the bond board assets based research project final report
TRANSCRIPT
The Bond Board Assets Based
Research ProjectFinal Report
Dr Katy Goldstraw, Post Doctoral Research Fellow in Participatory Research, I4P
October 2018
Page | 1
The Bond Board Assets Based Research Project
Executive Summary
The aim of this two year research project was to help the Bond Board to understand
how to design services appropriately in order to promote meaningful engagement.
The project worked with the Bond Board, using Sustainable Livelihoods analysis to
analyse HARP service users experience of the Bond Board. The research used a
five fold, assets based analysis approach to evidence impact and barriers service
provision. The research identified the range of locations that clients access services
within and the diversity of social ties that clients have with both formal organisations
and informal organisations such as street soup kitchens or faith groups that are offer
drop in services. The research revealed the range of reciprocal relationships that
clients utilise as social and human assets. Clients have a range of income sources
that are both formal and informal. Some clients have numerous links with public
assets and others much less so.
The research revealed a sense of how clients manage their human, social, public,
and financial assets. The clients respected and liked the staff team and had trusting
relationships with the volunteers and staff at the HARP St Andrews drop in. This
trust offered clients a relief from anxiety, they knew that there was a place where
they would not only be welcome but where they could also receive support. It was
here that the research’s key conclusion, the notion of the HARP project being a safe
transformative space emerged.
This is the final report of the assets based research project. It summarises the
findings a two year research project with the HARP Project, 2016-2017. The report
begins with a brief outline of the project and the socio-political context that it sits
Page | 2
within before summarising the methodological approach, discussing findings and
drawing conclusions.
Author: Dr Katy Goldstraw, Edge Hill University
Page | 3
Introduction
This is the final report of the assets based research project. It summarises the
findings a two year research project with the HARP Project, 2016-2017. The report
begins with a brief outline of the project and the socio-political context that it sits
within before summarising the methodological approach, discussing findings and
drawing conclusions.
Through an existing reputation for participatory research in Rochdale, the Bond
Board approached I4P to conduct a two year Participatory co-produced project. The
HARP Project is a Big Lottery funded partnership project between two organisations
that support homeless and vulnerably housed clients, which began in September
2016. The project is for excluded and marginalised individuals and provides
intensive 1:1 support, short term crisis solutions, a specialist welfare rights service
and opportunities for clients to become involved in peer research. Edge Hill
University (EHU) used participatory and co-produced approaches to analyse HARP
service user’s experience of the Bond Board.
The aim of the research was to help the Bond Board to understand how to design
services appropriately in order to promote meaningful engagement. The project
worked with the Bond Board over two years, using Sustainable Livelihoods analysis
to analyse HARP service users experience of the Bond Board. The research used a
five fold, assets based analysis approach to evidence impact and barriers service
provision. These research findings will allow the Bond Board to better design
services focussed around clients.
Having introduced the research the next section of this report will consider the socio-
political context that it sits within.
Page | 4
The Context of the Work
Part of conducting a Sustainable Livelihoods Analysis of an organisation is to frame
the organisational experience within the Macro (nation / regional) and Meso (Local)
context. The framing of the HARP project allows a consideration of the broader
challenges that HARP clients face. Changes in government policy have had a
significant effect on housing and homelessness provision. Nationally the Homeless
Reduction Bill 2017 has affected housing strategy, the Bill sits within the context of
wider welfare reform, including the Localism Act 2011, The Welfare Reform Act
2012, and the Housing and Planning Act 2016:
‘From our research evidence it is clear that welfare reform has been
making both private and social sector landlords more risk adverse with regard
to letting to households in receipt of benefit’ (Fitzpatrick et al 2017:81)
Regionally the Bond Board sits within Greater Manchester Housing Needs Group
and the Devolution Agenda, this holds the potential to offer a more locally responsive
and innovative Housing Policy;
‘devolution and heath and social care integration in Greater
Manchester has espoused potential to be at the forefront of innovative service
delivery and new effective commissioning practices that can address
entrenched, highly complex problems’ (Wall, 2017:17)
This regional picture is influenced by the Greater Manchester Devolved Authority’s
budget.
‘the development of the devolved budgets and potential freedoms to
the 10- GM authorities provides opportunities to bring to the fore a more
collective approach across the sub-region’ (Jolley et al, 2017:9)
Page | 5
Locally welfare reform, including withdrawal of benefit for 18-21year olds, Local
Housing Allowance and Single Room rate, the Benefit Cap affect the local housing
need;
‘Regionally housing and homelessness strategy is affected by … the
continued demand and high occupancy rates for most types of supported and
temporary accommodation and a waiting list for households seeking support
via the Adult Social Care commissioned floating support services. Move on for
households that have to use temporary and supported accommodation has
become more difficult and the average period of time in accommodation at the
Homeless Families Unit and Single Household Unit has increased from 12.5
weeks in 2014 to 14.5 weeks in 2016. For individuals using specialist Housing
services such as Stepping Stones Projects, re-housing is taking far longer’
(Jolley et al, 2017:14).
It is in this context of increased need and an increasingly challenging position for
private landlords that the Bond Board situates it’s assets based participatory
research.
Page | 6
A Participatory, Co-Produced Research Project
Participatory research challenges power relations seeking to link research with
empowerment, education and action. Valuing all knowledge forms, be it from lived
experience, professional practice, community volunteering and that of being a citizen
in Rochdale means that power can be shared. The power that has traditionally sat
with professional voices can be shared to build positive change in the community.
Participatory research, involves research participants in the research process, co-
producing knowledge, which recognises all people’s (community member, citizens,
residents, professionals etc.) power and voice in the community. Participatory
research approaches are useful as they can identify community needs, prioritise and
contextualise issues within people’s lived experience and give direction to policy
development. The aim of participatory research in the context of the HARP project is
to recognise and empower HARP clients as critical thinkers, who can engage with
the HARP project strategy as empowered individuals.
Developing a safe space for participatory research to happen is important. Managing
expectations and being clear about what is possible with. The researchers took a
respectful approach to those with lived experience, being clear where their voice
could hold impact and where system constraints may present insurmountable
barriers to change. Honesty is important and communities respect that. The co-
produced participatory approaches enacted within the HARP project have produced
evidence of the power of the voice of people with lived experience within a place.
There are challenges to this approach; creating safe spaces to share knowledge and
addressing power hierarchies within organisational structures is challenging but the
value of enacting social justice by involving those with lived experience of the effect
of local, regional and national politics is irrefutable. In using participatory
approaches, the agency of research participants is nurtured. Participatory research
embodies the principle that all people have a right to a voice (Lister and Beresford,
1991).
Co-production as a research methodology recognises the multiplicity of roles that
exist within a collaborative project, including the complex sense making required. In
gathering the diversity of opinions, ideas and approaches ‘creative solutions arise
Page | 7
out of interaction under conditions of uncertainty, diversity and instability’ (Fullan,
1999:4). Co-production holds the potential to decolonise research practices, and to
create safe spaces, ‘to retrieve spaces of marginalisation as spaces from which to
develop indigenous research agendas’ (Tuhiwai-Smith 1999: 5). In recognising the
variety of types of knowledge held by a community there is significant power in co-
produced research and how it is represented.
Sustainable Livelihoods Analysis (SLA) as a Participatory Approach Sustainable
Livelihoods Analysis (SLA) is a participatory research approach. SLA originates
from international development. It was brought to the UK by Oxfam GB. It is an
assets based approach to analysis, focussed on examining a unit of analysis, most
usually the household, in terms of its vulnerabilities or adaptive strategies. Rather
than focussing purely on the economic, SLA examines a series of categories a
household might use to adapt to change or crisis. The approach is participatory,
involving those with experience of poverty in the research, inviting research
participants to reflect on their experiences and to contribute to analysis. Five assets
make up a sustainable livelihood; human, social, physical and financial and public.
Human Assets: These are the skills, knowledge and Health that allow people to
engage in everyday life. In the context of HARP project clients these might be their
skills, mental and physical health and knowledge of where to access support such
as soup kitchens in the local area.
Social Assets: These are the social resources that people can draw on; these
relationships are built on reciprocity & trust and can be informal friends, neighbours
for example or more formal relationships with support organisations. In the case of
HARP project clients these might be the relationships that they have with other
clients at the coffee shop drop in at St Andrews Church or at Petrus sessions.
Physical Assets: These are the tools and equipment that people need to function,
including housing, transport and access to information. For HARP project clients this
could be their housing needs or access to smartphones / computers to engage with
Universal Credit requirements.
Financial Assets: These assets include income from employment, benefit,
pensions, savings. In the case of HARP project clients sources of income may come
Page | 8
from employment, benefits or other cash in hand roles as well as from loans,
participation in the grey economy or in kind contributions to income such as use of
food banks.
Public Assets: These are access to public services, such as libraries, local
voluntary and community groups and faith groups. In the case of HARP clients these
might include health centres, the Bond Board, Petrus, Hepron Church.
The key concept of the approach is that everyone has assets in their life that are
both financial and non-financial and people choose to utilise these assets in different
ways. The Sustainable livelihood approach begins by looking at the day to day
experience of peoples lives, in the realisation that people draw from a variety of
different assets.
A further important principle of the approach is the importance of power relationships
in communities. The sustainable livelihoods approach is focussed on the lived
experiences of people and organisations. It focusses on their assets and aims to
make connections between micro level coping strategies and macro level polices.
Page | 9
The Value of Participatory and Co-Produced Research for the Bond Board
The value of participatory and co-produced research for the HARP project is in the
opportunity to democratise knowledge and in the opportunity to develop previously
unheard community voices. Participatory and co-produced research has a role in
legitimising knowledge (Evans and Fisher, 1999), and in shaping what sort of
knowledge is given priority. Participatory approaches build spaces that develop trust
in which relationships can be developed to expand the depth of data collected and
improve the usefulness of their research (Stoudt, 2007)
Participatory and co-produced research enables knowledge to be articulated that is
emotional, personal and subjective. Drawing from tacit knowledge alongside explicit
and exact knowledge forms, ‘the “everyday” as a field becomes a key site for things
to happen’ (Facer and Pahl, 2017). Through participatory and co-produced
methodologies, forms of embodied knowledge can be rediscovered (Behar, 1996).
Participatory approaches to research aim to create spaces where researchers can
move from personal experience to critical reflection on their knowledge.
Page | 10
The Research Methodology
The assets based research approach used a participatory and co-produced
methodology. This methodology deliberately took a multi-layered and creative
approach to gathering and communicating research data and findings, working with
two graphic designers and three visual artists over the course of the project. This
approach aimed to take a positive and empowering approach with (not to) the
HARP client community. Working together to build knowledge (to co-produce
knowledge) with members of a local community or set of communities has the
potential to stimulate social change. Knowledge and power are linked, and
participatory approaches aim to value everybody’s knowledge.Participatory
approaches value community knowledge, gained from experience and from living in
a place not just professional knowledge. The research had four key objectives:
Research Aims and Objectives
To help understand how to design services appropriately in order to promote
meaningful engagement
To evidence impact gaps are barriers service provision with a view to locating
future funding.
To share the learning: in order to better design services focussed around clients.
To connect into wider Greater Manchester Sustainable Livelihoods Work
Two Sustainable livelihoods training workshops were held. Four participatory
activities were held on a variety of occasions at both St Andrews Drop in and
PETRUS. Fifteen peer to peer semi structured micro interviews were conducted. The
collaborative analysis was made up of two informal analysis sessions, one workshop
with staff and four sessions led by artists at St Andrews drop in.
Page | 11
The First Year of the Research. 2016-2017
Sustainable Livelihoods Analysis Training. The HARP project began in September
2016. In October 2016 training was delivered with staff and volunteers of both Bond
Board and Petrus by The Volunteer Training Company. This training introduced
Sustainable Livelihoods as an assets based approach and shared examples of
successful use of the approach in Wales by Oxfam UK. Participants of this training
session were very positive about taking an assets based approach and recognised
that this is an approach that they tried to adopt when supporting clients. The
opportunity to develop integrated working focussing on assets (as opposed to
deprivations, which are often the focus in order to achieve benefit payments or
housing or support funding) was positively received. The training also identified the
need for further work with both staff & volunteer groups around the specifics of the
HARP project and clear leadership in terms of how data, paperwork and client
information will be shared.
Participatory Activities The first phase of the research was to design and deliver
participatory activities that could help clients of the HARP project identify and map
their assets. A range of participatory activities that could be used as part of coffee
shop drop in sessions were developed.
Social Assets Mapping Activity : Where do you find Community? In December
2016, the first activity took place. The Bond Board staff, set out an Ordinance
Survey Map of Rochdale with some arrow post it notes. They asked clients to
anonymously state where they found community in Rochdale Borough. This was
then marked onto the map.
Page | 12
The map has was left out at several sessions and further places of support added to
the map. The map was also taken to Petrus, to add in the spaces of community that
clients that access Petrus but not the St Andrews coffee Shop drop in utilise. As
clients added to the map, projects further afield were included in Middleton,
Heywood and Littleborough. Spaces of community further afield, within Greater
Manchester, one as far as Stockport were identified by clients as spaces where they
found community.
This activity mapped client’s sense of community, where they access support but
more importantly where they feel part of something. The activity was focussed on
mapping social assets. These are the social resources that people can draw on;
these relationships are built on reciprocity & trust and can be informal friends,
neighbours for example or more formal relationships with support organisations. The
activity revealed the range of social assets that clients utilise. St Andrew’s Church
and Petrus are both based close to the centre of Rochdale yet clients added
activities in Middleton. Heywood and Littlelborough and also one activity in
Stockport.
Some sources of community were known to support staff at the Bond Board but
others were new. Staff weren't previously aware of the range of people accessing
activities run by faith groups based out of churches. This activity revealed the range
of support accessed by clients, also their willingness to travel to access support. In
some cases such as the support being accessed in Stockport the client was being
Page | 13
collected and driven to a specific service. This perhaps identifies a need for that
specific service closer to Rochdale.
Social and Human Assets Activity: Who do you help and Who helps you? In
January 2017, a second activity was added to the mapping activity asking clients to
respond to two questions; Who do you help? and who helps you? This exercise
involved a large poster with two circles asking one question in each circle.
Participants were then asked to write their responses on post it notes and stick them
to the relevant circle. This activity was deliberately balanced, aimed at reinforcing
client assets and notions of reciprocity, community and trust rather than reinforcing a
deficit model by simply questioning who helps you.
Page | 14
This activity mapped both a sense of clients social networks and ties, who they
shared and received support from, but also client human assets in the skills that they
used (both formal and informal) in helping others. The human assets are the skills,
knowledge and health that allow people to engage in everyday life. The social assets
are the social resources that people can draw on; these relationships are built on
reciprocity & trust and can be informal friends, neighbours for example or more
formal relationships with support organisations. This activity collected the responses
given by clients attending the St Andrew’s Coffee Shop drop in and Petrus and
revealed a variety of assets, skills and community reciprocity. These findings were
added into a digital image of human and social assets held by HARP project clients.
Page | 15
Financial Assets Activity: Where do you get Cash?
In February 2017 a third activity was added to the sessions asking people where do
they get cash? After a detailed discussion with staff at the Bond Board, a list of
where clients of the HARP project that attended the St Andrews Church Coffee Shop
Drop in and Petrus might get cash was created. A piggy bank style container was
created and labelled token produced. The activity asked people to add into the piggy
bank all the sources of income they have. For example if their income is made up of
benefits, part-time zero hours contract, two loans (from different companies), friends
helping out and use of food bank then they would put 6 tokens into the piggy bank
(each one labelled with the different source of income).
We had a further conversation regarding the labelling of non-legal activities, those
that exist within the grey economy. Clients of the St Andrews drop in have different
backgrounds to those who use Petrus, however many clients of both HARP project
locations supplement formal income sources with other income sources such as
drug dealing and, or sex work. We concluded after careful discussion that creating
tokens to reflect the specifics of the grey economy would be labelling and might be
Page | 16
perceived as judgement and decided to refer to these income sources as simply
‘cash in hand.’ After discussion with clients at St Andrews Drop in and Petrus, a
HARP staff member identified other sources of income, such as cash converters.
The HARP staff member created tokens for these additional sources of income. The
tokens were gathered after each session, gaining a picture of different client group’s
sources of income depending on location of the session that the access (i.e St
Andrews or Petrus).
This activity mapped clients financial assets and offered a sense of how clients
manage their money. The Bond Board in the past has worked with clients to budget
for properties, reccomending that a property that the client had chosen was too
expensive for that client’s budget. They have then met with the client who has
decided to rent the property and found that the client was managing. This had led the
Bond Board to consider their approach to financial planning, and to wonder if they
had fully appreciated a clients informal income sources.
Page | 17
All sources of income, formal and informal were included in an extensive list. When
the activity was conducted additional sources of income were added such as
shoplifting and cash converters. This activity revealed the variety of income sources
that clients utilised. Clients that used the drop in coffee morning on different session
dates gave a different range of answers but when gathered together, the sheer
variety of income sources was evident. For Bond Board clients, formal income
sources, such as benefits, work or loans were only part of their cash flow.
Public Assets Activity: What sources of support do you use? In March 2017, a
further activity was added to the research, which considered which public assets
clients use. This activity was designed to consider the range of public assets,
institutions such as libraries, GP Surgeries, Charities that each individual clients use.
These activities were anonymous but on each person shaped card, clients listed the
range of public assets that they utilised. These assets ranged from the library, to the
hospital, the Bond Board, Ring and Ride transport service.
Page | 18
Clients were asked to anonymously complete a person shaped card and list on it
using felt-tip pens which organisations they use / access e.g sure start, library,
lighthouse project. This gave a sense of which clients, use which public services.
This was completed with a support worker. The activity revealed that clients are
accessing healthcare regularly for support but that not all were engaging with other
opportunities for support such as those offered by Rochdale Borough Council.The
activity also revealed that some clients were very active in their community regularly
engaging with a variety of public assets, others much less so. This perhaps identifies
an opportunity for the HARP project staff, to work with clients and support them to
access other support opportunities that exist within their locality.
Page | 19
The participatory activities were conducted regularly sat Petrus and at St Andrews
coffee shop drop in and offered an opportunity for clients to share their experiences
anonymously.
Page | 20
Sustainable Livelihoods Workshop with Staff.
An SLA workshop was held in July 2017 with Bond Board staff and trustees. In
working with staff, volunteers and Trustees at the Bond Board Away Day, time was
spent reflecting on the SLA research with the HARP project. The Away Day was the
beginnings of gathering staff, volunteer and trustee involvement in using the SLA
research with clients, beginning to think of how they might use the information
regarding how client’s use their assets experience and social ties to manage their
livelihood to develop organisational strategy.
The afternoon session with trustees took the information from the SLA research with
clients, reflecting on the morning SLA workshop activities with staff and volunteers
and used it as a basis to create and develop organisational strategy. Again a
workshop approach was used, at first considering organisational directions in relation
to each SLA asset and then mapping out SMART objectives for each assets for the
Bond Board.
Page | 21
Emerging Observations, Patterns and Learning from the First Year of Research.
The first year of the of the research took longer than initially imagined. It was clear
that leaving the participatory activities out and available, over a number of sessions
was important to enable participants to feel comfortable with the activities and to
engage a variety of clients. It is also important that the activities were run at both the
St Andrews Church and Petrus Hub sites. As such this research has been iterative. It
has been important that time has been taken over these activities, allowing support
workers and clients to build up trust and for the activities to become part of the
‘routine’ of support offered at each location. As research has been gathered an
important element of engaging with clients has been to feedback. Posters were
designed by a graphic designer and large size A0 colour posters, were displayed
regularly at Petrus and St Andrews Church over the summer of 2017.
As the activities continued, a picture of the range of locations that clients access
services within and the diversity of social ties that clients have emerged. It was clear
too that clients were engaged in reciprocal relationships that utilise their assets
alongside supporting their needs. Clients have a range of income sources that are
both formal and informal. Some clients have numerous links with public assets and
other much less so. As we have gathered data we have begun to have develop a
sense, by the of how clients manage their human, social, public, and financial
assets.
Page | 22
The Second Year of the Research. 2017-2018.
In late 2017 and early 2018 further participatory and co-produced research began.
This was part of the iterative research process with clients. The research
methodology has built on the information gathered from the participatory activities
and staff away day, to consider client and staff reflections on the assets. Year one
focussed on building relationships with clients and developing the partnership project
between Petrus and the Bond Board. Key to this process was the skill of SLA
support workers in building strong working relationships with clients and enabling
clients to understand and engaging with the process. This first year of the project set
the scene and built relationships, in order to establish which clients are accessing
which services and what assets they have and how they are utilising them.
The second year of the research project focussed on developing the nuances from
the findings that emerged from the participatory activities conducted in year one and
on building the critical reflections of clients using the HARP project.
Peer-Research Training In January 2018 peer research training was offered to
volunteers. The volunteering opportunity was opened up- to previous and existing
clients of the Bond Board. Volunteers were invited to become peer researchers,
gathering stories of how current clients use their assets to manage the livelihood.
The semi structured interviews were to be referred to as ‘a coffee and a catch up’
conversations and recorded in the edge of the main church hall during the
Wednesday coffee Shop Drop ins. This was to offer a level of confidentiality but to
ensure that the volunteers and clients could be in an open space and visible for
safeguarding reasons. The aim of these conversations held within a space to the
side but still part of the coffee shop drop I was to create ‘safe interview spaces’ that
‘minimised the power gaps between interviewer and participant’ (Stoudt, 2007:287).
No personal details or names are recorded, simply voices in conversation. The audio
was to be collected by the EHU researcher and analysed. These stories were to be
analysed to draw out assets and reflections on client experience of the Bond Board
and can sit alongside the anonymised SLA activities to offer more information as to
how clients manage their assets.
Page | 23
Developing Peer Led Co-produced knowledge. The process of training and
supporting the volunteers was a useful learning experience. It took time for the
volunteers to feel comfortable and to develop confidence in the process. The initial
training session was attended by two volunteers and two Bond board staff members.
The training session included research ethics, recording data on the Dictaphone,
holding and approaching semi-structured conversations. The aim was to begin with a
practice session at the next drop in and then start recording semi structured
conversations from the following session. The staff and volunteers were interested
and enthusiastic about the process but nervous too about how it would work and
how to use the Dictaphones.
It soon became clear that the process of training as peer researchers would take
longer than initially envisaged. The questions originally drafted by staff were too long
for the volunteers to recall and reading was a challenge in some instances. The
questions were simplified and summarised into two easy to remember questions:
What top tips do you have to share with others, ideas that have helped you cope
or manage when things have been tough?
What does it feel like to be helped by the Bond Board?
The drop in coffee shop sessions run every fortnight so the EHU researcher
attended most of these sessions, often towards the end of the drop in session time,
to meet with the volunteers, run through where and how they might sit for the
recorded conversations. Practice conversations were recorded on Dictaphones and
reflective conversations encouraged about how being involved in the process made
the volunteers feel and how they might negotiate difficult topics that require
confidentiality. This process was time intensive yet necessary as working
relationships, trust and knowledge take time to build especially with clients groups
who have not always previously had positive dealings with unknown professionals
such as university researchers. In spending time in unstructured interaction,
developing working relationships, drinking coffee together and in informal
conversation as well as more formal training opportunities working relationships were
Page | 24
built which enabled good quality reflection and communication once the peer
research had began.
The Peer Research was conducted between January and August 2018. Once the
peer research began, de-brief sessions were held after every session to ensure that
the volunteers talked through any issues and could reflect on their experience of the
project. Supervision for the researchers after each session was provided by Edge
Hill University. The initial plan for the peer research was that it would be in depth
interviews led by the peer researchers, recorded on a Dictaphone and then
transcribed and analysed after each HARP drop in session by EHU staff. In actuality,
the peer research project took much longer to establish than expected and the
researchers needed more pastoral support and training than was initially expected.
The two research questions were kept as simple and accessible as possible: how
do you feel about using the Bond Board and what tops tips do you have for people
that use the Bond Board?
Micro Conversations The Peer researchers were committed and very keen to be
involved. However using the dicta phone and building up the confidence to have
conversations as well as remembering the research questions was a lot to ask of
people. The questions needed to be remembered by some researchers as literacy
was a challenge for them. After discussion with the peer researchers it was decided
that EHU staff would sit with the peer researchers as they conducted the interviews,
to support using the dicta phone and to help remember the questions. Due to the ad-
hoc nature of attendance at the drop in, the mental ill health of one of the
researchers then most interviews were conducted by the peer researchers but some
were conducted solely by an EHU staff member.
Once the interview conversations began it became clear that long and in-depth
discussions were not the best approach as a research method with a chaotic client
group. Addiction and mental health challenges for many clients meant that sitting in
one place and concentrating for longer periods was simply too much. People attend
the drop in to socialise, to have a cup of tea and some toast and to access advice
and welfare support. Clients simply didn’t want to take part in long conversations. It
was therefore decided that micro interviews were the best, least disruptive and most
accessible approach. These micro interviews worked well. They were 5-7minute
Page | 25
conversations held by joining the table of those to be interviewed and sitting with
them while they drank their tea, conversing in an informal manner and asking them
for their thoughts in response to the two research questions. HARP drop in clients
responded well to this approach, happy to share their thoughts and experiences.
Fifteen micro interviews were conducted over a period from April - August 2018.
Transcripts were written up. Thematic analysis was conducted to draw out key
themes from these interviews. Each micro interview was transcribed into a word
document. The transcripts were then analysed using the research package NViVO
and themes began to emerge. The research analysis was open and iterative
(Williams and Pierce 2016) in its approach. Key terms and significant issues for the
data analysis were identified through a collective contribution process (Datta et al,
2015) returning to the HARP drop in sessions for discussion with clients.As a piece
of participatory co-produced research, it was important that the analysis was co-
produced with HARP clients, that they retained control over the data analysis (Datta
et al, 2015). The anonymous transcripts were shared with an artist, Molly Van Der
Wiejj1 who developed a selection of images to accompany the quotes. The aim of
working with Molly was offer another, visual, means of communicating with the
clients, to summarise the transcripts for those with limited literacy.
1 http://mollyvanderweij.com/
Page | 26
Findings from the Micro Conversations
This section of the report summarises and draws themes from the peer research
interviews. The quotes and images are used to illustrate the discussion of emerging
themes.
Practical Help & Comfort.
The Bond Board provide practical help, which is well organised and efficient. Clients
felt real comfort n the fact that they could come to the HARP drop in and there would
be practical support and action that would happen to change the challenges that they
had asked for help with.
Yes sometime I have a food bag. Its good to come to them if you have any problems like
or anything like that. Have used them just asking for advice and seen some properties
Page | 27
like. They don’t do my property at the minute but they did show me a few like. Mainly I
just come to them for advice mainly.
Yes they sorted out my bill and and sort out what needs to go down to get out of debt
and I rent my property through the Bond Board. I’ve been with the Bond Board twice
and its got sorted in a matter of days, a matter of weeks. Its quite quick to turn
around and get sorted.
A Transformative Space
Clients shared that the HARP drop in session was a transformative space where
they could visit when they were having financial or benefit worries and access
support. They felt that they would not be judged at the drop in and in accessing
support at the HARP project they felt that their worries were addressed. Several
clients shared how this had a really positive effect on their mental health.
Page | 28
Life was tough as I moved home and moved area and I was on benefits and I was
capped. I was also struggling with money - landlord was always on my back and I needed
help on getting on the right support for my son. … All I can say was that the Bond
Board really helped with putting me fines into one and supported me with throughout
my benefit cap as I was awarded DLA for my son in the end. It was still a struggle and
hard times but we got through it. We got through it with loads of support from family
and my key worker.
I moved up from London and I was referred to the Bond Board who helped me get the
first flat. I had damp issues which were never resolved and the BB helped me get
somewhere with (hardly any) damp.
[My] ESA Stopped and I was struggling with health conditions and attending job
interviews and the Bond Board got me mandatory reconsideration and back pay … I’ve
loads of support from the Bond Board, friends and some family. BB applied when we had
shortfalls in the rent
The Knowledge that you are not alone
The knowledge that the HARP project was there, was a comfort to many clients.
Simply knowing that they are not alone and that when the post falls on the mat they
needn’t be anxious because they can ask for help and access good quality advice at
the coffee shop drop in was important for clients. The knowledge that help is there
when they need it reduced their anxiety significantly.
You don’t worry about letters coming through the door. Cause I don’t know what I’m
talking about or what I’m doing. I feel more confident with me paperwork. And when
you do go [to the council offices] yourself but when you do go and you don’t get any help.
They’re [the Bond Board] our voice they sort it out.
Page | 29
Its good you know they’re always here to help. When I first came here [to the Bond
Board] I was in financial difficulty cause I’d just lost me job … but I’d done me job for
28 years and cause I’ve been put on benefits because of [health condition] and if it
wasn’t for this place I wouldn’t have a clue what to do … they helped me work through
the benefits.
They are a godsend of it wasn’t for people like these [the Bond Board] you know we’d
all be homeless … I was nearly homeless. I lost me house and they found us a new home.
They helped me. I was in that house for 17 years and it was a wrench you know but …
I used to own me own house but they helped me and I only had to move next door.
A Place of Welcome Building Social Networks and Ties
The opportunity to meet other people and to socialise was very much valued by the
client group. The fact that the session wasn’t just an advice session but also a
relaxed informal space was also important to the HARP client group.
I think it’s [the HARP project] a good thing it offers support for the tenants cause
the majority of the tenants on the bond board you could meet … you can socialise you can
Page | 30
ask the staff any questions and they will get you an answer. They have council people
come down to help with your council tax, rates anything like that
Its nice cause we met new people. Yes we usually have a food bag or a cleaning bag. ….
[the HARP project staff] told me about it like and as soon as I got one of their [Bond
Board] properties she asked if I wanted to come along like you see then I though id
come down. I don’t really get out much and I lost my dad in November do I had nothing
to you know … so I was just stuck in me property but I met [couple sat with] at
church. I do go to church and they said come down like. I started coming out now to the
coffee morning and it gets me out of the house. Its socialising really and its being able
to chat with other people … if you’ve got problems you can ask for help.
I think it’s [the HARP project] a good thing it offers support for the tenants cause
the majority of the tenants on the bond board you could meet … you can socialise you can
ask the staff any questions and they will get you an answer. They have council people
come down to help with your council tax, rates anything like that … And basically you get
a red cross parcel every time so yeah I think it’s a good thing really …. It gets people
out socially
The HARP coffee shop drop in is a place of welcome for a client group that don’t
often feel welcome anywhere. Clients shared that they felt that in other places they
felt like they were an inconvenience for people, that they wanted to get them fobbed
off and their issues off their desk as soon as possible. The HARP project wasn’t like
that and clients valued how welcoming the space was. In terms of the physical space
its light and airy with a cafe feel. The rooms are clean with disabled toilets and baby
changing facilitates. It feels spacious. Over the warm summer, the doors of the cafe
area open wide to let a breeze in and tables were taken onto the grass outside. The
pleasant physical space and the warm welcome from staff and other clients was very
much valued as a place of refuge from the tough day to day lives that clients
experience.
I got introduced to [the HARP project] off my girlfriend who got a property with the
Bond Board. I come in here for a food bag a cleaning bag a cup of tea, a toast, cheese on
toast, good conversation and help with the housing and positive things anything that
Page | 31
you are stick on the BB will help you with it … it needs to be more than once a
fortnight., once a week or twice a week, it’s a really its nice to see other people that you
haven’t seen for a week.
Don’t be frightened to come because they make you so welcome .. as soon as you come in
… Yes very welcome, and they’ve done a lot for me. [the HARP project staff] at the
moment is trying to sort out where I had an accident on the bus, she’s helped me with
my pension and getting a bungalow. And she’s got all of us on the list [Housing List for a
Bungalow]
We look forward to coming every two week we wish it were every week … we do like it
cause its social you know? …. Its social you know cause it gets me out of the house and
also if you ever got some problems you can come and have a word with them.
A Flexible Space
The flexible nature of the drop ins was important to the HARP clients. The fact that it
was a drop in service rather than a closed group or a group that met fortnightly and
expected regular attendance. Clients valued the fact that they could drop in regularly
when they felt that they needed either some social or welfare support and when they
didn’t attend for a while, that was fine too. They felt that they would be welcomed
back when they wanted to return which gave them a sense of security, knowing that
help was there and would be there if they needed it.
You know don’t be a stranger really – cause it takes me a while, I sound quiet, it takes a
while to gain confidence … so coming regularly so you feel confident – don’t just come in
once and say its not for me …. come [to the Bond Board] when you feel like coming.
It gets people out socially … Even though you don’t have to come, once you’ve been once
it helps … cause you speak to people that you wouldn’t normally speak to. Cause I’ve
suffered from [Mental Health Condition] for quite a while now and I close myself in … so
its helped me to keep contact with people outside my close family with people I might
not normally speak to. It helps stop social isolation really, you know sorry for big words
but that’s what popped into my head
Page | 32
Intergenerational Space
The inter-generational nature of the space was valued by clients. It offered an safe,
pleasant space for extended families to meet where they could all have something to
eat, sit around a table together, catch up on news and access any support if needed.
Many other support services are age or need specific. Playgroups, homeless night
shelters, mental health support groups were all mentioned as places where clients
also attended but the inter-generational nature of the space was unique and very
much valued by clients.
Its about getting out to socialise, to spend time with me dad, we live 10-15 min walk
from each other so I tend to walk down to his and we tend to walk here. With-it being
the holidays the girls [Primary School & Pre-School Age Children] like to come and play
and interact with the other children that come and its something for them to do … It
helps them socialise with children outside of school a chance to meet new friends
Page | 33
Well good its good to socialise with people as well apart from myself. Sometimes I see
you [other man] knocking about but I don't see anybody else apart from here so its nice
to see everyone like.
I feel happy when I come here, I wish it was on every week. Its nice that there's all
different age groups that makes it better. I mean I’m [Age Shared - OAP] so I could
go to a lot of sixty plus groups but I like being here cause its a nice mix of people.
Well its the only social life that I have innt? .. I enjoy coming her cause you can sit down
and relax, get a up of tea or coffee … I know some people here – that there’s me niece
and her fella. Its [The HARP Drop in] been twelve month of pure positive
The Right People
The HARP drop in was valued too for the people, the support workers, welfare
advice workers and volunteers. Clients valued the welcoming nature culture of the
drop in. They shared that someone would always speak to them and how they were
always welcomed. They very much valued that staff and volunteer team. Core staff
members plus a regular group of volunteers create a supportive environment where
Page | 34
they could sit down with clients, make phone calls to access support and to help
clients with benefit, health or financial paperwork.
They are lovely the girls here, especially [name of HARP project staff member] they do
a lot to help.
I felt comfy here from the start, they welcomed me and all that and they’re friendly. I
just asked them and I told them what me peoples were and they sorted it all out for us
straight away and they've been brilliant like. If you’ve got any problems you know
they're always here you can come down and there’s someone on the bond board that
knows you know? I just asked [Bond Board Staff] and she said that someone at Bond
Board that knows about that. That’s a good thing it takes the worry off you mind as
well you know.
The staff and volunteers are trusted by clients and importantly too, they are liked.
They are experienced and knowledgeable but more than that have bonds with the
clients group that hold trust, kindness and care within each working relationship. This
is important in creating the transformative space that the HARP project offers. It is
this approach that creates the safe space where clients can flourish.
It makes be feel very very Happy. [name of HARP project staff member] has been
helping me find a house. I need a house close to my children’s School and we rejected the
first house that the Bond Board offered us as it wasn’t close enough because my wife is
not well she has [Health condition]. She came last time with us but today she is in bed …
and we need to be close to School and Church [name of HARP project staff member] has
been helping us with this. Our school is [x] and it is also our church.
Reflections on Peer to Peer Research
The Peer interviews developed the conclusions that has had emerged from the
participatory research. Developing a safe space for all holds multiple and complex
challenges but can also hold opportunities to facilitate clients voice, enabling them to
share lived experience which can in turn influence policy and practice.In terms of
Assets clients have strong social and human assets. Clients are resourceful, using
multiple sources of support and hard working; volunteering formally with charities
and informally caring for generations above and below them. The HARP project
Page | 35
facilitates client social assets by offering informal and relaxed spaces to access
support, socialise and feel valued. The Bond Board offers an opportunity for HARP
project users to develop and build to strong social ties. The social ties can be drawn
upon to invite users of the project to develop their human skills, using the new
computer services available or working with an artist to artistically express their lived
experience. This additional physical space in the Bond Board offices will provide
free use computer services. There is the space at the HARP drop in at St Andrews to
use the church hall section of the space to engage with a greater range of public
services. Currently benefits advice is available but mental health was a key area
where clients expressed needing additional support. Loans are a major issue,
perhaps the Credit Union can be invited into the church hall space to offer financial
support. The importance of having a safe space to feel welcome nurtures clients
mental health beyond the day of the drop in. Having a space where you know and
trust those that you are asking help from meant that clients felt confident that they
could positively respond to any challenges in between drop in sessions.The
opportunity that HARP drop in provides as a safe space, a space of welcome where
clients can informally share experience and friendships can be developed to built
client voice, and for clients to flourish.
Page | 36
Co-Produced Research Analysis:
Co-produced research requires a commitment to collaborative analysis. Findings and
initial themes developed using Nvivo from the SLA workshops with staff and
volunteers, the participatory activities and the peer interviews were then opened up
for collaborative analysis with clients, staff and volunteers.
Collaborative Analysis of Participatory Activities.
Two informal sessions in April and May 2018, were hosted that invited clients to
reflect and comment on the posters and build the picture of assets that have
emerged from the participatory work.The posters that were created to map clients
assets in 2016 and 2017 were displayed in the main hall of the church where the
HARP drop-ins are based. This was a piece of collaborative analysis, offering clients
the opportunity to reflect on the findings from the participatory analysis. This was
important to ensure that the correct meaning was taken from the initial research and
that the emerging conclusions that were being drawn from the research were
Page | 37
confirmed by the clients using the coffee shop drop in. It was also an opportunity to
discuss emerging themes and conclusions as part of co-producing the research
findings with clients.
HARP Project Workshop: In May 2018 a short informal workshop using Sustainable
Livelihoods approaches and tools was run asking employees and volunteers on the
HARP project to reflect on the emerging findings from the participatory research and
to anonymously share their knowledge of how clients utilise their assets was held.
This workshop summarised initial findings from the participatory activities and asked
participants to feedback on why they thought that clients were using their assets in
this way. The discussion collaboratively analysed the research findings, co-
producing key conclusions. The workshop then examined what these emerging
conclusions tells us about the HARP project, in terms of how it can develop and
improve services to better reflect client need.
Page | 38
Being part of a co-produced research project that valued and sought to develop
client assets was important for staff and volunteers of the HARP project, as
evidenced in these quotes gathered annonymously during a participatory activity
during the workshop.
“Working on a Case Study & Hearing Peoples Stories really touched me, realising difficult
situations can happen to us all”
“it enables me to help powerless people”
“giving otherwise disadvantaged people a chance to come together and be a community
who is valued”
“Ability to think holistically about impact on clients, to be part of change”
“Broadened my experience and ability to help more holistic issues for clients”
Key themes that emerged from this collaborative analysis focussed on the
importance of the HARP project in creating safe spaces, the value of support as a
voluntary addition to the core social provision and the value of having support staff
that can offer practical support to clients available at each session.
Page | 39
Working with Artists to Co-Produce Analysis.
In July and August 2018 two artists, Jon Dorsett2 and Eva Brudenell3, were invited
to visit the HARP drop in to spend time talking to clients about how they felt about
the HARP project. The first artist, John Dorsett, a graphic harvester, had informal
conversations with clients, asking them how they felt about the project and from
these conversations created a poster. The sessions attended by Jon were important
as they offered a visualisation of the peer to peer conversations that had been less
obvious within the sessions and also offered further opportunity to collaboratively
initial findings from peer to peer interviews, participatory activities and staff &
volunteer workshops. Jon’s artwork is also important in communicating the ideas
discussed throughout the research with wider housing, public sector and civil society
partners within Rochdale. This poster has been laminated and will be displayed in
the Bond Board office. The image has also been added to flyers that advertise the
2 jondorsett.co.uk
3 https://folksy.com/shops/evabrudenell
Page | 40
Bond Boards work as a way of sharing knowledge gained from the HARP project
with the Rochdale community.
The second artist that we invited into the coffee shop drop in session was Eva
Brudenell. Eva’s sessions began with a workshop format with the hope of recording
on pamplet format how clients felt about the HARP project. Clients found that they
were happy to discuss their feelings and were very open and happy to share
reflections and perspectives but that they were not so keen on engaging with the
printing and pamplet making art session. Eva, the artist, holding to a client focused
co-production methodology was then able to adapt her session to create a canvas
that summarised client feedback. Clients were happy to share the phrases and
design that they would like to see Eva create and the canvas was a collaborative
piece with the art led by Eva and the design and wording corroboratively created with
HARP clients. The canvas created by Eva Brudenell is to be displayed in the Bond
Boards offices in order that the knowledge and feedback from the session can be
shared more widely.
The aim of all of these collaborative analysis sessions was to allow the conversation
around client assets to mature and to gather a more nuanced picture of how clients
Page | 41
negotiate their assets and in turn how this can influence and develop the
organisational strategy for the Bond Board.
Having summarised the research conducted in year one and two of the research
project the next section of this report will consider learning from taking a participatory
approach and off an analysis of the research findings.
Page | 42
Learning from the Research Approach
Taking a co-produced participatory approach to gain a holistic appreciation of client
asset's on the HARP project has been experimental. The research has deliberately
taken a reflective (Lewin, 1951) approach, seeking to reflect the Bond Board’s
commitment as va learning organisation (Sen, 1991). It is important when taking a
reflective approach, to learning to be transparent about what worked and where
areas of learning have emerged.
Reflexive Approaches Participatory research is research in which participants are
active in the construction of knowledge about their lives and researchers attempt to
be more transparent about their roles. Reflexivity ‘involves reflecting on the way in
which research is carried out and understanding how the process of doing research
shapes its outcomes’ (Hardy et al. 2001:534). Participative approaches recognise
research as co-constituted. Recognising research participants as reflexive beings,
involving participants in reflexive dialogue during data analysis or evaluation (Dean,
2017) is key to participatory approaches. Reflexive practice empowers people to
become aware of the structures that inhibit them, more able to enact agency over
their siltation (Bourdieu, 1986). The value of participatory approaches is their
commitment to enacting change;
In a world so deeply in need of change … I have therefore come to
think of action research as residing in the space that can integrate
truth and power (Huang, 2010:109).
The value for the Bond Board of using reflective participatory approaches to
research sits in the democratisation of knowledge and the opportunity to build voice.
Using participatory approaches offers an opportunity for reflection and learning. The
project worked well due to the volunteer and client enthusiasm for research and
working relationships between EHU staff and the HARP project staff. The volunteers
and clients of the drop in are interested and enthusiastic to help support the Bond
Board and attended every training and drop in session without fail. They were
committed to learn and contribute despite in some cases very challenging personal
situations. Alongside this, a strong working relationship between the volunteers,
Page | 43
staff and university researcher has enabled the research to be flexible and
responsive to organisational needs and pressures. Time frames have been flexible
allowing for a supportive flexible approach to the project.
There were also areas for learning, these related to the significant and urgent needs
of clients and the intellectual property held in the beginning with one key staff
member. The coffee Shop drop-ins are very busy and attract a wide variety of people
with a varying amount of support needs. By their nature they are drop in sessions,
which means that it is not possible to predict specific issues that people require
support with. The drop in sessions were supported by the staff team which included
a benefits adviser. On a few occasions changes in benefits or specific safeguarding
crises meant that the research had had to take a background role in order for clients
immediate need to (quite rightly) be the focus. This taught us that the process takes
time and in taking time it builds the opportunity for informal knowledge and working
relationships to be developed. The time taken therefore, whilst unstructured was a
real positive for the project. The Sustainable Livelihoods Worker on the HARP
project broke her leg and was unable to work for part of the Autumn of 2017. As the
lead contact for the research, the research inevitably had to pause during her
recovery. This taught us to broaden the research team and since the start of 2018 a
variety of project staff have joined research meetings.
Reflecting on the experience of existing participatory and co-produced
methodologies within the HARP Project reflective cues for future projects have been
created:
POWER – Co-produced and participatory approaches have a responsibility to
negotiate conflicted conversations and to recognise and empower all voices within
these conversations.
ETHICS – Taking an ethical approach to research involves the safeguarding of
voice. As researchers we hold a duty of care towards the emotional and physical
health of those involved in participatory and co-produced research.
LEGITIMISING KNOWLEDGE Universities hold status and power within the
community. Developing participatory and co-produced research validates the
Universities commitment to the community and adds an academic status to
Page | 44
community led research. This status can be useful to legitimize community
knowledge and to gain funding opportunities.
CONFLICT Communities are not places of consensus. Participatory and Co-
Produced methodologies need to represent the contested nature of the
conversations they hold.
RESPECT Needs to be established. It takes TIME and requires TRUST
LANGUAGE Participatory and co-produced research needs to be accessible. The
language used within the research process and within any research outputs for
example reports needs to be appropriate.
Page | 45
Analysis of Research Findings
The research project has identified the range of locations that clients access services
within and the diversity of social ties that clients have with both formal organisations
such as the Lighthouse Project but also informal and emerging organisations such
as street soup kitchens or faith groups that are offering drop in services. It was clear
too that clients are engaged in reciprocal relationships that utilise their assets
alongside supporting their needs. Clients have a range of income sources that are
both formal and informal. Some clients have numerous links with public assets and
others much less so. As we gathered data we began develop a sense of how clients
manage their human, social, public, and financial assets.
The peer to peer interviews revealed the value of the HARP project for clients. The
clients respected and liked the staff team and had trusting relationships with the
volunteers and staff at the HARP St Andrews drop in. This trust offered clients a
relief from anxiety, they knew that there was a place where they would not only be
welcome but where they could also receive support. It was here that the notion of the
HARP project being a safe transformative space emerged.
In offering practical support and stepping stones to solve health or benefit crises, the
drop in centre supported clients to regain control over their fragile financial and
health assets and to build new and emerging social and human assets via the
opportunity to socialise and attend training such as first aid courses. For once you
are safe from harassment and abuse you can feel safe to be ‘cognitively,
intellectually and emotionally expressive’ (Lewis et al, 2015). Being in a safe space
empowers ‘civic engagement, personhood and freedom’ (Lewis et al, 2015).
The HARP project offers perhaps an alternative space of inclusion, a ‘safe haven’
(Pinfold, 2000) or ‘oases’ (Philo et al, 2005). Safe social spaces are characterised by
both objective physical safety and subjective psychological safety and emotional
safety (Vaughan, 2014). The HARP project offers the opportunity for both ‘bridging’
and ‘bonding’ social capital to be built. Putnam (1995) defines bonding social capital
as the social networks and ties that link those in similar circumstances from similar
backgrounds. Bridging social capital (Putnam, 1995) are the links and ties between
Page | 46
different social groups. In offering an intergenerational safe space, the HARP project
offers the opportunity for bridging social capital that can offer networks outside of the
clients existing social circle and in so doing offer opportunities. The social space
offered by the HARP project was particularly important for clients. For Probyn (1996)
to ‘belong’ is primarily a social characteristic. To feel like you belong is more than
simply being included socially, it is to feel attached, valued and a sense that you are
‘part of’ the people, activities, network and space that you inhabit.
In using reflexive approaches to participatory research, participatory activities,
workshops and informal reflections the HARP client group were able to engage in
community level accessible critical reflection about their livelihoods. Vaughan (2014)
suggests that communities need to move beyond safe social spaces to
transformative spaces. Vaughan (2014) suggests that this can be achieved through
the development of critical thinking. In training as peer researchers volunteers were
able to develop their critical reflections. By ‘personalising and humanising their
stories’ (Vaughan, 2014:189) working with the artists, participants were empowered
to shared their lived experiences. Visual methods enabled participants to
communicate in a ‘rich language’ (Humphreys and Brezillion, 2002). In sharing their
stories using visual means participants created a spaces of reflection, that were
‘reflective of the subtle, incremental and provisional ways in which social change
actually occurs’ (Cornwall and Edwards, 2010).
The research revealed areas of insecurity too. Indeed, safe spaces are contested
notions. Creating a safe space requires that the space is safe for everyone. The
notion of the term ‘safe space’ requires clarification, safe for who and from what?
(Stoudt, 2007). In an intergenerational context there are both adult and child
safeguarding responsibilities. The Bond Board’s clients include people from a range
of backgrounds, from large families to single people. Accommodating the needs of
all the clients of the HARP project, offering a space of welcome for all and ensuring
the space is also safe for all is challenging and requires carefully thought out risk
assessment by senior management.
The staff were supporting clients with extremely challenging personal circumstances.
The emotional impact of trying to help a client through health and benefit crises with
dignity and respect whilst often navigating adult or child safeguarding procedures on
Page | 47
behalf of the client is a lot to ask of staff. The livelihoods of the staff on the HARP
project should also be considered and annomyous comments shared during
participatory workshops revealed a high level of emotional stress. This challenges
the notion of the HARP project offering a safe space for everyone. Participating in a
piece of co-produced research aimed at building client assets and taking a positive
approach to supporting clients was valued by staff as the quotes shared above
demonstrate, however it is important to recognise that this is not a panacea to staff
stress. The emotional challenges of ‘white knuckle’ (Baines and Cunnigham, 2011)
care work should not be under estimated.
In conclusion then the notion of making spaces, moving through spaces, expanding
spaces and living in spaces (Greene, 1995) sits well with a project whose bread and
butter work is housing. Greene (1995) suggests that to make a safe space is to be
free. Free to have voice, to share the knowledge of lived experience and free to be
honest about ones livelihood assets and incomes sources without judgement. Free
to be reflexive and to critically think through your lived experiences of convictions,
addiction, mental ill health or disability in a space that will facilitate you having a
voice. It is here that the HARP project can further develop the participatory research
project. Empowering and facilitating client voice, enabling clients to continue to co-
produce research and in so doing influence the strategic direction of the project.
Page | 48
Reflecting on the Aims and Objectives
The assets based research conducted with the HARP project between 2016 and
2018 has met it’s initial research aims and objectives.
Research Aims and Objectives
To help understand how to design services appropriately in order to promote
meaningful engagement
To evidence impact gaps are barriers service provision with a view to locating
future funding.
To share the learning: in order to better design services focussed around clients.
To connect into wider Greater Manchester Sustainable Livelihoods Work
The research has met its objectives in helping understand how to design services
appropriately in order to promote meaningful engagement and to evidence impact
gaps are barriers service provision with a view to locating future funding. It has
enabled a clearer picture of how clients utilise their assets and has developed a
picture of how some clients receive more support than others from public assets
such as voluntary, community and faith based groups. In co-producing the research
with the HARP clients, volunteers, employees and trustees, the project has
embedded the learning within the research itself, involving all participants in the
knowledge sharing as part of the research process. The research project is now
moving into the next phase of its work to share the learning from the research, using
the art created by Jon Dorsett and Eva Brudenell to illustrate the learning from the
research project. The HARP project is now linked to LeadingGM 4 via the EHU.
#LeadingGM is a collective effort across GM to mobilise a community of leaders from
across all corners and sectors. It is part of a programme of activities that together will
4 http://www.leadinggm.org.uk/
Page | 49
support GM leaders to achieve their Stronger Together ambition. There are further
opportunities to link this work into the work being done across Greater Manchester
and Rochdale and to showcase the findings of this research.
Page | 50
Areas for Action
The research has identified key areas for each SLA asset where the HARP project
can develop client assets as a result of gathering a more holistic picture of clients
livelihoods.
The diversity of support that clients access is clear. For the Bond Board this
suggests that as a charity integrating into Greater Manchester (rather than Rochdale
focussed) networks is the next step. For the client, recognising that there is a variety
of support across Greater Manchester is obviously important. Perhaps (from
speaking with HARP clients, this is the case) support is on offer on different days in
different places. Therefore creating an updated map of what's available and where
and on what day will be a helpful additional to client support.
The reciprocity between clients and those that they care about is clear. The peer to
peer interviews revealed that clients very much appreciated the first aid training
offered by the Bond Board. There is an opportunity here for staff to further support
the clients with their caring roles either by offering access to child-minding
registration courses for example or opening up the drop in coffee shop to include
clients and those they care for.
Page | 51
Some clients access a range of services and others less. The peer to peer interviews
suggested that this is not necessarily need related but that some clients less aware /
less able to access other sources of support. This opens up an opportunity for staff
to better link all clients into public support networks. Most people gave health or
council examples, other than the Bond Board Housing wasn't given as an example or
police. This suggests that there are opportunities to build links with other sources of
public support such as police community support officers or other charitable housing
providers.
Clients access a range of financial resources and have a diverse income stream.
They are not dependant on one source of income from work or benefits. In terms of
Bond Board strategy highlighting the 'grey' sources of income with the client runs
through their budget with Bond Board the client can work with the support worker to
adapt their income sources to legal options whilst recognising that a diversity of
income streams is important for the client.
Page | 52
Conclusion
This final report has summarised a two year participatory and co-produced research
project. The report began with a brief outline of the project and the socio-political
context that it sat within before summarising the methodological approach,
discussing findings and developing analysis. The aim of the research project was to
help the Bond Board to understand how to design services appropriately in order to
promote meaningful engagement. The project worked with the Bond Board, using
Sustainable Livelihoods analysis to analyse HARP service users experience of the
Bond Board.
The research used a five fold, assets based analysis approach to evidence impact
and barriers service provision. The research identified the range of locations that
clients access services within and the diversity of social ties that clients have with
both formal organisations and informal organisations such as street soup kitchens or
faith groups that are offer drop in services. The research revealed the range of
reciprocal relationships that clients utilise as social and human assets. Clients have
a range of income sources that are both formal and informal. Some clients have
numerous links with public assets and others much less so. The research revealed a
sense of how clients manage their human, social, public, and financial assets. The
clients respected and liked the staff team and had trusting relationships with the
volunteers and staff at the HARP St Andrews drop in. This trust offered clients a
relief from anxiety, they knew that there was a place where they would not only be
welcome but where they could also receive support. It was here that the notion of the
HARP project being a safe transformative space emerged.
Page | 53
References
Agger, B. (1990) The decline of discourse: Reading, writing and resistance in post
modern capitalism. New York: Falmer.
Atkinson, M., Wilkin, A.,Stottt, A., Doherty, P., and Kinder, K. (2002) Multi-agency
working: A Detailed Study National Foundation for Educational Research, Berkshire
Baines D.Cunningham I. (2011) ‘“ White knuckle care work”: Violence, gender and
new public management in the voluntary sector’, Work, Employment and Society ,
25(4), pp. 760–76.
Behar, R. (1996) The girl in the cast. In: R. Behar The vulnerable observer:
anthropology that breaks your heart. Boston: Beacon Press. pp. 104–132.
Bennett, F. and Roberts, M. (2004) From input to influence: Participatory approaches
to research and inquiry about poverty. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. Handbook of theory and research for the
sociology of education(pp. 241–258). New York: Greenwood.
Cornwall, A and Edwards, J (2010) Introduction: Negotiating empowerment IDS
Bulletin: Institute for Development Studies 41 (2): 1-9
Datta, R., Khyang, N, U., Khyang, H, K, P., Kheyang, H,A, P,. Khyang, M.C.,
Chapola, J (2015) Participatory Action Research and researchers responsibilities: an
experience with an indigenous community International Journal of Social Research
Methodology, 18:6, 581-599
Dean, J (2017) Doing Reflexivity Policy Press, Bristol
Evans, C and Fisher, M (1999) Collaborative Evaluation with Service Users In L.
Shaw and J.Lishman (eds) Evaluation and Social Work Practice London Sage Pg11-
117
Facer, K. and Pahl, K. Eds. (2017) Valuing interdisciplinary collaborative research:
Beyond impact. Bristol: Policy Press.
Page | 54
Fitzpatrick, S. Pawson, H,. Bramley, G,. Wilcox, S,. and Watts, B. (2017) The
Homelessness Monitor: England 2017 Crisis, London
Fullan, M. (1999) Change Forces: The Sequel. Falmer Press, London
Fullan, M. (1999) Change Forces: The Sequel. Falmer Press, London
Greene, M (1995) Releasing the Imagination Jossey-Bass, San Francisco
Grenfell, M. I. and James, D. with Hodkinson, P., Reay, D. and Robbins, D. (1998)
Bourdieu and education: Acts of practical theory. London: Falmer Press.
Haraway, D. (1991) Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the
privilege of partial perspective. In: Donna Haraway Cymians, cyborgs and women.
New York: Free Association Books.
Hardy, C,. Nelson, P,. Phillips, Clegg, S,. (2001) Reflexivity in Organization and
Management Theory: A Study of the Production of the Research `Subject' Human
Relations Volume: 54 issue: 5, page(s): 531-560. May 1, 2001
Huang, H, B. (2010) What is good action research? Action Research Vol 8: (1) 93-
109
Humphreys, P,. and Brezillion, P,. (2002) Combining rich and restricted languages in
multimedia: Enrichment of context for innovative decisions. In Adam F, Brezillion P,
Humphreys P, (eds) Decision Making and Decision Support in the Internet Age.
Cork: Oaktree Press 695-708
Jacoby, R. (1987) The last intellectuals: American culture in the age of academe.
New York: Basic.
Jolley, I,. Bellis, H,. Abbott, C,. (2017) Rochdale Borough’s Homelessness Strategy
June 2017 Rochdale Borough Council
Lewin, K. (1951) Field theory in social science; selected theoretical papers. D.
Cartwright (ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
Lister, R. (2002) A politics of recognition and respect: involving people with
experience of poverty in decision-making that affects their lives. Social Policy and
Society, Vol. 1, Issue 1.
Page | 55
Lister, R. and Beresford, P. (1991) Working together against poverty: Involving poor
people in action against poverty. Open Services Project and Department of Applied
Social Studies, University of Bradford.
Nash, R. (2004) Liberating scholarly writing: The power of personal narrative. New
York : Teachers College Press.
Philo, C,. Parr,. H and Burns, N,. (2005) An Oasis for us: in between spaces of
training for people with mental health problems in Scottish Highlands Geoforum 36,
778-91
Pinfold, V (2000) Building up safe havens … all around the world: users experiences
of living in the community with mental health problems Health and Place 6, 201-12
Probyn, E (1996) Outside Belongings Routledge, New York
Putnam, D. (1995) ‘Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital’, Journal of
Democracy, Vol. 6,No. 1, pp. 65–78
Rogers, D.S. and Whetten , D.A. (Eds) (1982). Inter-organsiational Coordination:
Theory Research and Implementation. First edn. Ames,IA: Iowa State University.
Sen, A., 1991. "What Did You Learn In The World Today?," Harvard Institute of
Economic Research Working Papers 1536, Harvard - Institute of Economic
Research.
Stoudt, B, G (2007) The Co-Construction of Knowledge in ‘safe spaces’ : Reflecting
on Politics and Power in Participatory Action Research Children Youth and
Environments Vol. 17. No.2
Tuhiwai- Smith, L. (1999) Decolonising Methodologies: Research and Indigenous
Peoples. Zed Books, London
Vaughan, C (2014) Participatory Research with youth: Idealising safe social spaces
or building transformative links in difficult environments? Journal of Health
psychology 2014, Vol 19 (1) 184-192
Wall, J (2017) Substance Misuse and Homelessness in Greater Manchester Lifeline
Data Analysis Project 27 February 2017
Page | 56
Williams, O. R. and Pierce, J. (2016) Iterative parallelism as research praxis:
embracing the discursive incommensurability of scholarship and everyday politics.
Area, 48: 222–228. doi:10.1111/area.12258
Zapka, J.G., Marrocco, G.R., Lweis, B., McCusker, J., Sullivan, J., McCarthy, J and
Birch, F.X. (1992). ‘Interorganisational responses to AIDS: a case study of the
Worcester AIDS consortium’, Health Education Research: Theory and Practice, 7,
31–46. Cited in: Delaney, F.G. (1994). ‘Muddling through the middle ground:
theoretical concerns in inter-sectoral collaboration and health promotion’, Health
Promotion International, 9, 3, 217–25.
Institute for Public Policy and Professional Practice (I4P)I4P is Edge Hill University’s cross-disciplinary research and knowledge exchange initiativeestablished in 2013. The Institute is committed to exploring the opportunities for cross sectorcollaboration and co-operation and to draw on the experience of practitioners as well asacademic researchers to inform new ways of working and learning.
E: [email protected] W: edgehill.ac.uk/i4p T: twitter.com/I4PEHU