Social Inclusion Project Team - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 38
About This Presentation
Title:

Social Inclusion Project Team

Description:

David Morris NIMHE SI programme. Nicola Vick NIMHE SI programme. Fabian Davies Oxleas Trust ... MIND (SW) Human Givens. Davis Valued Lifestyles Support Needs ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:75
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 39
Provided by: sar105
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Social Inclusion Project Team


1
  • Social Inclusion Project Team
  • Peter Huxley UoW Swansea
  • Sherrill Evans UoW Swansea
  • Maria Munroe UoW Swansea
  • Martin Webber IoP
  • Tanya Burchardt LSE
  • Martin Knapp LSE
  • David McDaid LSE
  • Acknowledgements to
  • Peter Bates NDT
  • Jenny Secker Anglia Ruskin
  • David Morris NIMHE SI programme
  • Nicola Vick NIMHE SI programme
  • Fabian Davies Oxleas Trust

2
Social Inclusion Project
  • Aims
  • Describe the key components of social inclusion
  • Identify existing measures of the various
    components of social inclusion
  • Draft the possible content of an index of social
    inclusion for testing among general population
    and treated and untreated mental health samples


3
Social Inclusion Project
  • Methods
  • FOUR main components
  • (1) Review of literature
  • An update of the LSE literature review on social
    exclusion and a further search with particular
    reference to existing measures of social
    inclusion
  • (2) A review of existing measures
  • Including web searches the work of the NIMHE
    research and evidence coalition network
  • (3) Concept mapping exercise
  • in a number of groups, including members of the
    general public, mental health and other
    professionals, and older people groups)
  • (4) Expert group synthesis


4
Social inclusion Project
  • Useful conceptual material and background papers
  • Commins (1993)
  • Beck (1997)
  • Berman and Phillips (2000)
  • Berger Schmitt and Noll (2000) (Appendix 1)
  • Burchardt, Le Grand and Piachaud (2002)
  • Atkinson (2002)
  • EFILWC (2003)
  • Roeher Institute (2003)
  • ZUMA (2005)
  • Levitas et al (2006)
  • Combat Poverty Agency (Ireland) Better policies,
    Better outcomes (2006)
  • New Policy Institute/ Joseph Rowntree Trust
    (2006)


5
Social inclusion Project
  • Concept Mapping groups
  • Nine groups
  • IoP group
  • Mental health service users
  • Older people group
  • Student group
  • Womens group
  • NIMHE social inclusion network group
  • Social inclusion and employment group
  • Voluntary organisations and BME group
  • General population group


6
Social Inclusion Project

Focus groups - Concept mapping Concept maps are
graphical tools for organizing and representing
knowledge which is sometimes used for measurement
development . There are six steps in the concept
mapping process STEP ONE Preparation STEP TWO
Generating statements STEP THREE Structuring of
statements STEP FOUR Representation of
statements STEP FIVE Interpretation of maps STEP
SIX Utilisation of the concept maps
7
Social inclusion Project
  • 66 participants
  • 444 statements
  • 66 clusters


8
Social inclusion Project
Most frequent themes (seven or more groups) Most
frequent Social network and support e.g.
friends and family Second Opportunities Neighbo
urhood and built environment e.g. ghettos,
deprivation, surroundings Financial
stability Employment Disadvantaged and excluded
groups Acceptance including being part of
society Third Participation in society and
social support (local society rather than
wider) Discrimination including
stigma Representation being visible and listened
to having a say Participation (wider) Housing
Health and well being Engaging in
community Diversity, difference, integration
9
Social inclusion Project
  • Third (continued)
  • Decreased exclusion/opposite of
    exclusion/including people who have been excluded
  • Choice/Freedom/Control/Power/Responsibility
  • Access
  • Service provision
  • Fourth (five or six groups)
  • Confidence/Sense of Purpose/Fulfilment/Achievement
  • Isolation
  • Having a meaningful, recognised and valued role
  • Barriers to inclusion
  • Understanding
  • Peoples behaviour
  • Transport and mobility
  • Safety, fear, crime, conflict
  • Respect
  • Religion (ignorance and tolerance)
  • Education


10
Social inclusion Project
  • Web searches
  • Search Engines
  • Look Smart Dogpile NQMC Question Bank Google
    Advanced Copernic Firefox
  • Terms
  • Social Inclusion Index Socially inclusion
  • Hits - 1955
  • Conclusion academic sites, EU, NIMHE etc
  • added almost nothing to conventional searching


11
Social inclusion Project
  • CONVENTIONAL LITERATURE SEARCH STRATEGY
  • DATA BASES
  • Web of Knowledge (Science Citation Index Social
    Science Citation Index)
  • CSA (Assia Eric Sociological Abstracts Social
    Services Abstracts)
  • Ovid (Medline, Old medline Embase Psychinfo
    IBSS HMIC)


12
Social inclusion Project
  • SEARCH TERMS
  • Varied slightly between search engine due to the
    capabilities of each one.
  • Keyword search on inclusion using the following
    truncated and/or specific terms
  • OVID Social inclu OR social capital OR social
    cohesi OR social engage OR social involve OR
    social participation OR social interaction OR
    social integrat OR social responsibilit OR
    social wellbeing OR social well-being
  • CSA Social(ly) inclusion/ed/ive, Social Capital,
    Social(ly) cohesion/ive, Social(ly)
    engage/d/ment, Social(ly) invole/d/ment, Social
    participation, Social interaction/s, Social
    integration/ed, Social responsibility/ies, Social
    wellbeing/well-being
  • Web of Knowledge OVID truncated terms followed
    by a within search search for CSA specific terms


13
Social inclusion Project
  • SEARCH TERMS
  • Title searches for measure/s using the same
    specific terms in each database
  • measure OR measures OR measurement OR index OR
    indices OR indicator OR indicators OR scale OR
    scales OR tool OR tools OR assessment OR
    assessments OR instrument OR instruments OR
    questionnaire OR questionnaires OR form OR forms
    OR profile OR profiles OR test OR tests OR
    schedule OR schedules.
  • Social inclusion and measures searches were
    combined in all databases, to produce a more
    focused search
  • Combined searches were limited according to the
    criteria (next slide) as far as possible
  • The ability to limit searches varied by database,
    and only OVID was able to exclude duplicates
    effectively


14
Social inclusion Project
  • Criteria
  • Abstract
  • English Language
  • Humans
  • Peer review journals
  • 1948-2007
  • Tests and measures (OVID only)
  • Process
  • 2 people reviewed and categorised all abstracts
  • Papers reporting on measures of social inclusion
    or contributing variables eg participation, or
    including useful conceptual material, were
    retrieved and read, again by 2 people


15
Social inclusion Project
  • Literature Search Results


16
Social inclusion Project
  • 144 potentially relevant papers when duplicates
    removed
  • These were retrieved and classified as follows
  • 1 Measures of inclusion or components
  • 2 Conceptual papers relevant to social inclusion
    or measurement
  • Measures of other concepts or none of
    the above
  • 68 papers were selected for inclusion in the
    review, on the basis that they met criteria 1) or
    2)


17
Social inclusion Project
  • The search did not produce any existing measures
    of social inclusion.
  • Of the 68 papers reviewed
  • 9 measures of aspects of inclusion or component
    measures were reported (participation community
    integration, social cohesion) and these are
    reviewed in more detail
  • 16 conceptually useful papers were identified
    relating to measurement (eg, that proposed items
    models, indicators, Wilson -Adelaide)
  • 43 papers were excluded on the basis of
    relevance, quality or because they measured other
    concepts


18
Social inclusion Project
  • The two broad approaches to the measurement of
    inclusion emerged
  • Individual, inward looking, psychological,
    subjective, internal referents
  • Societal, outward looking, objective, social
    indicators, external referents


19
Social inclusion Project
  • INDIVIDUAL APPROACH
  • Roeher Institute, Canada
  • Crawford (2003) suggests that two key themes
    emerge from this perspective. People with
    disabilities want to be socially included in the
    sense that they, like others, want
  • ?To participate as valued, appreciated equals in
    the social, economic, political and cultural life
    of the community (i.e., in valued societal
    situations) and
  • ?To be involved in mutually trusting,
    appreciative and respectful interpersonal
    relationships at the family, peer and community
    levels.
  • That is, people want inclusion in the situations
    that most people take for granted and want to be
    welcomed and valued there.


20
Social inclusion Project
  • Crawford (2003) lists the socially valued
    situations that people want to participate in as
    (egs)
  • ??Post-secondary education or training.
  • ?A job or career and income security in the event
    of unemployment.
  • ?An affordable, healthy pleasant home that
    meets individual family needs.
  • ?A safe, secure, healthy and pleasant
    neighbourhood.
  • ?Justice in the event of violence or abuse.
  • ?Recreational opportunities and chances for
    cultural/artistic expression.
  • ??Health, social and related services.
  • ?Clubs, faith communities, voluntary
    associations.
  • ?Opportunities/venues for civic involvement
  • Valued interpersonal situations in which people
    want to participate include
  • ?Family, a variety of friendships and
    relationships with trusted, respectful others in
    the community.

21
Social inclusion Project
  • SOCIAL INDICATOR APPROACH
  • The second major approach to the measurement of
    inclusion is the social indicators approach which
    uses existing (statistical) data sources in an
    aggregated form to assess the success or change,
    in social inclusion terms, of various policies
    and strategies.
  • These policies are often area-based, for example
    the Social Inclusion Measure groups in the
    Irish republics regions, or may relate to more
    local services, for example schools in Hampshire,
    or specific age groups (Tanton et al 2006)
    children at risk of exclusion in Australia.
  • Existing indicators are taken to represent
    aspects of inclusion, and these may or may not be
    aggregate into a single index.


22
  • Some of the issues related to this approach
  • How are indicator questions selected and tested?
  • Often no indication, commonly experts, sometimes
    that which is already available
  • Mental health service users often do not like the
    census or survey style questions and want them
    rephrased
  • It is possible to incorporate modules on specific
    issues (eg social capital in the HSE QoL in the
    NPMS Levitas social exclusion in the UKLHS) in
    existing surveys and over-sample particular
    groups is this a route one would want to go
    down?
  • Work with existing research groups?

23
Social inclusion Project
  • Social indicators research groups
  • European Social Survey City University
  • GESIS - ZUMA
  • NPI/Rowntree
  • All have large accessible data sets


24
Social inclusion Project
  • German Social Science Infrastructure Services
  • ZUMA Centre for Survey Research and Methodology,
    Mannheim
  • Inclusion Indicators
  • Currently the European System of Social
    Indicators is being implemented step by step by
     ZUMA's Social Indicators Department. At this
    stage time series data are available at their
    website for 7 out of the projected 13 life
    domains Population, household and family Labour
    market and working conditions Housing Education
    and vocational training Income Standard of
    living and consumer patterns, Health and Total
    life situation.
  • The indicator system covers as a standard the
    previous EU-15 countries, Norway, Switzerland,
    Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, as well as Japan
    and the U.S. as major reference societies.
    Successively, all the EU-25 member states will be
    covered systematically, as is already the case
    for numerous indicators.


25
Social inclusion Project
  • ZUMA Indicators
  • Life Domains
  • Population, household and family
  • Income, standard of living and consumer patterns
  • Housing
  • Health
  • Transport
  • Environment
  • Leisure, Media and Culture
  • Social Security
  • Social and Political Participation and
    Integration
  • Crime and public safety
  • Education and vocational training
  • Labour market and working conditions
  • Total life situation


26
Social inclusion Project
  • In the UK, Levitas et al were commissioned by
    the Cabinet Office to produce a measure of social
    exclusion
  • Levitas et als Bristol Social Exclusion Matrix
    has three major sections
  • resources (material, access to services, social
    resources)
  • participation (economic, social, culture
    education and skills, political and civic)
  • quality of life (health and well-being, living
    environment, crime, harm and criminalization).

27
Social inclusion Project

  • They examined 27 potential sources of data and
    selected the best available data on children,
    adults of working age and older people.
  • the Millennium poverty and social exclusion
    survey
  • the Families and young children survey
  • the Longitudinal survey of young people (ALSPAC)
  • the British household panel survey and the
    General Household Survey for adults of working
    age
  • English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) for
    older groups.
  • Other options - add a module to existing
    household surveys (but excludes excluded groups)

28
Social inclusion Project
  • Review of measures
  • Bates Key indicators for services
  • MIND (SW) Human Givens
  • Davis Valued Lifestyles Support Needs Pack
  • Secker Inclusion measure
  • (Huxley Social and community participation
    profile)
  • Lev-Weisel (2003) Perceived Community
    Cohesion
  • Van Brakel et al (2006) The Participation
    Scale
  • Gierveld and van Tilburg (2006) Loneliness
    scale
  • Lelieveldt (2004) Neighbourhood participation
  • Sibley et al (2006) Impact on participation
    and autonomy questionnaire


29
  • Issues
  • Are there any adequate existing measures? No
  • Are there any component measures? Possibly
  • No combined indicator subjective measures
  • Is a combined indicator desirable or possible?
  • Should we be looking at 6 measures, one indicator
    based and one perceived inclusion, for three
    major demographic groups?
  • Or one measure with a core and age specific
    modules?

30
Social inclusion Project

31
  • Question Structure within Domains
  • Opportunity of access to material
    resources/existence of rights (o)
  • Perceived access to resources/ perceived
    entitlements (s)
  • Participation /actual realisation of rights (o)
  • Perceived participation/perceived realisation of
    rights (s)
  • Choice/ improved or changed entitlements (s)

32
  • Participation
  • From the ESRC Health Variations Programme Survey
    and National Psychiatric Morbidity Survey
  • 80/100 feel leisure opportunities are restricted
    (cf 64)
  • 83/100 want a more active social life (cf 62)
  • 47/100 want to participate more fully in family
    activities (cf 28)
  • 56/100 not a member of community groups ( cf 47)
  • Satisfaction with leisure activity 3.7 (cf 4.3)
    (plt0.001)

33
  • From the ESRC Health Variations Programme Survey
    South Manchester
  • Access and participation
  • 5 employed compared to.. 61
  • 24 hour working week compared to.. 38 hours
  • 53 seen friend last week compared to. 80
  • 57 have a close friend compared to 95
  • 16 contact relatives less than monthly.3

34
Social inclusion Project

35
Social inclusion Project
  • Implications for Phase II
  • Indicators and questions
  • Best candidates European Social Survey ZUMA
    NPI/Rowntree
  • Perceived inclusion
  • Existing instruments?
  • Choice goals
  • Cognitive appraisal of questions
  • Age specific measures
  • Psychometric testing


36
Social inclusion Project
  • Psychometric Testing
  • Validity tests vs other measures
  • (eg participation scales Anglia-Ruskin measure)
  • Responsiveness over time
  • (service context where inclusion change is the
    objective eg arts programmes, MIND SW or Oxleas)
  • Beta-testing
  • Construct experiment using standard measures on
    same subjects (Priebe et al 1999)


37
Social inclusion Project
  • Potential international collaborations
  • Prof Robert Bland, Tasmania
  • Prof Sammy Chiu, Hong Kong
  • Prof Lih-Rong Wang, Taiwan
  • Prof Rick Beinecke, Boston
  • Prof Bill Healy, Melbourne
  • SCRENE (12 European States)


38
CSCR Centre for Social Carework
Research University of Wales Swansea Singleton
Park Swansea SA2 8PP P.J.Huxley_at_swansea.ac.uk S.E
vans_at_swansea.ac.uk C.M.Baker_at_swansea.ac.uk
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com