The flyer for the phase, here.
So far, I have undertaken the first phase of the research that involved planning four public consultations with the African and Caribbean community. This series of open public consultations attracted over 65 participants aged between 18 and 75 over the four weeks. The participants were engaged in activities that enabled them to use their daily living experiences to explore how useful and relevant the presented public national health information was to enable them to improve health outcomes.
Weeks two and three included a presentation from two gatekeepers (Maqsood Ahmad, Strategic Clinical Network Senior Manager and National Director for CCG MH Leadership Programme and Rona Daniels, Consultant in Health Improvement, Public Health England) who worked within the management of government statutory organisations to identify important health information in the prevention of CVD related diseases. The analysis from phase 1 has so far identified a number of factors contributing to the prevalence and sustainability of poor health in the African and Caribbean community.
The feedback from phase 1 (which will be unpacked further in phase 2 of the focus group sessions) highlighted that
- The community needs are judged and formed by the implicit biases of gatekeepers.
- Individuals do not feel valued as the research and policy agenda is not inclusive of their needs. They believe that their health is de-prioritised. This results in poor engagement with services.
- The community feel disempowered and that power and control remain in the hands of the gatekeepers to large public and voluntary organisations. This is evident in the seed-corn funding they receive which does not enable sustainable service provision to meet the needs of their community.
- That there is a lack of value attached to the cultural needs of the African and Caribbean Community and that this is about identities of the health seeker seen through the eyes of the gatekeepers.
Overall, the group echoed repeatedly the direct impact upon their health outcomes in terms of the level of poor culturally insensitive health care provision and the inadequate health prevention guidance that they receive.
One participant states that “only the powerful can make a universal assumption and legitimise it and impose their views and decisions on the less powerful”.