FAQ

Two half-day co-production workshops were held with all stakeholders to make recommendations to support the design of a P&C research system (see workshop guide in Appendix 4). The sessions, presented in more detail in the findings section, began with an overview of the P&C research journey and a summary of the survey findings to ensure that the recommendations were rooted in the data and shared understanding of P&C research. Insights from the literature review were also introduced to inspire discussion and provide examples of P&C research coordination and practice across the United Kingdom. Over 50 people attended the workshops, including approximately 20 P&C researchers, 15 council/NHS representatives, 6 university researchers, and 12 VCS representatives. The P&C research team supported the presentation of findings and shared their experiences to illustrate challenges and opportunities.

Following the workshops, the facilitation team conducted a mix of deductive and inductive framework analysis of the workshop data, organising the recommendations according to the stages of the P&C research journey. Where further details were needed to describe the framework, additional interpretation and examples were added inductively during the analysis, helping to inform specific areas of the co-produced recommendations. All workshop facilitators reviewed the data analysis to ensure that the recommendations in this report reflect the discussions.

As illustrated by the quotes below, participants highlighted the active presence of P&C research in Tower Hamlets, with a strong desire across sectors to collaborate in using this approach to develop place-based solutions for tackling inequities:

“So many different projects in Tower Hamlets using a peer and community research approach.” (P&C researcher)

“Several very skilled and well-respected VCS community research organisations.” (council officer)

“The desire to collaborate and create place-based / specific responses." (university researcher)

The power of P&C researchers in amplifying voices, developing innovative methodologies, and creating effective solutions was seen as empowering for residents and organisations, as illustrated in the quotes below:

“Unearthing things/voices not usually heard.” (P&C researcher)

“Valuing the skills of the community and being cognisant of power dynamics." (university researcher)

“Picking best methods for communities.” (P&C researcher)

“Innovative and creative methodologies for understanding the views of local residents.” (university researcher)

“Empowering for lay people to know what they think matters.” (P&C researcher)

Relevant research, topic, and questions answered rather than dwelling on things that do not matter to people.” (P&C researcher)

Participants were driven to support and conduct P&C research due to its potential to generate and influence local policy: “Gives opportunities to influence.” (P&C researcher)

“Seeing change happen is empowering.” (P&C researcher)

Participants also reflected on how the delivery and use of P&C research can build trust between residents and other stakeholders including the Council.

Participants noted several practical challenges, including the risk of repetition in P&C research projects, the perception that the evidence generated by P&C research is not valued by some stakeholders, short-term funding, difficulty reaching certain communities to be included in research, P&C research being misrepresented after completion by policymakers, a lack of transparency and accountability in implementing recommendations, and insufficient support for P&C researchers and research projects.

“Research projects are not informed by existing research insights and data.” (P&C researcher) 

“Community research is not valued, recognised (P&C researcher, workshop) Short termism limits impact.” (P&C researcher)

“People get activated and excited and then the money runs out.” (P&C researcher)

“It can be challenging to reach certain communities. Housebound, digitally excluded people for example.” (P&C researcher)

“Research being misrepresented once it is done, endangering communities.” (P&C researcher)

“Accountability is a key factor. Sometimes dissemination is too limited, missing people out, biasing reports to make it look more impact was achieved than in reality. We are accountable to the public.” (P&C researcher)

“Lack of transparency: organisations and co-researchers all need to know what is happening, including dissemination.” (P&C researcher)

“Policymaker buy in drops off at the implementation stage. A waste of time and money.” (P&C researcher)

“Trust breaks down if no change taken.” (P&C researcher)

“Clear payment policy is needed.” (P&C researcher)

“Lack of clarity around DWP guidance on peer research and benefits." (community organisation representative)

“Effective training does not exist: training needs to be inclusive; examples of effective training could be stakeholders sharing different expertise and insights, and training logistics on a research project.” (P&C researcher)

In addition to these challenges, a lack of trust and togetherness was highlighted due to issues such as perceived discrimination against P&C researchers, insufficient resources for meaningful community engagement and involvement in research, and the extraction of P&C research from the people and groups who produced it.

“Not sharing the same ideas of what we are trying to do.” (council officer)

“Lack of trust between communities and institutions from previous experiences and current challenges.” (university researcher)

“Residents not feeling welcome into research and local authority spaces.” (university researcher)

“Discrimination by researchers and council officers when framing research themes, interpreting data and sharing results.” (university researcher)

“Providing sufficient resources and time to meaningfully engage and sustain relations with communities." (community organisation representative)

“Risk of tokenism and extraction.” (university researcher)

Funding remains a significant challenge for P&C research. Alongside the difficulty of implementing research recommendations through policy and system changes, funding was highlighted as one of the top challenges by survey participants (see Figure 4).

Fragmented organisation and short-term funding were cited by one in four survey respondents (25%) as limiting the impact of P&C research. Limited funding was noted by nearly one in five participants (16%). This challenge on funding was particularly noted by public sector and university representatives. Community organisations also emphasised the need for better funding arrangements to ensure the quality of P&C research.