International Evidence on the Impact of Health-Justice Partnerships: A Systematic Scoping Review

Justice in Health? Studying the Role of Legal Support in a Culturally Responsive Mental Health Service in Australia

Health Justice Partnerships (HJPs) are collaborations across law, health, and social care seeking more equitable health outcomes. This article aims to explore an HJP embedded within a culturally responsive mental health service in Australia for people who are culturally and racially marginalized (CARM). We draw on data produced for an evaluation of this service between August and November 2022 to conduct a reflexive thematic analysis. Thinking conceptually with the social determinants of health and intersectionality operationalized as structural, political, and representational, we present findings from individual and group interviews with 16 service users and 37 service providers. First, we describe the variety of legal issues service providers and service users encounter and how they affect opportunities for good health. Second, we provide insights into how care coordination across practitioners from different sectors and professions takes place to support service users. Third, we identify service principles and values that inform practices of integrated and culturally responsive care. We tie these insights together to demonstrate how multiple social categories flow together in the experiences of people from CARM communities in Western, White normative, and/or settler colonial societies. People confront built-in legal issues, for example, related to immigration legal status, welfare, housing, employment, or family, that affect mental health. Health, legal, and social systems have the dual capacity to capture people from CARM backgrounds in relations of care as well as oppression. We offer methodological reflections on studying these dynamics through culturally responsive qualitative research and discuss implications for culturally responsive HJP practice.

Health Justice Partnership: An Opportunity to Respond to Childhood Adversity

Background

Health justice partnerships (HJP) embed legal support into health care teams to address patient unmet legal needs. Families experiencing adversity are likely to have multiple legal needs yet are unlikely to seek legal assistance. Implementing a HJP within an integrated health and social care hub may improve outcomes for families by addressing adversity related to unmet legal need.

Methods

A mixed-method evaluation of new HJPs was conducted across two sites in Australia. Process data were collected regarding the use of the legal services. Qualitative data explored the experience of legal support.

Results

Forty caregivers were referred across two sites with 38 seen over the first 12 months. Caregivers had an average 2.5 legal issues each; 65% of referrals were for family violence and family law matters, 31% were for civil law matters and 4% were for criminal matters. Qualitative data demonstrated the value of HJP to increase practitioner confidence and understanding of legal support pathways while empowering caregivers to access legal support.

Conclusions

These HJPs improved access to legal support for families experiencing adversity and enabled early intervention. Improved outcomes from HJP depends upon the level of investment from each partner and the level of assistance the HJP can provide.

Effects of UK hostile environment policies on maternity care for refugees, asylum seekers, and undocumented migrants in Camden: Examining the experiences of healthcare professionals and community organisations

Background

The London borough of Camden has long been home for many refugees, asylum seekers, and undocumented migrants (RASUs). Over time, it has witnessed an increase in the population of these migrant groups, accompanied by notable changes in the obstacles they encounter when seeking health services, particularly maternity care. We explore how the 'hostile environment' policies affect access to and delivery of quality maternity services for RASUs.

Methods

This study was conducted over eight months (November 2021-July 2022) both remotely and face-to-face, in various locations in Camden and in the Maternity Department at University College London Hospital, UK. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) and community organisations (COs) were identified as two major stakeholders involved in the care provision for RASUs. 33 semi-structured interviews were conducted (with 22 HCPs and 11 COs) to understand their experiences of delivering care to this population.

Results

There was consensus among HCPs and COs that the current immigration policies undermined their duty of care, personal morals, and the principles of the NHS. These policies have created a restrictive environment, making it increasingly difficult for migrants to navigate the healthcare system and creating an atmosphere of distrust, propagating fears of being charged. This has led to HCPs and COs going beyond their remits to ensure that RASUs are accessing and engaging with maternity care, regardless of an individual's status and despite any potential repercussions for themselves.

Conclusion

In the face of an intensifying hostile environment under the UK government, supporting RASUs cannot be solely reliant on political measures. We need to advocate for healthcare navigator roles, health justice partnerships, specialist teams, and comprehensive training for service providers. HCPs and COs should be adequately supported in their endeavours to ensure RASUs have access to standardised, high-quality maternity care.

Integration of medical legal services into a hospital-based violence intervention program: A survey and interview-based provider needs assessment

BACKGROUND

Violent injury among trauma surgery patients is strongly associated with exposure to harmful social determinants of health and negative long-term health outcomes. Medical-legal partnerships in other settings successfully provide patients with legal services to address similar health-harming legal needs and may offer a promising model for the care of violently injured patients.

STUDY DESIGN

An electronic survey tool was distributed to clinicians and staff affiliated with the hospital-based violence intervention program at a single urban level one trauma center. Semistructured follow-up interviews were conducted with participants, and interviews were coded using thematic analysis and grounded theory.

RESULTS

Participants reported many health-harming legal needs among their violently injured patients. The most commonly identified needs were: health insurance denials (62.5%); difficulty accessing crime victims compensation funds (56.3%); trouble accessing official documents (50%); and problems with non-SSDI public benefits (50%). Participants reported inconsistent methods for learning about and responding to patients' health-harming legal needs. The most common barriers to addressing these needs included the following: lack of awareness that a lawyer could help with the issue (68.8%); prioritization of other needs (68.8%); previous negative legal experiences (62.5%); and cost (62.5%). Identified needs encompass issues traditionally addressed by MLPs as well as more novel challenges faced by violent injury survivors.

CONCLUSION

This survey and interview-based study identifies complex health-harming legal needs present among violently injured trauma surgery patients. Medical-legal partnerships specially designed for the setting of violent injury appear well-suited to meet these needs, potentially reducing risk of violent reinjury, long-term negative health outcomes, and health care system costs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

Legal Services for Veterans (LSV): Protocol for evaluating the grant-based LSV initiative supporting community organizations' delivery of legal services to veterans

BACKGROUND

1.8 million Veterans are estimated to need legal services, such as for housing eviction prevention, discharge upgrades, and state and federal Veterans benefits. While having one's legal needs met is known to improve one's health and its social determinants, many Veterans' legal needs remain unmet. Public Law 116-315 enacted in 2021 authorizes VA to fund legal services for Veterans (LSV) by awarding grants to legal service providers including nonprofit organizations and law schools' legal assistance programs. This congressionally mandated LSV initiative will award grants to about 75 competitively selected entities providing legal services. This paper describes the protocol for evaluating the initiative. The evaluation will fulfill congressional reporting requirements, and inform continued implementation and sustainment of LSV over time.

METHODS

Our protocol calls for a prospective, mixed-methods observational study with a repeated measures design, aligning to the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance (RE-AIM) and Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) frameworks. In 2023, competitively selected legal services-providing organizations will be awarded grants to implement LSV. The primary outcome will be the number of Veterans served by LSV in the 12 months after the awarding of the grant. The evaluation has three Aims. Aim 1 will focus on measuring primary and secondary LSV implementation outcomes aligned to RE-AIM. Aim 2 will apply the mixed quantitative-qualitative Matrixed Multiple Case Study method to identify patterns in implementation barriers, enablers, and other i-PARIHS-aligned factors that relate to observed outcomes. Aim 3 involves a mixed-methods economic evaluation to understand the costs and benefits of LSV implementation.

DISCUSSION

The LSV initiative is a new program that VA is implementing to help Veterans who need legal assistance. To optimize ongoing and future implementation of this program, it is important to rigorously evaluate LSV's outcomes, barriers and enablers, and costs and benefits. We have outlined the protocol for such an evaluation, which will lead to recommending strategies and resource allocation for VA's LSV implementation.

How co-locating public mental health interventions in community settings impacts mental health and health inequalities: a multi-site realist evaluation

BACKGROUND

Public mental health interventions are non-clinical services that aim to promote wellbeing and prevent mental ill health at the population level. In England, the health, social and community system is characterised by complex and fragmented inter-sectoral relationships. To overcome this, there has been an expansion in co-locating public mental health services within clinical settings, the focus of prior research. This study evaluates how co-location in community-based settings can support adult mental health and reduce health inequalities.

METHODS

A qualitative multi-site case study design using a realist evaluation approach was employed. Data collection took place in three phases: theory gleaning, parallel testing and refining of theories, and theory consolidation. We collected data from service users (n = 32), service providers (n = 32), funders, commissioners, and policy makers (n = 11), and members of the public (n = 10). We conducted in-depth interviews (n = 65) and four focus group discussions (n = 20) at six case study sites across England, UK, and two online multi-stakeholder workshops (n = 20). Interview guides followed realist-informed open-ended questions, adapted for each phase. The realist analysis used an iterative, inductive, and deductive data analysis approach to identify the underlying mechanisms for how community co-location affects public mental health outcomes, who this works best for, and understand the contexts in which co-location operates.

RESULTS

Five overarching co-location theories were elicited and supported. Co-located services: (1) improved provision of holistic and person-centred support; (2) reduced stigma by creating non-judgemental environments that were not associated with clinical or mental health services; (3) delivered services in psychologically safe environments by creating a culture of empathy, friendliness and trust where people felt they were being treated with dignity and respect; (4) helped to overcome barriers to accessibility by making service access less costly and more time efficient, and (5) enhance the sustainability of services through better pooling of resources.

CONCLUSION

Co-locating public mental health services within communities impacts multiple social determinants of poor mental health. It has a role in reducing mental health inequalities by helping those least likely to access services. Operating practices that engender inter-service trust and resource-sharing are likely to support sustainability.

Health economics of health justice partnerships: A rapid review of the economic returns to society of promoting access to legal advice

Background

Welfare legal problems and inadequate access to support services follow both the socioeconomic and the health inequalities gradients. Health Justice Partnership (HJP) is an international practitioner-led movement which brings together legal and healthcare professionals to address the root causes of ill health from negative social determinants. The aim of this paper was to identify the current evidence base for the cost-effectiveness of HJP or comparable welfare advice services.

Methods

A rapid review format was used, with a literature search of PubMed, CINAHL, ASSIA, PsycINFO, Medline, Cochrane Library, Global Health and Web of Science identifying 496 articles. After removal of duplicates, 176 papers were screened on titles and abstracts, and 20 papers met the eligibility criteria. Following a full-text screening, a further 14 papers were excluded due to lack of economic evaluations. Excluded papers' reference lists were scanned, with a further 3 further papers identified which met the inclusion criteria. A final pool of nine studies were included in this review.

Results

Studies focused on the financial benefit to service users, with only three studies reporting on cost effectiveness of the interventions. Only one study reported on the economic impact of change of health in service users and one study reported on changes in health service use.

Conclusion

This review highlights the current evidence gap in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of adequate access to free legal welfare advice and representation. We propose that an interdisciplinary research agenda between health economics and legal-health services is required to address this research gap.

Maximising the health impacts of free advice services in the UK: A mixed methods systematic review

After a decade of austerity spending cuts and welfare reform, the COVID-19 pandemic has posed further challenges to the finances, health and wellbeing of working-age, low-income people. While advice services have been widely seen (and funded) as an income maximisation intervention, their health and well-being impact is less clear. Previous systematic reviews investigating the link between advice services and health outcomes have found a weak evidence base and cover the period up until 2010. This mixed methods review examined up to date evidence to help understand the health impacts of free and independent welfare rights advice services. We included evaluations of free to access advice services on social welfare issues for members of the public that included health outcomes. Through comprehensive searches of two bibliographic databases and websites of relevant organisations we identified 15 articles based on a mixture of study designs. The advice interventions evaluated were based in a range of settings and only limited information was available on the delivery and nature of advice offered. We undertook a convergent synthesis to analyse data on the effectiveness of advice services on health outcomes and to explain variation in these outcomes. Our synthesis suggested that improvements in mental health and well-being measures are commonly attributed to advice service interventions. However, there is little insight to explain these impacts or to inform the delivery of services that maximise health benefits. Co-locating services in health settings appears promising and embracing models of delivery that promote collaboration between organisations tackling the social determinants of health may help to address the inherent complexities in the delivery of advice services and client needs. We make recommendations to improve routine monitoring and reporting by advice services, and methods of evaluation that will better account for complexity and context.