Neighbourhood networks: A model for community-based support (Web version)
Neighbourhood Networks (NNs) are community-based schemes offering a range of activities and services with the aim of improving health and promoting independence
The research shows that the NN model has a great deal to offer, and outlines the benefits of the model.
About us
Everyone has the right to a good life as they get older and our whole society benefits when they do. But far too many people face huge barriers that prevent them from doing so. As a result, many older people are living in bad housing, dealing with poverty and poor health and made to feel invisible in their communities and society.
Ageism, including discrimination in employment, stark inequalities in people’s health and financial circumstances, chronic underinvestment in helping people to age well and a lack of political focus – are all contributing to this growing and critical problem.
At the Centre for Ageing Better we are pioneering ways to make ageing better a reality for everyone. We aim to inspire and inform those in power to tackle the inequalities faced by older people, call out and challenge ageism in all its forms and encourage the widespread take-up of brilliant ideas and approaches that help people to age better.
Get it right and more of us can experience good health, financial security and be treated fairly and with respect as we grow older.
Help us make sure everyone can age better.
Contents
- Introduction
- Definitions
- What are neighbourhood networks?
- The Leeds networks
- Typical NN services
- Membership and participation
- Evaluating neighbourhood networks
- Evaluating the model
- Evaluating offer and access
- Findings
- Primary and secondary prevention
- Community engagement
- Requirements for success
- Ensuring support for all
- Ensuring equity in offer and access
- Checklist
- Recommendations
- Checklist
1. Introduction
Between 2019 and 2022, the Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research (CRESR) at Sheffield Hallam University undertook research on behalf of the Centre for Ageing Better, Leeds City Council (LCC) and the Leeds Older People’s Forum (LOPF) into the effectiveness of the neighbourhood network (NN) model in the City of Leeds.
Neighbourhood Networks (NNs) are community-based schemes offering a range of activities and services with the aim of improving health and promoting independence.
Our aim was to better understand how this model of voluntary and community sector support could help people in later life – in their mental and physical health, in their wellbeing, in their activities and their social networks – with the aim of sharing evidence-based practice of ‘what works’ locally, regionally and nationally.¹
Our research shows how NNs contribute to positive outcomes for older people and support local and national policy priorities in health and social care. It is aimed at a variety of stakeholders – from local authority commissioners and staff to health and social care professionals. It outlines what has worked well, what lessons have been learned and therefore how services can be improved. It also considers the important issue of equitable provision of services and resources and what can be done to improve access for everyone including minority groups and those facing barriers to involvement.
The research shows that the NN model has a great deal to offer, not least in terms of its adaptability to local needs, making it suitable for adoption by local authorities around the country. Briefly summarised, the main benefits of the model are its ability to:
- promote primary and secondary prevention of health conditions
- promote independence and wellbeing
- offer a wide range of services
- promote the inclusion of older people
- reduce pressure on health and social care services, as well as unpaid carers.
People in later life/older people
These terms, used throughout this document, do not infer any specific age group, but should generally be taken to mean those over the age of 60.
Healthy ageing and functional ability
In addition to people’s mental and physical capacities, and the environment in which they live, a core component of the World Health Organization (WHO) Decade of Healthy Ageing strategy² is ‘the process of developing and maintaining the functional ability that enables wellbeing in older age’.³ ‘Functional ability’ refers to a person’s ability to:
- meet their basic needs
- learn, grow and make decisions
- be mobile
- build and maintain relationships
- contribute to society
Frailty
Frailty is a term used by health and care professionals to describe the loss of body resilience, which means that in the case of a physical or mental illness, an accident or other stressful event, people living with frailty may have a slow recovery. It is typically used to refer to those who are at highest risk of adverse outcomes such as falls, disability, admission to hospital or the need for long-term care.
2. What are neighbourhood networks?
NNs are community-based organisations seeking to support people in later life to achieve the capabilities and outcomes associated with healthy ageing. NNs help to arrange social events, such as clubs and outings, offer befriending services to people in their own homes, and essential signposting to other services, such as health and social care, where needed. NNs engage the services of full and part-time staff, along with suitably trained volunteers.
The NN model addresses four key aims related to primary prevention:
- Increase people’s contribution to and involvement in society (social contact and connectedness).
- Reduce social isolation and loneliness.
- Improve people’s mental and physical health and wellbeing.
- Increase people’s level of choice and control, promoting and increasing independence.
The NN model can be regarded as a progressive framework, founded on the concepts of healthy ageing and functional ability. The need to address issues in access to services that may arise when attempting to deliver such a model is a core element of the framework.
The Leeds networks
In Leeds, NNs work alongside local care partnerships (LCPs) as part of the city’s core policy of devolved working at the neighbourhood level. Like NNs, LCPs aim to integrate health and social care, and the two groups share regions within the city.
Thirty-seven NNs cover the whole of Leeds, all of them run on a collaborative basis with those they are intended to serve: people aged 60 and over. They offer a broad range of services including information and advice, advocacy, health- and wellbeing-related activities, and opportunities for socialising and exercise.
The NNs in Leeds vary in size and function – from small local community groups to medium-sized voluntary organisations running an NN alongside other community-based activities and services, to national organisations using NNs to complement core activities.
The NNs do not run on identical lines but do receive funding from similar sources. Sources of funding for NNs will vary according to location and context across the country. In Leeds, the NNs also raise their own funds through donations and receive some income from service fees. The Leeds model has clearly shown that a core funder, from any suitable local source, is essential.
Each NN has a unique range of services, based on an understanding of the needs of its members and wider community, but centred around ten key categories applicable anywhere. These and their related subcategories, along with their relationship to the WHO functional abilities, are shown in Table 2.1. The list is not exhaustive, but is representative in a general sense, and should therefore be of great use to any local authority or council seeking to understand the operational scope of an NN.
A core funder, from any suitable local source, is essential.
Typical NN services
NN services may take place under one roof, across a number of community venues or in people’s homes. Table 2.1 gives a broad overview of the type of services offered by the LNNs. Other local authorities are likely to wish to offer a similar range, tailored to their own area and population.
Table 2.1 NN services
|
Category |
Examples |
Link to WHO functional abilities |
|
1. Opportunities for social connection and interaction |
Hobby/interest groups Lunch/café clubs Day trips and holidays
|
Be mobile Build and maintain relationships |
|
2. Support to engage in physical activity |
Sport and recreation |
Be mobile Build and maintain relationships
|
|
3. Learning and development |
Hobby/interest groups IT/digital
|
Learn, grow and make decisions |
|
4. Befriending |
By telephone or face to face |
Build and maintain relationships |
|
5. Food and nutrition |
Shopping/food delivery/meals on wheels Lunch clubs Medicine collection |
Meet basic needs |
|
6. Transport |
Car pick-ups Minibus trips |
Be mobile Build and maintain relationships Meet basic needs
|
|
7. Frailty and long-term condition (LTC) clinics |
Treatment of and assistance with common chronic and acute conditions in later life |
Be mobile Build and maintain relationships |
|
8. Information, advice and guidance |
Newsletters and websites One-to-one advice Referral and/or signposting to other agencies Housing, benefits and other advice on concerns with daily living |
Meet basic needs |
|
9. Home improvement and adaptation |
Small-scale maintenance, repair and gardening services Fire safety checks Home adaptation advice |
Be mobile Meet basic needs |
|
10. Volunteering |
Voluntary help across a range of services |
Contribute to society |
Membership and participation
NNs should be free to join, with no fee or subscription. Because joining an NN is a personal choice, the terms ‘member’ and ‘membership’ are used in this report to describe participating individuals. When membership is the suggestion of a GP or social care staff, it may be regarded as a referral to the NN service, but in many cases people join NNs having heard about them from friends, relatives, NN members or volunteers, other community organisations or an NN’s own awareness-raising activities (for example, the Leeds networks have a web presence and also distribute leaflets to community centres around the city). NN volunteers will sometimes transition to becoming ‘members’ as time passes, and some members are also volunteers. This blurred boundary – between volunteering help and receiving it – is one of the strengths of the NN model.
The blurred boundary between volunteering help and receiving it, is one of the strengths of the NN model.
No formal eligibility criteria are needed to join an NN: the activities and services available tend to self-define NN membership. However, this can also lead to real or perceived barriers to participation in the case of some groups.
3. Evaluating neighbourhood networks
Evaluating the model
Six NNs in Leeds were evaluated as case studies, using desk-based reviews of existing evidence, along with qualitative research involving NN staff, volunteers, members and partners. There were 57 participants across all these groups. The first phase focused on the different ways NNs work to promote functional ability for those with long-term conditions (LTCs) at three overlapping stages – preventing, delaying and reducing:
- preventing LTCs through community-based activities and support
- delaying severe onset of LTCs by assisting people to manage their condition
- reducing pressure on informal carers and acute services by supporting people with intensive needs.
We evaluated the extent to which the Leeds networks contribute to healthy ageing outcomes using the ‘five mechanisms of change’ (the ‘five Rs’).
- The first of these, resources, focuses on what an NN needs to deliver its services: funding, good governance, stable leadership, a strong and committed workforce, accessible and affordable facilities, a good reputation and a supportive policy environment. The next four (range, relationships, responsiveness, reassurance) focus on how an NN makes use of those resources to achieve its outcomes.
- The range of activities and tailored opportunities a network can offer.
- The network’s ability to build meaningful and trust-based relationships with and between members, their families and volunteers, along with other community organisations and groups.
- How well an NN is able to respond to its members’ needs, and how sensitive it is to changes in those needs – the more knowledgeable a network is about its members and their families, the better able it will be to respond effectively and appropriately.
- The extent to which network members feel a sense of reassurance from their membership.
Improving equity in offer and access
In parallel with our overall evaluation, and using the same qualitative data, we also sought to explore issues of equity in offer and access within the NN model, in terms of the resources needed to provide the desired services, the services offered and access to those services. Our findings are explored as part of Section 4, and our recommendations are given in Section 5.
4. Findings
Our key findings were:
- NNs are effective in primary and secondary prevention.
- The NN model creates a range of positive outcomes linked to the prevent, delay, reduce criteria (see Section 3) by increasing social contact and connectedness, reducing social isolation, improving mental health and wellbeing, promoting independence and offering incremental support to people with LTCs.
- NNs promote a positive cycle of pressure-free engagement with others.
- The model has wide applicability to numerous and varied situations and contexts in any community setting. Regular contact with members, and the ability to offer, or signpost to, the right support (be that physical or mental), are fundamental. NNs help to relieve pressure on family members, health and social services.
- The ‘five Rs’ (resources, range, relationships, responsiveness and reassurance) are a useful tool to create the building blocks in setting up NNs and in assessing their ongoing effectiveness.
- Variation of provision will always hamper effectiveness, but can be countered by anticipating problems before they arise and regularly reviewing the NN model in light of social change.
These findings are discussed in the following pages. They show how successful NNs have been in many areas, and offer key pointers to local and city authorities that will assist in the setting up of successful NN models of their own (see also Section 6).
Primary and secondary prevention
The NN model provides effective primary prevention through the four key outcomes listed in Section 2:
- increasing social contact and connectedness
- reducing social isolation and loneliness
- improving mental health and wellbeing
- promoting and increasing independence.
- supporting members experiencing frailty and other LTCs
- providing the right support at the right time for people with declining health.
The primary and secondary function of NNs reduces demand for, and relieves pressure on:
- the healthcare system
- carers and families.
Community engagement
The NN model creates a range of positive outcomes linked to the prevent, delay, reduce criteria discussed in Section 3.
Opportunities for social activity are helpful in alleviating isolation and loneliness and promoting social contact. The first stage to achieving this is a friendly, welcoming, pressure-free environment: if people experience a good first impression, they are more likely to return, in particular for those older people who find social interaction challenging because of shyness, desensitisation due to enforced isolation or other personal barriers. This environment does not have to be physical: it is equally possible to be welcoming through the use of technology.
They supplied me with a tablet, so I could get on Facebook and meet up with different people. I’ve been using the tablet to keep in touch with everything.
A sense of belonging leads to a sense of being a member of a community, which in turn fosters a sense of personal wellbeing and its associated health benefits. The Leeds NNs were frequently described as a ‘lifeline’ by the people we interviewed, with particular emphasis on the benefits of social activities and the befriending service.
Having a befriender, somebody who's prepared to go, talk and listen to things, take them out for a drink … it does far more than just that one visit.
A positive cycle develops: early low-level, pressure-free engagement with others leads to increased confidence and self-esteem, and a greater awareness of personal strengths and capabilities, which fosters greater participation, including volunteering, with benefits for other NN members, and so on. Improved self-esteem and participation also lead to feelings of greater independence (see below).
During the course of this cycle, NNs take on a secondary prevention role by helping to detect illness or disease early and potentially delay further deterioration. NNs offer support to members with LTCs such as frailty and memory loss by, for example working with local GPs and other healthcare services to deliver incremental advice on healthy eating, mobility, relaxation and mindfulness. Time is a key factor here: NN staff have more time than healthcare professionals, allowing NN members to open up and discuss mental or physical frailties without feeling under pressure.
The cycle of engagement leads to a reduction of pressure on other services, because the sense of having ‘nowhere else to turn’, and hence calling on inappropriate services (such as GPs, the 111 service or even 999) in desperation is reduced by membership of an NN.
‘The sense of having nowhere else to turn is reduced by the NN model’
Of course, NNs are also important in directing people to the correct type of support or assistance, such as primary healthcare, where otherwise this may not have been sought, or been left to the ‘last minute’, which all too often can mean too late.
All the above types of assistance help to reduce pressure on families and carers – both those close by, for whom caring is a necessary but sometimes heavy burden, and those living long distances from their relatives or friends, whose anxiety may be alleviated by the knowledge that local support is at hand. NNs also provide much-needed respite for carers by offering lunch clubs, day trips and other social activities.
Requirements for success
The ‘five Rs’ outlined in Section 3 are a useful tool to evaluate the effectiveness of any NN network.
All NNs require stable funding, good leadership and governance, a dedicated, well-trained workforce and suitable facilities. An NN’s reputation is also an important resource, as is a supportive policy environment in which to operate. Our study drew out the following key points concerning resources.
- Uncertainty over future funding hampers long-term planning. Some form of stable core grant is crucial. From it, NNs can seek to raise funds from other areas such as fees, other grants, donations and so on.
- Stable, embedded leadership from senior figures is important to success. Such people should not ‘lead from the top’ but be involved at all levels of the NN, from liaising with partner agencies to hands-on work with members in need. While this is a common feature of many small voluntary sector organisations, such an approach is characteristic of the NN ethos and a direct contributor to success.
- All NNs should seek to include the people whom they aim to serve in their governance structures: the voices of people in later life should always be at the heart of NN decision making.
- The NN workforce is likely to be a mix of paid staff and volunteers, bringing a blend of skills and strengths to their roles. The more stable the workforce (i.e. low turnover) the greater will be an NNs ability to adapt to change, overcome difficulties and cope with demand and workload. Volunteers play a key role and any costs involved in their training are outweighed by the benefits of their participation.
- Facilities (i.e. a meeting and office space) are essential for any NN. Those fortunate enough to own their own building will be able to offset the costs by renting out the space and may not have to spend money on hiring venues for events.
- A good reputation with people in later life, local residents and partner organisations is important for any NN. There is sometimes a disparity between what NNs actually do and what people’s perception of their function is. Reputation and awareness go hand in hand.
- A supportive policy environment is crucial. For example, LCC has a clear commitment to develop Leeds as an age-friendly city, and this provides the ideal policy backdrop for the activities of the NNs.
All NNs should pay careful attention to their range of services, and to nurturing their relationships with members and other key groups. NNs must be able to respond to changing needs and circumstances with agility and foresight. By doing all these things, NNs will generate an environment of reassurance and trust on which their members can rely. Our study drew out the following key points concerning these four Rs.
- The range of services should be tailored to people’s functional abilities (see the definition of healthy ageing from earlier).
- The greater the range of services – or perhaps more importantly the flexibility and relative informality of a particular service such as contact phone calls – the greater the level of inclusion
- Relationships built on familiarity and trust sit at the heart of the NN model. For example, in Leeds familiarity and a perceived degree of informality (compared with, say, the council or a formal health service), meant that older people were more inclined to ‘give it a go’. This also leads to more sustained involvement. Older people are made to feel welcome from the first visit onwards, enjoy the activities in which they participate and treasure the social connections they make, leading to a continued desire to participate, with accumulating benefits.
- Members may build up their own network of peer support as a result of participation, progressing from complete social isolation to regular social interaction and a personal support network of their own.
- Volunteering is an activity that some members may engage with as a means of ‘giving something back’. Members give and receive support and so move along a ‘pathway of participation’ within an NN (see photo above). In this way, an NN is able to respond to the changing capabilities and needs of its members – for example, supporting them in being an active volunteer, through less intense voluntary roles, to the point where they are mainly supported by others as a member of the NN. The NN model is flexible and responsive to changing needs at the community and individual levels. This is supported by an in-depth knowledge of the community and its population. Such knowledge can only be accumulated though strong relationships (see above) and because NNs have the time to get to know new members, explore their backgrounds, interests and concerns, and reassess this knowledge on a regular basis, allowing them to tailor services to best meet needs.
- The model provides a deep sense of reassurance for members, because they know their NN is there for them and that it will deliver. Regular contact plays a vital role.
For a lot of older people contact is limited, so the telephone support offers a bit of a lifeline, especially for their mental health. It could give them a bit of a lift that day, and a bit of a purpose, if they know they are going to get a call and actually talk to someone.
Ensuring support for all
Unevenness of provision can lead to concerns about equity in offer and access between and across NNs, due to geographic, demographic and socioeconomic factors, coupled with community needs and preferences. NN size, the skills and qualifications of NN workforces and an NN’s relationship with other local partnerships can also be sources of unequal provision.
Our study used the areas of resources, offer and access as benchmarks for evaluating potential or actual inequalities in any community-based provision. These are briefly summarised in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1
| Resources | Offer | Access |
| Funding | Resources | Personal barriers |
| Leadership | Demand | Organisational barriers |
| Location | Quality and innovation | System barriers |
| Partnerships | Training and skills | |
| Appropriateness | ||
| Access |
Resources
Variation in available resources can arise from issues of funding, volunteering, allocation, leadership and organisational influences.
- Core funding is a vital component in equitable delivery, providing stability and flexibility, and enabling an NN to build capacity, retain staff and ensure continuity of care, as well as being an important lever in generating additional funds from other public and philanthropic sources.
- The availability of volunteers may relate directly to levels of socioeconomic deprivation: in wealthy suburbs it is easy to find volunteers, while in deprived areas it can be very hard work. It is a sad irony that there are generally fewer volunteers in the areas that need them most. So, areas with the highest level of need may also be those with the lowest levels of resources (e.g. volunteers, donations).
- The availability and allocation of one resource may influence the availability and allocation of another. For example, access to money and staff time could affect the availability of volunteers to an organisation, as both time and money need to be invested in recruiting and retaining them.
- Resources may not be utilised to best effect without strong leadership. Success has been shown to be more about individuals and their leadership style than, for example, who sits on which committee.
- Organisational resources and arrangements such as partnerships, relationships with a range of external organisations, along with fixed assets, human resources, finance, IT, catering facilities and transport can all be sources of uneven provision
Offer
Differences in offer between NNs is not necessarily a bad thing. Much depends on the reasons for the differences. As with resources, differences in offer should relate to differences in local need. Some NNs experience greater demand than others, and the range of services and level of responsiveness an NN is able to achieve are, of course, influenced directly by levels of funding. There are two further key points for commissioners to bear in mind in terms of offer, relating to setting boundaries around an NN’s offer, and the need for and cost of training and support.
- There comes a point when an NN is no longer the appropriate organisation to be helping someone, as there are limits to what they can do if a person’s needs become too complex. NNs should be clear about the extent of help they can offer.
- It is sadly true that the greater the offer, the greater the need for robust training and support for staff and volunteers, in particular in relation to issues of safeguarding,⁴ which links back once again to available resources and funding.
… each area is different. The houses are different, the people are different, the needs are different, you know, so we all provide a different service, really.
Access
Whatever the quality and range of services on offer, they will not be effective if people cannot access them. Wherever possible, access should be equal. Equity in access is not about what is on offer but relates to the personal, organisational and system barriers that surround that offer.
Our study showed that the main personal barriers to access involve gender, loneliness, age, background and technology.
- In terms of gender, the Leeds experience indicates that there may be an overrepresentation of female NN members and volunteers, in part reflecting the older population overall. This is likely, though not necessarily, to be replicated in other local authority areas around the country. Women also tend to be more proactive in seeking help to relieve their loneliness or resolve their health problems than men. The very fact that women may form the majority of membership in an NN can be off-putting to some men.
- Loneliness itself can act as a barrier to participation, giving rise to feelings of anxiety and low self-confidence, neither of which contribute positively to the likelihood of self-referral or the take-up of a recommendation from others.
- The age of some older people, who may be termed the ‘younger old’, may put them off joining an NN because of positive self-regard: they may see NNs as ‘full of old people in wheelchairs’ (LNN3, staff) and not for them. These negative associations mean that some people are missing out on activities they would in fact enjoy. More should be done to show the NNs are available and suitable whether someone is 55 or 85.
- In Leeds, people from an ethnic minority background were underrepresented across the NNs. Non-participation by these groups may be due to cultural stigma associated with seeking help outside the immediate family or close friends. Language barriers also play a part, as engaging with those who have English as a second language (ESL) may require the services of translators, making the process of helping them more time consuming and complex than it is with those for whom English is their first language.
- For all members, technological or digital exclusion has the potential to act as a barrier. Not everyone has access to, or the desire to use, modern technology such as tablets. Financial constraints also play a major role: a person may be perfectly open to acquiring and learning how to use a tablet or smartphone, but not be able to afford one. An NN may have a strong desire to provide access to such devices but be unable to fund their provision.
The main areas here are the effects of local infrastructure, particularly on transport links, and the reputation of an NN as an organisation in the local community.
- Transport, linked to issues of local infrastructure, is a barrier to access: it does not matter how strong your desire to participate in the local community, nor how many suitable activities and services your local NN may offer – if you can’t get there, or they can’t get to you, you can’t participate, and therefore you are excluded from any benefit, to yourself or those around you. In Leeds, the study found that a large proportion of NN staff and financial resources were taken up by providing transport to members for whom no local transport links were available or suitable.
- Reputation will affect an NN’s appeal by influencing people’s perception of its purposes and aims. NNs have a responsibility to diversify and become more inclusive of the varied needs and interests of potential (and existing) members
For any NN, anywhere in the country, there will be what we have called ‘system barriers’, rooted in the ways partner organisations work, how aware they are of how NNs work, and issues of clarity, communication and ‘siloing’ between the health and care and the voluntary and community sectors. These all act as system barriers that in turn have an effect on equity in access.
5. Ensuring equity in offer and access
Some variation and disparities in resources, offer and access (see Section 4) is inevitable due to external factors that are largely, but not completely, out of an NN’s control.
However, any NN can strive to even out such difference in offer and access as far as possible within the constraints of their individual circumstances. All NNs should seek to make their offer as fair as possible. One of the most important lessons from the Leeds study, which applies to any similar NN schemes around the country, was the need for NNs to strive to avoid inadvertent exclusion by regularly re-examining their approach to activities and services with the needs of minority groups (whoever they may be) firmly in mind.
NNs should be aware that the older population is going to become more diverse. Addressing diversity is a useful tool in seeking to break down barriers to access and improving even provision of services. Seeking to involve the ‘younger old’ is a good way for NNs to monitor how the needs and desires of older people are likely to change in the future. The ‘younger old’ of today are, after all, the ‘older old’ of tomorrow.
Despite the many barriers outlined in Section 4, there are a number of things that can be done to achieve greater equality in any NN, some of which have as much to do with mind-set as with specific action. The checklist below gives a point-by-point guide.
NNs should strive to avoid inadvertent exclusion by re-examining their approach to activities and services with the needs of minority groups firmly in mind
Checklist: Developing a model to ensure equity in offer and access
-
Improve and secure funding by ensuring a model that provides core funding that will assure stability and form a basis for growth.
-
Grow the total amount of resources available by seeking additional statutory and philanthropic funding.
-
Broaden volunteering opportunities and try to ensure representativeness across the whole workforce.
-
Develop a high-level ‘minimum’ menu of services, co-designed with key stakeholders, to allow provision of locally-specific services in response to need.
-
Provide a mix of different clubs and activities that are likely to appeal to younger and older members.
-
Focus on identifying and overcoming barriers to participation for different groups.
-
Provide services for specific gendered or culturally oriented groups (e.g. men, LGBT and other minority groups, the younger old).
-
Engage with ethnic minority residents, perhaps by seeking the support of local organisations.
-
Avoid inadvertent exclusion by regularly reviewing the offer and examining how this may be having an effect on access.
-
Plan ahead by thinking about younger and more diverse populations in the present, and what their needs might be as they age in the future.
-
Link up with other local groups to improve access and offer.
-
Engage with family members and carers, whose support and input are critical to success.
-
Engage with the local health and social care system in order to better understand its workings and adapt accordingly.
6. Recommendations
We have shown how the NN model is centred on providing opportunities and services in community settings in which long-term relationships are fostered based on trust, care and reassurance. The Leeds experience has shown that engaging with an NN enables people in later life to give and receive support among their peers, both as members of NNs and as volunteers (and sometimes both).
The opportunities presented by the NN model to develop or sustain functional ability at a community level are clear, as are the many benefits. Centrally, the model plays a role in moderating age-related declining physical and mental health through supportive home and community environments.
We have provided an ‘essentials checklist’ for any organisation seeking to bring NNs into its range of community-based services. For specific recommendations concerning equitable provision, see Section 5.
Essentials checklist
-
Funding needs to be both sufficient and sustainable. This means different things to different NNs, depending on a range of factors including their size, membership base and delivery model. A core funder, from any suitable local source, is essential.
-
All NNs should seek to include in their governance structures the people they aim to serve: the voices of people in later life should always be at the heart of NN decision making.
-
Senior leadership figures should be involved at all levels of an NN, rather than leading from the top.
-
NNs should seek to establish a stable workforce and encourage, cherish and train their volunteers as a crucial asset to the model.
-
Where possible NNs should seek to have control over their premises, ideally through ownership.
-
Membership should be free.
-
NNs should seek to provide a context-specific range of services, centred around the ten key categories listed in the earlier table.
-
NNs should nurture their relationships with members and other key groups, which will help them respond to changing needs and circumstances with agility and foresight.
-
NNs should enhance their local reputation by raising awareness about what they do and who they serve, remembering that people’s perception of an NNs role may differ from the reality of that role.
-
NNs should always be clear about the extent of the help they can offer.
-
Policy should be developed locally and nationally to promote the five Rs and support their development.
-
Wherever possible, access to an NN’s services should be equal and proportionate to need (see Section 5).
Leeds Neighbourhood Network
Read more¹ See Dayson D, Bimpson E, Ellis-Paine A, Gilbertson, J and Kara, H (2020) Ever more needed? The role of the Leeds Neighbourhood Networks during the COVID-19 pandemic. London: Ageing Better; Dayson D, Gilbertson J, Chambers J, Ellis-Payne A and Kara H (2022) How community organisations contribute to healthy ageing. London: Ageing Better; Bimpson E, Dayson C, Ellis-Payne A, Gilbertson J, Kara H and Leather D (2023) Evaluation of the Leeds Neighbourhood Networks: Understanding equity of offer, access and resources. London: Ageing Better/Sheffield Hallam University.
² WHO (World Health Organization) (2019) Decade of healthy ageing 2020–2030, update 1, March 2019. Geneva: WHO.
³ Rudnicka E, Napierala P, Podfigurna A, Męczekalski B, Smolarczyk R and Grymowicz M (2020) The World Health Organization approach to healthy ageing. Maturitas 139: 6–11.
⁴ For general information on safeguarding, see The Charity Commission (2017) Safeguarding and protecting people for charities and trustees, December 2017, amended June 2022, www.gov.uk/guidance/safeguarding-duties-for-charity-trustees. For all NNs in Leeds, safeguarding is taken into account as part of overarching governance.