Table 1 Summary of completed peer research projects
Project | Round | Topic | Method(s) | Sampling | Peer researchers | Participants | Main findings | ToC component |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LC1 | 1 | Young resident’s experience of the area | Photovoice | n/a | 7 (young people) | 7 | Local identify & culture; close-knit families; lack of space; poor-quality housing; fly-tipping; social divisions based on language; places of unity; communal celebrations. | Context |
LC2 | 1 | Female resident’s experience of the area | Semi-structured interviews | Convenience | 8 (local women) | 16 (8 ‘older’, 8 ‘younger’) | Range of skills/interests/aspirations; common family pressure; improving situation for women; mental health stigma; low mental health literacy. | Context |
LC3 | 1 | Residents’ views of estate regeneration; community activity involvement | Survey | Convenience | 4 | 55 | Residents feel marginalised/ignored; improve current homes; fears of tenancy changes; dislike private housing; strong sense of belonging but low trust; fear of crime. | Context |
LC4 | 1 | Local experience of asset transfer | Semi-structured interviews | Convenience | 6 | 25 (managers, users, non-users) | Community assets important to physical and emotional wellbeing; Assets ‘dumped’ on community; necessary skills/knowledge in place; CAs to be more tailored to community; fear of future viability. | Context; mechanism of change |
LC5 | 2 | Value of local foodbank project; community activity involvement | Survey | Convenience | 4 | 26 | Information about service users; service highly valued; potential improvements; want to be involved in community activity; need to match people skills with roles. | Context; mechanism of change |
LC2 | 2 | Intergenerational relations; making community events more inclusive | Semi-structured interviews | Convenience | 9 | 25 (14 female, 11 male) | Poor intergenerational relationships; negative view of teenagers; desire for community events; using complimentary skills to bring people together. | Context; mechanism of change |
LC3 | 2 | Community activity involvement | Mixed-methods – survey + semi-structured interviews | Convenience | 5 | 5 interviews 42 surveys | Broad support for LC project; involving more people is good; multiple barriers to taking part (e.g. childcare, work); limited want to be more involved. | Context |
LC4 | 2 | Community activity involvement; access to local information | Survey | Convenience | 5 | 72 | Limited awareness of community activities/that activities are community led; barriers to taking part; reliance on word-of-mouth for information. | Context; mechanism of change |
LC1 | 3 | Social connection during ‘lockdown’; Access, use, preferences around digital | Structured interview | Random | 7 | 63 (60% under 39 years) | People feel connected enough; widespread access to smartphones and social media; not using email/video calls; mixed access to online services; widespread access to media from other countries; suggestions for a community TV channel. | Context; mechanism of change |
LC2 | 3 | Social connectedness and access to support/services during ‘lockdown’ | Structured interview/survey | Convenience | 7 | 22 (17 female, 5 male) | Isolating and negative experience; technology useful for maintaining contact but no substitute for in-person; widespread access to IT equipment and social media; limited use of video calls; older people more isolated; digital access requires skills/knowledge; training/support needed. | Context; mechanism of change |
LC5 | 3 | Experience of ‘lockdown’; social connectedness and access to support/services during ‘lockdown’; access, use, preferences around digital | Structured interview/survey | Convenience | 8 | 76 | Range of negative experiences through lockdown; Most personal circumstances unchanged; availability and quality of support largely unchanged; older people more frequently digitally excluded. | Context; mechanism of change |
LC6 | 3 | Social connectedness and access to support/services during ‘lockdown’ | Structured interview/survey | Convenience | 7 | 10 | Isolating and challenging experience; generally enough access to digital services/support; lack of skills and confidence cause of digital exclusion. | Context; mechanism of change |
LC7 | 3 | Experiences of ‘gatekeepers’ | Structured interview/survey | Convenience | 5 | 10 | Range of gatekeepers; some supportive, some challenging; range of barriers to collaboration; strategies for overcoming barriers. | Context; mechanism of change |
LP1 | 1 | Perceptions of the neighbourhood | Semi-structured interviews | Convenience | 4 | Unclear | People like living in the area; strong local bonds; newcomers take time to integrate; limited local resources; LP project beneficial for participants; range of barriers to taking part. | Context; mechanism of change |
LP2 | 1 | Accessibility of the beach/seafront | Mixed-methods – Semi-structured interviews + Feedback at community events + Desk research + photovoice | Convenience | 5 | Unclear number of interviews. Feedback from over 80 disabled people | Beach/seafront generally inaccessible; inadequate physical infrastructure; negative impacts individuals; multiple potential benefits of improved assess. | Context |
LP3 | 1 | Community activity involvement | Mixed-method – Survey + semi-structured interview | Convenience | Unclear | 73 survey, 16 interviews | Multiple barriers to participation; complex and dependent on circumstances; more opportunities needed but limited community resources. | Context; mechanism of change |
LP4 | 1 | Young resident’s experience of the area | Photovoice | n/a | 10 (young people) | 10 | Plentiful local assets; anti-social behaviour; lack of accessible facilities/places for young people; new youth activities are good; concerns about new housing developments. | Context |
LP5 | 1 | Community activity involvement | Semi-structured interviews | Convenience | 7 | 35 | Desire for more community activities; clearer information about what’s happening; multiple barriers to taking part. | Context; mechanism of change |