Well London phase 1 evaluation findings (2007 – 2011) have been brought together in a synthesis report:
A peer-reviewed report of the non experimental evaluation components is also available:
Summary of Findings
The evaluation considered impact at several levels: individual ‘participant’ level, project level, programme level, community level and whole population wide level.
There was strong qualitative and some quantitative evidence of important positive impacts for local people who participated directly in the programme activities on a range of health and well-being indicators. This impact appeared to be greater for those local people who got involved in organising and delivering programme activities – a key feature of the Well London approach.
There were also promising findings relating to impact at project, programme and community levels.
There was little evidence of significant positive impact at the whole population level in phase 1, except for significant positive findings relating to reductions in unhealthy eating and people in the neighbourhood pulling together more (one of the social cohesion measures).
However areas where there were higher levels of exposure to the intervention showed some significantly better outcomes at the wider population level.
Overall, findings from the evaluation of phase 1 provide some encouraging evidence that the Well London framework works to improve the health and well-being of participants and potentially the wider population where higher levels of participation are achieved through the local programmes.
Phase 1 peer reviewed publications
We have listed a number of peer reviewed journals that have emerged from Well London in the table at the bottom of this page.
|Evaluation of community level interventions||+ More info||Download|
Research exploring the the effectiveness of interventions using a community development approach to improve health behaviours at a structural or ecological level is limited. Wall et al (2009) evaluated the Well London approach through a cluster randomised trial. This trial is potentially very useful in providing evidence of the types of intervention that can reduce poor health within disadvantaged communities.
|The influence of environmental factors on physical activity and generalisability of public health research||+ More info||Download|
Much of Public Health's investment in interventions is informed by research that has taken place in other areas outside of the area that is to be invested. Using physical activity as an example, Watts et al (2011) highlight some of the issues involved in adopting this approach. In their paper they present a framework to enable practitioners to consider the influence of environmental factors when assessing the generalisability of research to a particular place or location.
|Exposure to Well London and the association with health and well-being outcomes||+ More info||Download|
This paper describes the measures of exposure to Well London and examines its relationship between health, well-being and social outcomes.
|Barriers to community cohesion||+ More info||Download|
The notion of community and cohesion can have many meanings from a personal and policy context. Bertotti at al (2011) explore the discourses on community within the policy context at the time the study was conducted and compares it to the views of residents and how they construct their community. The study identifies young people as being a central element to community cohesion and makes recommendations to improve cohesion within communities.
|Benefits of participation in Well London - A qualitative study||+ More info||Download|
Residents who participated in Well London reported improvements in their health and well-being. Derges et al's (2014) study aimed to explore the nature of the benefits reported and the processes that were required in order to achieve these outcomes. There was an interaction between participation and, well-being the study also identified other factors that modulated benefits described by participants. Personal well-being and social cohesion emerged as important mediators of change.ere achieved.
|Phase 1 Well London - Results of a community engagement approach to improving health behaviours||+ More info||Download|
Phillips et al (2013) examined the data collected through Well London to establish whether the programme had an impact on health at a neighbourhood level. Their study found evidence of lower unhealthy eating scores and higher proportions of residents agreeing that their community pulled together within Well London areas. The study also discusses some of the reasons why it was unable to detect changes at a population level.