Older and wiser

Getting communities to define their own priorities for future research is essential. Jabeer Butt and Alex O’Neil describe their experience with BME older people.

An examination of some of the major funders of applied social research in the UK demonstrates the interest in impacting on policy and practice. One of the of the ESRC’s stated aims is “to advance knowledge and provide trained social scientists who meet the needs of users and beneficiaries, thereby contributing to the economic competitiveness of the United Kingdom, the effectiveness of public services and policy, and the quality of life.” The Department of Health similarly suggests that their Policy Research Programme “aims to help ensure that decision-making in the policy domain is informed by all available and robust scientific evidence.” It is likely that many social researchers, if asked, would also identify their desire to see their research findings bring about change or improvement.

But how readily we can show that research has actually led to change is a complex task, not least because the policy-making process, as well as the process of developing better practice, appears to be far from logical. It is often impossible to say that this finding led to that change. This difficulty of showing how research has made a difference is one aspect of the increasingly combative response from individuals and communities as to whether they are willing to be involved in research. It is in this context that the JRF commissioned the REU (formerly the Race Equality Unit at the National Institute for Social Work) to talk to black and minority ethnic older people about what should be the future priorities of the JRF’s work on older people.

A number of consultations were carried out with a diverse range of older people from BME communities in Leeds, Bristol and London. To ensure that we had informed discussions, REU staff summarised existing research about BME older people and presented this summary at each of the consultation events, often using facilitators with community language skills to ensure that all the older people were able to understand and participate in discussions.

The summary noted, that there were some limitations to existing research (such as the limited number of nationally representative studies). However, some points did emerge. These included: the significant growth in number of older people from BME communities; that becoming frail and requiring more support and care appeared to happen at a comparatively younger age within many of these communities; that they were more likely to face a greater level of poverty; that they were more likely to live in poorer quality housing which lacks basic amenities, and this may impact on their health; that the commonly held view that extended family will look after their "elders" may be a myth and certainly masks the level of true need; and that whilst there are common experiences across different communities, there is no universal experience common to them all.

The BME older people at the consultations agreed that these findings reflected what was known in their own areas. At the same time, however, there was some frustration that researchers still wanted to do yet more research about their lives. Older people felt a more urgent task was to use existing research to make a difference in terms of the support and care that they received. Many of the older people suggested that there was important work still to be done (with some identifying a particular priority in understanding why things were not changing). However, they reiterated that what was important was finding ways to apply current research into practice.

As part of this process of using research to change policy and practice, older people identified a number of key issues to be addressed. They recognised the significant support and care provided by black-led voluntary organisations and argued that investment in these providers should be increased. However, some felt that this was not enough, and that what was needed was change in the provision of mainstream services. Some of the changes in mainstream services were about ensuring that mainstream providers were able to communicate effectively with service users, particularly those whose first language was not English.

For some communities poverty was the central issue. There was a feeling that it was “their lot” to accept the poverty they had to face, but did not want their children or grandchildren to be in the same position. Benefit entitlement was often poorly understood, not available in appropriate languages, or there was no one to explain what was available and how they might apply for it. Action to combat the causes of poverty was highlighted.

Older people highlighted the need to challenge stereotypes about BME communities, in particular the notion that communities ‘looked after their own’. This sometimes was not practically possible as different generations were not living together or did not always share the same values. Regardless of whether families were ‘looking after their elders’, there was a suggestion that isolation and depression were particular concerns.

In all three consultation events, BME older people pointed out that they had much in common with white older people and often faced the same challenges. However, they were also keen to emphasise that there was diversity within BME communities too.

Talking to BME older people in Bristol, Leeds and London highlighted that the priorities for these older people were not necessarily about carrying out more research into needs and experiences; but it was about how research could be (and should be) used to bring about a more positive experience of support and care for them. There appeared to be lessons to be learnt from the support provided by black-led voluntary organisations who often appeared to be providing the type of support and care BME older people wanted. However, there was also a need to explore how change (or improvement) in mainstream provision could be achieved. The consequences of our finding are already being implemented by JRF and it hoped that they will be taken into consideration by other researchers as well.

A consequence of this has been that the JRF has commissioned an action research project that is working with six black-led voluntary organisations from across England to help them develop their monitoring and evaluation systems to better understand what it is that they do that works. Additionally, to use this experience to identify lessons for others on what works and why JRF has also supported the Shared Expectations, Shared Commitments project based at Sheffield University. The project is working with Chinese older people in four areas to identify standards that Chinese older people expect.

These consultations highlight the challenge to move beyond the traditional research agenda and to develop ideas in practice. At the same time there is a need to involve older people from BME communities in bringing about this shift. This will require funders, services and policy-makers to develop their own approaches (in involving BME older people; in sharing the setting of agendas; of supporting the development of exemplars of good practice) to achieve these ends. Whether directly or indirectly, social research impacts on policy and practice and it is essential that those being researched are the ones who identify their own priorities to ensure that the impact is as well informed and beneficial as possible.

The report, "Let's move on: Black and minority ethnic older people's views on research findings” is available from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation price £11.95. top