Recovery College influences upon service users: a Recovery Academy exploration of employment and service use
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JMHTEP-06-2018-0038 |
| Published date | 13 May 2019 |
| Date | 13 May 2019 |
| Pages | 141-148 |
| Author | Rebecca Sutton,Kate Lawrence,Elisabeth Zabel,Paul French |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Mental health,Mental health education |
Recovery College influences upon service
users: a Recovery Academy exploration of
employment and service use
Rebecca Sutton, Kate Lawrence, Elisabeth Zabel and Paul French
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to provide an exploration of Recovery Academy influences upon
employment and service use amongst individuals with lived experience of mental health difficulties.
Design/methodology/approach –The study utilised a questionnaire design over a nine-month period.
Participants’baseline and follow-up data were analysed to explore the influence of course attendance upon
employment and service use.
Findings –At follow-up, there was a significant association between participants attending Recovery
Academy coursesand paid or self-employment (po0.05). However,there were also no significant differences
in service use over timebetween those who attended courses andthose who did not attend any courses.
Research limitations/implications –Further research is required to explore the cost-effectiveness of the
Recovery Academy. As participants were all enroled onto the Recovery Academy findings may not be
generalisable to other Recovery Colleges. There is a need for more robust research such as a randomised
controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate multiple Recovery Colleges and establish definitive conclusions as to their
economic implications.
Social implications –There may be value in the Recovery Academy as a gateway to employment, speaking
to the transformative powers of Recovery Colleges. The Recovery Academy may serve as a vehicle to
support service users to obtain paid or self-employment, and thus promote community reintegration.
Originality/value –This paper offers an important contribution to the Recovery College literature, which
remains limited in evaluative evidence, particularly regarding associated economic factors, such as
employment and service use.
Keywords Employment, Evaluation, Recovery College, Service use, Recovery, Recovery outcomes
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Recovery refers to a process of discovery whereby individuals’build personally meaningful lives
which are not bound by mental health symptoms (Shepherd et al., 2008). For services to better
assist individuals in achieving recovery outcomes, ten key organisational challenges have been
identified which need to be addressed (Boardman and Shepherd, 2009; Shepherd et al., 2010).
One such challenge outlines the establishment of a “Recovery College”to drive organisational
change (Perkins et al., 2012). A defining feature of Recovery Colleges are that they are open to
everyone including health professionals, service users, carers and family member or friends
(Perkins et al., 2012). Recovery Colleges adopt an educational paradigm enabling those who
attend courses to develop skills which aid recovery and self-management (Perkins et al., 2012).
Courses also combine the expertise of lived experience with professional training through
co-production and co-facilitation. This emphasis on collaboration serves to promote shared
learning and thereby challenge social exclusion (Perkins et al., 2012).
The literature surrounding Recovery Colleges has shown promising results regarding their ability
to support recovery amongst service users (Meddings et al., 2015; Rinaldi and Wybourn, 2011;
Received 29 June 2018
Accepted 18 December 2018
The authors would like to thank
previous service user students and
the Psychosis Research Unit’s
Service User Reference Group
(SURG) for providing their
expertise during research
conception and for their guidance
throughout the study. The authors
also thank course administrators
at the Recovery Academy for
raising awareness of the research
study to support study
recruitment. The authors gratefully
acknowledge advice and
contributions received from
Professor Richard Emsley which
supported data analysis. The
current study was internally funded
utilising existing resources at the
Psychosis Research Unit within
GMMH. No declarations of interest
are reported by the authors of
this paper.
Rebecca Sutton,
Kate Lawrence and Elisabeth
Zabel are all based at
Psychosis Research Unit,
Greater Manchester Mental
Health NHS Foundation Trust,
Manchester, UK.
Paul French is based at Greater
Manchester MentalHealth NHS
Foundation Trust,
Psychosis Research Unit,
Prestwich, UK and
Institute of Psychology,
Healthand Society, University of
Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
DOI 10.1108/JMHTEP-06-2018-0038 VOL. 14 NO. 3 2019, pp. 141-148, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1755-6228
j
THE JOURNAL OF MENTALHEALTH TRAINING, EDUCATION AND PRACTICE
j
PAGE141
To continue reading
Request your trial