug] => measuring-wellbeing-series
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 91
[taxonomy] => category
[description] =>
[parent] => 3
[count] => 6
[filter] => raw
)
[19] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 8
[name] => Mental and physical health
[slug] => mental-and-physical-health
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 8
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Our experience and perception of our mental and physical health is the biggest single factor that explains, on average, how we rate our wellbeing. Good health is associated with higher life satisfaction. When it comes to poor health, r ecent acute health problems affect wellbeing the most. But longer-term chronic ill health also has an effect on wellbeing.
Yet it is still possible to experience poor mental and physical health and rate our wellbeing highly, or vice versa. This is because health and wellbeing are different, but clearly linked. The effect of wellbeing on health is substantial - but variable - and comparable to other risk factors more traditionally targeted by public health, such as a healthy diet.
Our evidence, guidance, and analysis on mental and physical health focusses on:
[parent] => 0
[count] => 61
[filter] => raw
)
[20] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 4
[name] => Places and community
[slug] => places-and-community
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 4
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => The places where we live, work and spend time clearly have an impact on our wellbeing. So do the people we know - and encounter - in these places. For example, we know that there are spillover community effects of crime - and knock-on effects of social fragmentation, and deprivation - on our individual wellbeing regardless of whether these things affect us directly.
But what works when it comes to effective policy and practice to improve both individual and community wellbeing? And how do we measure things like community wellbeing: why can't we just add up all the reported individual wellbeing scores in an area?
Our evidence, analysis and guidance looks at how community wellbeing can be understood and improved. Our research looks at:
[parent] => 0
[count] => 92
[filter] => raw
)
[21] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 72
[name] => Post-grad wellbeing: Project Courage
[slug] => project-courage-phd-post-grad
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 72
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Project Courage consists of two years of research and trials in universities across the UK.
Led by researchers at the University of East Anglia, and funded by the Office for Students and the University of East Anglia, it applied a huge variety of methodologies, including survey data, literature review and focus groups for the research component, and then ran interventions at primarily three levels: prevention; resilience; and in-depth support. These were across eight strands of work ranging from policy adjustments to accessible physical activities.
We will be sharing findings and policy implications in early 2020. Please sign up to our email alert
[parent] => 6
[count] => 2
[filter] => raw
)
[22] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 85
[name] => Social prescribing data analysis: WELLCOMM
[slug] => social-prescribing-wellcomm
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 85
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => This project started in February 2020, and we will be sharing updates throughout 2020-21, so sign up to find out as this project progresses.
WELLCOMM is a two-year programme led by Dr Daisy Fancourt, UCL Behavioural Science and Health; along with Dr Karen Mak, UCL BSH; Dr Marie Polley, Social Prescribing Network; and the Centre.
The aim is to transform our understanding of the relationship between community engagement and wellbeing at a population level.
What do we know?
There is strong theoretical literature on why community engagement is crucial to how we survive and thrive and emerging data shows the benefits for wellbeing.
But there remains a paucity of high-quality, large-scale, and longitudinal research on which community activities affect our wellbeing, whether they be arts engagement, volunteering or sport and who is most likely to benefit.
What will we do?
Our project will analyse what the benefits of community engagement are for wellbeing, who benefits most, and how to encourage community engagement amongst different populations. By the end of the project, our objective is to have published new rigorous high impact research which will be of immediate relevance to policy makers, commissioners, investors and organisations.
The programme is funded by the Economic Social and Research Council (ESRC).
[parent] => 8
[count] => 1
[filter] => raw
)
[23] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 81
[name] => Social prescribing models and resources
[slug] => social-prescribing-models
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 81
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => What is social prescribing?
Social prescribing is a way of linking people with sources of support within the community to improve their health and wellbeing.
Social prescribing enables local organisations, including GP practices, to refer people to a link worker. Link workers give people time and focus on what matters to the person through shared decision making, personalised care and support planning.
Link workers can draw on a range of evidence informed models to guide conversations on personal wellbeing.
Evidence-informed models
PERMA Plus
Developed by the Wellbeing and Resilience Centre and South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, this model identifies factors that allow individuals, communities and societies to flourish.
Download the PDF P ositive emotion
E ngagement
R elationships
M eaning
A chievement
Plus
Sleep
Nutrition (five vegetables and two fruits a day)
Physical activity
Optimism
Five Ways to Wellbeing
Five Ways to Wellbeing was developed by the New Economics Foundation as part of the Government’s Foresight project on Mental Capacity and Wellbeing.
Read our blogs on Five Ways to Wellbeing and the evidence gaps .
The model identifies five evidence-based actions to improve wellbeing
Connect
Be active
Take notice
Keep learning
Give
10 Keys to Happier Living
Ten Keys to Happier Living identifies actions that consistently tend to have a positive impact on people's happiness and wellbeing. The first five keys (GREAT) are about how we interact with the outside world in our daily activities. They are based on the Five Ways to Wellbeing . The second five keys (DREAM) come from inside us and depend on our attitude to life.
Other useful resources for social prescribing
The Health Foundation – What makes us healthy
The Health Foundation has prepared a series of infographics, accompanying blogs and commentaries to describe and explain the social determinants of health in an accessible and engaging way.
C3 Collaborating for Health
Based in London, this global NGO builds multi-sector collaborations to address non-communicable diseases’ leading risk factors by promoting three behaviour changes:
improving what we eat and drink
stopping smoking
increasing physical activity
Wellbeing outcome measurement
Local areas are using a range of wellbeing outcome measurement tools, such as the ONS wellbeing scale and the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (SWEMWBS) to measure the impact of their social prescribing activity.
The What Works Centre for Wellbeing has online guidance to help organisations understand, measure, evaluation and analyse their wellbeing impact.
If you’ve carried out an evaluation of an intervention that used a wellbeing framework, or are planning to, please let us know so we can begin building an evidence base. You can email us at info@whatworkswellbeing.org .
[parent] => 8
[count] => 2
[filter] => raw
)
[24] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 84
[name] => Teens and young adults: loneliness and wellbeing
[slug] => loneliness-teens-young-adults
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 84
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Loneliness is increasingly recognised as a serious public health concern within the UK, with robust links to physical health, use of health care services, and early mortality.
Though loneliness has historically been viewed as an issue amongst older adults, recent research has shown elevated levels of loneliness among young people, with effects accumulating across the lifespan.
This project focuses exclusively on young people, and leverages data from three large UK data resources to identify individual and community factors associated with loneliness, differentiate loneliness from related aspects of social wellbeing, and investigate the impact of loneliness on personal wellbeing and mental health.
Findings from the project will allow for early identification of risk and protective factors for loneliness that subsequently inform the design of public policy aimed at alleviating loneliness, and improving personal wellbeing and mental health.
You can sign up to our evidence alerts to find out more as this research progresses throughout 2020.
[parent] => 11
[count] => 3
[filter] => raw
)
[25] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 75
[name] => Understanding and measuring wellbeing: free workshops
[slug] => understanding-measuring-wellbeing-free-workshops
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 75
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Charities, especially small- and medium-sized ones, want to measure what matters . Funding bodies are increasingly asking for measures that capture real impact, beyond traditional outcomes. Wellbeing is now widely recognised as an evidence-informed, established approach to understanding how your service, project or programme makes a difference.
But what does wellbeing look like in your context? And where do you start when it comes to measuring it? At the Centre we are committed to supporting voluntary sector organisations to understand, improve and measure wellbeing.
We are pleased to announce a programme of free wellbeing workshops designed specially for small to medium-sized charities. Supported by the National Lottery Community Fund, the workshops will travel across the country, starting in February 2020.
INTRODUCTORY WORKSHOPS: UNDERSTANDING, IMPROVING AND MEASURING WELLBEING wellbeing concepts and evidence , how to use evidence to improve your activities , and recommended measures for wellbeing evaluations and is ideal for you if you:
work for a small or medium-sized charity or social enterprise
want to understand if and how your activities affect the wellbeing of the people you support
are responsible for reporting, evaluation or impact
have not measured wellbeing very much or at all yet and need some guidance on how to get started.
This workshop is lead by Ingrid Abreu Scherer, Wellbeing and Civil Society Lead at the Centre. She works with charities, community organisations, funders and policy makers to design activities that help people and communities to thrive.
She encourages evaluations that capture the wellbeing impacts of activities, and develops practical tools and resources to help communities learn from their experience and build the evidence on what works to improve wellbeing.
ADVANCED WORKSHOP: DESIGNING AND PREPARING FOR EVALUATION d esign a wellbeing evaluation and how to measure and interpret your wellbeing impact and is ideal for you if you:
are familiar with evaluation frameworks and concepts
have dedicated Monitoring and Evaluation, or Learning and Insights, teams who are keen to improve their understanding of wellbeing evaluation frameworks and methodologies
have already conducted or are planning to conduct a wellbeing evaluation
This workshop is lead by Margherita Musella, Evaluation Lead at the Centre. She advises charities and funders on how to conduct and strengthen their wellbeing evaluations by advising on appropriate methods, measures and approaches and promotes the use of evaluation data from UK projects and pilots to learn about “what works” to improve Wellbeing.
[parent] => 4
[count] => 1
[filter] => raw
)
[26] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 83
[name] => Understanding social isolation and loneliness at different ages
[slug] => social-isolation-lifecourse
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 83
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => The research project, led by Dr Praveetha Patalay, aims to examine the links between social isolation, loneliness and wellbeing.
Using data from five British longitudinal cohort studies – following children born in 1946, 1958, 1970, 1989-90 and 2000-01 - her team will look at whether levels of social connectedness and loneliness, and their relationship to subjective wellbeing, change over people’s lives. They will then investigate whether these patterns vary between generations.
Despite an increase in policy interest, there is little evidence documenting the associations between social isolation, loneliness and subjective wellbeing across our lives and between generations. This research project aims to address this gap, while also generating a range of comparable ‘harmonised’ measures of social isolation for future research.
Sign up to our evidence alerts to find out more about this project throughout 2020.
[parent] => 11
[count] => 1
[filter] => raw
)
[27] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 70
[name] => Volunteering and wellbeing
[slug] => volunteering-and-wellbeing
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 70
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => A large number of third sector organisations rely on volunteers to deliver their arts, culture and sport projects.
Later this year, we will be publishing the findings of a Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) to identify, collate and appraise the evidence on wellbeing impact of volunteering interventions.
Around 40% of people in the UK volunteer at least once a year, with a quarter volunteering once a month. When considering informal volunteering – giving unpaid help to someone who is not a relative – over half of adults volunteer in this way every year.
Our research will answer the following questions to improve how a range of organisations support volunteer wellbeing:
What are the wellbeing impacts of volunteering, and does it affect different populations differently?
What are the key mechanisms by which wellbeing outcomes are achieved for volunteers, and are these generalisable across different contexts and people?
What types of volunteering are particularly associated with wellbeing outcomes?
What are the barriers or enablers to improving wellbeing through volunteering?
The Centre, along with Spirit of 2012, has commissioned the Institute of Volunteering Research to undertake a Rapid Evidence Assessment about volunteering and wellbeing. It will specifically looking at the impact of volunteering on the volunteers themselves.
[parent] => 10
[count] => 5
[filter] => raw
)
[30] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 113
[name] => Wellbeing economics and analysis
[slug] => wellbeing-economics-and-analysis
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 113
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Traditionally, economics is a social science primarily concerned with production, consumption, and transfer of wealth .
More pluralist approaches to economics draw on diverse voices, perspectives and approaches to understand how to organise society to achieve broader goals, such as ensuring sustainable, resilient and inclusive economies.
Wellbeing economics is about using science and evidence to organise society in a way that optimises wellbeing outcomes .
Our work in this area aims to support you to:
use and understand the wellbeing data and measures that now exist develop the methodology for using wellbeing data and evidence in decision-making, including the field of wellbeing economics. increase the use of comparable measures across sectors and disciplines.
[parent] => 0
[count] => 1
[filter] => raw
)
[31] => WP_Term Object
(
[term_id] => 7
[name] => Work
[slug] => work
[term_group] => 0
[term_taxonomy_id] => 7
[taxonomy] => category
[description] => Sign up to receive a special focus 12-email series on employee wellbeing Whether we have a job or not is the third biggest factor associated with our wellbeing, after our mental and physical health and our personal relationships.
Our work on this topic has focussed on:
Being out of work damages wellbeing for everyone, regardless of age, gender, location, ethnicity, level of education. The effect is as big as bereavement. We do not adapt to unemployment and the effects can worsen with time.
But beyond employment, the quality of our jobs matters for our wellbeing. Life satisfaction peaks at 23 and 68 and is at its lowest during working life. Improving wellbeing at work looks to be possible both by direct and indirect approaches. By quality, we’re not talking about any specific type of job, but the conditions that help us thrive in the workplace. So, what does a good job look like?
[parent] => 0
[count] => 76
[filter] => raw
)
)
Building Connections Fund: Evaluation and Learning
Carers' music fund
Covid-19
Culture, arts and sport
Data and analysis
Education and learning
Employee wellbeing snapshot survey
Environment
Government and public policy
Guidance for better workplace wellbeing
Higher education: student and staff wellbeing and mental health
HMT Green Book Appraisal Guidance
Income and economy
Joint decision making, co-production and democracy
Knowledge use & implementation
Local authorities strategic support
Loneliness
Measuring wellbeing
Measuring wellbeing series
Mental and physical health
Places and community
Post-grad wellbeing: Project Courage
Social prescribing data analysis: WELLCOMM
Social prescribing models and resources
Teens and young adults: loneliness and wellbeing
Understanding and measuring wellbeing: free workshops
Understanding social isolation and loneliness at different ages
Volunteering and wellbeing
Wellbeing economics and analysis
Work
