Rapid mixed-methods evaluation of two place-based financial resilience interventions across two London local authorities
No Thumbnail Available
Authors
Gemma Bridge
Professor Chris Flood
Professor Susie Sykes
Professor Patrick Callaghan
Apolonia Radomska
Gemma Bridge
Cameron Giles
Emily Aidoo
Sophia Looney
Nancy Breton
Contact
Check for full-text access
Issue Date
06-May-26
Type
Conference Abstract
Language
Keywords
Housing , Neighbourhood health & place-based working , Working with people and communities , Rapid evaluation , Economic inclusion
Alternative Title
Abstract
Background
Financial stress harms mental health, physical health, and housing stability. Local authorities invest in financial resilience services to reduce these harms, but evidence on health impact and value for money is limited. In Lambeth and Southwark, two organisations offer financial resilience services to support residents facing debt and housing insecurity. We conducted a rapid evaluation to assess health, social and economic impacts and understand how the services work in practice.
Objectives
We aimed to assess whether people who accepted support had better health and wellbeing outcomes than those who declined. We also aimed to understand delivery processes and explore cost-effectiveness to inform local decision-making.
Methods
In collaboration with Impact on Urban Health, Lambeth Health Determinants Research Collaborative colleagues and Lambeth Council commissioners, with input from public contributors, we undertook a mixed-methods evaluation. We conducted a quantitative online survey with people who accepted or declined support, measuring quality of life, mental health, physical health service use, housing stability, and social inclusion. We conducted semi-structured interviews with service users, staff and referrers to explore acceptability, engagement, inclusion, feasibility, sustainability and fidelity. We collected service use data and applied economic modelling to estimate costs, cost per outcome, and potential return on investment.
Results
Quantitative findings show that people who accepted support reported significantly fewer GP appointments and in-patient hospital stays than those who declined, suggesting positive health impacts. They also reported lower quality of life, higher psychological distress, and greater contact with the criminal justice system, suggesting the service is reaching those most in need. Early economic modelling suggests value for money, with potential reductions in wider public service use. Qualitative findings show that service users value flexible and personalised support. Trusted referral pathways increased engagement. Staff capacity and short-term funding limited sustainability.
Conclusion
Financial resilience services appeared to reach those most in need and may improve health outcomes. Delivery processes shaped who benefited and how sustainable the model could be. Early findings indicate potential economic value. Further longitudinal research is needed.
Discussion and learning for local authorities
Rapid mixed-methods evaluation can generate timely evidence for service planning. Place-based financial inclusion services can support health and reduce pressure on public services. Strong referral pathways and stable funding are key to impact. Embedding evaluation within routine delivery can strengthen commissioning decisions.