Search

Much attention has been given in recent years to involving community members in research within a number of fields including community development. Indeed, there is a large amount of literature outlining what this process involves and describes the benefits and problems of doing such research across a range of contexts. There has also been some discussion of the different approaches that can be applied under the umbrella of community-based research and their relationship to the outcomes associated with both successful and positive community development. Yet very little attention has been paid to the actual experiences of these lay researchers involved in community-based research in relation to their roles. The nature of the researcher's role as work thus requires critical consideration. This article examines the role of lay researchers within four different approaches to community-based research used for the development of community action plans within the Objective 1, South Yorkshire context. This article reports upon differential roles and types of work in relation to both experiences and outcomes. The article, therefore, addresses what these different researcher roles tell us about community-based research and outlines the implications in relation to community development. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This paper reports on the outcomes of the Community Health Apprentices Project, an intermediate labour market (ILM) project delivered in two neighbouring areas of Bradford, England. The project was illustrative of current UK policy in its attempt to both address unemployment and health inequalities. The aim of the paper is to improve understanding of the type and range of outcomes that can result from ILM projects based in the community health sector. A qualitative evaluation was undertaken and interviews were carried out with three groups of stakeholders: the community health apprentices, key informants in the placement organisations and the delivery partners. Findings show that both anticipated and unanticipated outcomes occurred in relation to increased skills for work, improved health and well-being and improved organisational capacity. While there are contextual factors which make this project unique, the findings illustrate the potential range of outcomes that can be achieved when social and emotional support is offered in tandem with work experience. The findings further highlight the organisational benefits of investing in local people to deliver community health work. The paper concludes that in order to build an evidence base for ILM approaches, a broader understanding of outcomes needs to be developed, taking into account social and health outcomes as well as economic indicators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]