4858 Mental Health Report - National University of Ireland, Galway

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Collaborative Practice and Policy Practice This work allows people to focus more specifically on mental health as a pure concept. Cross-border work is a wonderful learning opportunity with beneficial parallel developments. Mental health promotion needs to establish a network of interested parties. Three things are needed to develop understanding of mental health promotion on a cross-border basis: 1. Supportive training. 2. Research and policy infrastructures. 3. Sustainability of initiatives at a service level. • What are the current barriers to effective cross border collaboration The following themes emerged in response to this question: Organisations and partnerships Projects can be above and beyond the core business of the organisations supporting them. It takes time to build trust and there is more work needed around partnership. Collaboration is not at the higher levels of government in that it is not ingrained in collaborative health policy. The question ‘Who takes the lead and who controls’ was raised. In any partnership there is a need to draw funding, so someone needs to be the lead partner. Furthermore, there is not always equity of resources and this may bring about animosity or negativity from one or both sets of partners. Evidence and information Many groups felt that there is not a standard approach or view on health promotion with regard to where it begins or ends, nor are there standardised data collection methods. Furthermore, we do not know what works and what does not work. There does not appear to be a central agency/point/database for identifying what collaborative projects are out there. While the impetus of crossborder working is relatively new, it is already becoming fragmented. While a number of cross-border bodies which work on promoting cross-border health now exist, the responsibilities of each unit are unclear and we need to pull this together on a cross-border basis. Many felt that there is a lack of information for potential partners with regard to resources and sustainability, and this can be coupled with the fear of the unknown and questions such as ‘If you get in, can you get out’ Practical Barriers A number of practical barriers to cross-border working were identified within the groups. These were: • The use of the term ‘cross-border’ can act as an impediment to progress as it highlights differences and segregation by 65
Collaborative Practice and Policy the border. The language used needs to reflect co-operative working and the sharing of common issues such as a shared focus on health. • Geographical barriers. It is typical to have two bases for cross-border projects: one in the North and one in the South. • Political and legal barriers resulting from two different jurisdictions. • Different currencies. • Different structures between the North and South with regard to professional training. • Time barriers and constraints. Projects are often extra to an already heavy workload. Working at partnership also takes time. Geographical distance also means that travelling for meetings takes a lot of time. Also it takes time to see the actual benefits of a project. • Cultural differences between both jurisdictions. • Political extremists and organised crime may be a barrier in communities. Other barriers mentioned were the lack of accountability built into projects. As this is not done at the moment, it makes the project more difficult to control. As projects take off and this type of working becomes more effective, it will not be unusual to work on a cross-border basis. An example of this was the Folic Acid campaign which was run on a North-South basis. This was very successful and people look at this as a model for how to run their own projects. However there is a lack of evaluation and this is a problem. Barriers need to be identified or recognised before a project commences. We should realise that cross-border working is not the answer to all ills. One group felt that ‘barriers can be used as opportunities.’ • How do we evaluate this collaboration Responses to this question were categorised as follows: Need for evaluation Most respondents felt that evaluation was an area that is in need of greater attention and many acknowledged there were difficulties in currently evaluating this collaboration. One of the reasons put forward by the groups for this difficulty is that there is no agreement on or standardisation of the type of evidence to be gained, and this makes evaluation difficult. Evaluation of partnership/collaborative practice It was felt that the partnership/relationships needed to be evaluated along with the outcomes. Currently there is a lack of evaluation of the process of working together. Something needs to be done to formalise North-South co-operation at the organisational level. One group suggested a template should be developed for best practice in working together which draws on current experience. Thus a standardised approach could be developed with broader parameters than mental health promotion. 66
Page 1 and 2:
A Report for the Centre For Cross B
Page 3 and 4:
About the Authors Dr. Margaret Barr
Page 5 and 6:
Acknowledgements We would like to t
Page 7 and 8:
Introductory comments by the Depart
Page 10 and 11:
Background and Rationale 1 There is
Page 12 and 13:
Background and Rationale of mental
Page 14 and 15:
Background and Rationale underlined
Page 16 and 17: Background and Rationale • Produc
Page 18 and 19: Project Aims and Objectives 2 This
Page 20 and 21: Methodology 3 Phase 1: Methodology
Page 22 and 23: Methodology semi-structured intervi
Page 24 and 25: Methodology Methods for Review and
Page 26 and 27: Methodology Lifestyle risk factors
Page 28 and 29: Methodology • To identify the str
Page 30 and 31: Findings from the Investigation of
Page 62: Findings from the Investigation of
Page 65: Collaborative Practice and Policy
Page 69 and 70: Collaborative Practice and Policy o
Page 71 and 72: Collaborative Practice and Policy R
Page 73 and 74: Collaborative Practice and Policy c
Page 75 and 76: Collaborative Practice and Policy T
Page 79 and 80: Collaborative Practice and Policy B
Page 81 and 82: Collaborative Practice and Policy f
Page 83 and 84: Collaborative Practice and Policy A
Page 85 and 86: Collaborative Practice and Policy O
Page 87 and 88: Collaborative Practice and Policy T
Page 91 and 92: Collaborative Practice and Policy A
Page 93 and 94: Collaborative Practice and Policy W
Page 96 and 97: Findings from the Compatibility and
Page 116 and 117:
Findings from the Compatibility and
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Conclusions and Recommendations 7 G
Page 126 and 127:
Conclusions and Recommendations Dat
Page 128 and 129:
Conclusions and Recommendations The
Page 130 and 131:
Conclusions and Recommendations pos
Page 132 and 133:
Conclusions and Recommendations are
Page 134 and 135:
References Adult Mental Health Serv
Page 136 and 137:
References Department of Health and
Page 138 and 139:
References Health Education Board f
Page 140 and 141:
References Layte, R., Jenkinson, C.
Page 142 and 143:
References Sindall, C. (1997) Inter
Page 144 and 145:
Promoting Positive Mental Health: C
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Promoting Positive Mental Health an
Page 156 and 157:
Promoting Positive Mental Health an
Page 158 and 159:
Organisations which contributed to
Page 160 and 161:
159
Page 162:
The Centre for Cross Border Studies
show all

4858 Mental Health Report - National University of Ireland, Galway

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?