Project Start and End Date 01/ /2019 Kommentar [aa1]: data on website flyer says: > Please note which one is correct. Thanks.

Transcription

1 THRIVE JPI MYBL FIRST TRANSNATIONAL CALL (JTC 2015) Progress Dialogue Form The aim of the Progress Dialogue is on the one hand to support the projects regarding outreach and stakeholder involvement, and on the other hand to inform JPI MYBL about the progress of the projects. At the same time the dialogue is meant to contribute to the learning process of JPI MYBL when it comes to promoting and supporting policy oriented research. Period duration Start of project until filling the template 01/ /2018 (sent to Call Secretariat on ) Name of Project THRIVE - Tackling Health Inequalities and Extending Working Lives PI / Coordinator Margaret Whitehead Project Start and End Date 01/ /2019 Project Funding million Euros Countries Involved UK, Sweden, Denmark, Canada Kommentar [aa1]: data on website flyer says: > Please note which one is correct. Thanks. 1. Please provide an EXECUTIVE SUMMARY for the above mentioned project period intended for publication by JPI MYBL and co-funders (250 words max): (in non-specialist language). THRIVE (Tackling health inequalities and extending working lives) brings together leaders in health inequalities and employment research from the UK, Canada, Sweden and Denmark. In each of these countries policymakers are facing particular challenges related to rising life expectancy, a shift in the age profile of the population and the consequent increase in the prevalence of chronic illness and disability. But these increases in life expectancy are not experienced equally - there are inequalities that are frequently overlooked in policy-making. Less skilled workers, for example, have a shorter life expectancy, earlier onset of chronic illness and disability, are more likely to suffer from multiple health conditions as they get older. Policymakers in Europe and Canada urgently need to develop strategies that fairly extend working life taking these health inequalities into account. Our aim is therefore to conduct international research that advances our understanding of the differential impacts of health inequalities on the opportunity to work later in life and of strategies and policies for extending working life that take these health inequalities into consideration. 2. PROGRESS AGAINST OBJECTIVES - (500 words max): Please explain progress against objectives for the project duration until today. We ask to include: Progress against each work package or work strand and, Progress against your investments overall objectives and aims. Please also include comments on deviations from the original project plan as well as comments on tasks that were planned but not completed or tasks that were completed although they were not planned. Work package 1 (international comparison of the changing pattern of longstanding illness, comorbidity and caring across the life course into old age, the employment consequences of this pattern and how this varies by SES, gender, country and cohort): Data have been prepared for analysis in all study countries. A comparative analysis of patterns of morbidity and comorbidity across study countries is underway. Analysis is also taking place in all study countries assessing the impact of different patterns of morbidity and comorbidity on employment at older ages. Additional unplanned analysis is also being conducted to investigate the role of changing welfare

2 benefit provision in preventing poverty at older ages in the UK and Canada. Work package 2 (comparative equity focused policy analysis to develop a typology and case studies of international policies): This work package has 3 components: scoping review; developing typologies; and, case studies and logic models. Scoping reviews have been completed for each country and results are being fed into work packages 1 and 3. Work package 3 (systematic reviews assessing the differential impact of policies to extend the working lives for older people with longstanding illness). The initial plan was to include reviews of both the quantitative and qualitative literature. Initial searches identified insufficient qualitative evidence to enable a systematic review of the qualitative literature. The reviews are therefore focusing on quantitative evaluative literature. 3 systematic reviews are current underway: 1. The differential effects of return-to-work policies targeting older disabled workers by SES. 2. The differential effects on the employment of older workers of changes to disability benefits, by SES. 3. The differential effects on the employment of disabled older workers of wage subsidies. Literature searches for these reviews have been completed and papers are currently being screened against inclusion criteria. Work package 4 (syntheses, scenario analysis, and policy implications) will synthesise the results from work packages 1, 2, and 3. Workshops with policy makers are being planned in all study countries during 2018, and appropriate policy makers and other stakeholders have been identified, for engagement in these. 3. HIGHLIGHTS AND IMPACT (500 words max): Please highlight the most successful or promising work in your view from the past project duration. Please provide examples of the impact (nature and scale) that your project is having on intended users (policy makers, front line practitioners, other investments, scholarly communities) or discuss potential impact and how to achieve it. Our research on the impact of changing patterns of multi-morbidity on employment has generated considerable interest from national level policy making communities in the UK, including the national government s Department of Work and Pensions and Department of Health and Social Care. We believe this to be a promising aspect of our research and we are continuing to engage with both national and local policy makers to ensure that the research is relevant to the needs of policy makers. The research is also generating important findings for the academic community and we have identified relevant outlets for all upcoming publications. We will engage with the nonacademic community via publicly focused blog posts and will produce a non-technical report detailing the findings from the research. 4. STAKEHOLDERS Please give details of stakeholders currently engaged with the project or on project advisory boards, like how and when you involve stakeholders, how easy is it to engage them, and what the stakeholder s views and contributions are on your project. Team members in all study countries have strong relationships with policy makers at both the local and national levels. THRIVE researchers were involved in a roundtable discussion with the UK, Department for Work and Pensions, in February 2017, providing input from the THRIVE research into the consultation on the Government s new policy Improving Lives reducing the disability

3 employment gap. In March 2017 THRIVE researchers were involved with the Centre for Better Aging, presenting findings from the THRIVE project to policy makers and practitioners from the UK s Department for Education, Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), and the joint Work and Health Unit (supported jointly by the DWP and the Department of Health and Social Care). In the UK a workshop was run in November 2017 (London) with analysts at the Joint Work and Health unit, a governmental group jointly funded by the UK Department for Work and Pensions and the Department of Health. This was focused on presenting THRIVE S initial multi-morbidity analysis, informing future analysis and coordinating technical aspects of the work. The UK team are members of the Social Security Commission of the UK Labour Party and have presented evidence from the THRIVE project MPs at the UK Parliament in October 2017, informing the future policy of the Labour party in relation to return to work support for older workers with disabilities. A further workshop was run with the UK Department of Health in January 2018, where initial results were presented and policy makers were involved in informing the direction of the final analysis. Our research on the impact of changing patterns of multi-morbidity on employment has particularly generated considerable interest with each of these stakeholders. 5. NETWORKING Please give details of networking activities e.g. workshops or conferences attended, invited talks, requests for information from stakeholders. The UK team have met with the Work and Health Unit, which is jointly sponsored by the UK Government Department of Health and Social Care and the Department for Work and Pensions, in order to discuss shared interests and aims specifically related to the work of THRIVE. Two meetings occurred in Members of the Work and Health Unit have committed to attend a workshop with other stakeholders in Cooperation with the Work and Health Unit is ongoing over this period. In early 2018 we also presented work at the Department for Health about the ongoing research of THRIVE and agreed to engage in further discussions about the research. The Swedish team will be holding a policy forum in 2018 which will include key policy makers, union representatives and politicians in order to discuss results and shared interests. Both the Canadian and Danish teams are planning similar workshops to occur in Team members attended the European Public Health Conference in 2017 presenting a paper and a poster. 6. DETAILS ABOUT THE PROJECT COLLABORATION Are the collaborations in this project new or were these existing collaborations? How do you involve the academic partners and stakeholders in the project? The academic partnership between all institutions is based on pre-existing relationships. Meetings are regularly held between all team members and a workshop is held on a yearly basis

4 at one of the partner institutions. Team members who are working on specific aspects of the project are in contact on a more regular ad hoc basis. Other stakeholders will be invited to workshops in each of the partner countries. We have also visited policy makers in order to discuss shared interests and findings related to THRIVE. 7. COLLABORATION WITH OTHER PROJECTS Please describe actual and intended collaborations with other JPI/EU/national funded investments. The THRIVE project has been actively collaborating with a number of other funded including: The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Public Health Research, UK (collaboration involving 8 academic institutions around England). NIHR Public Health Research Consortium, UK (collaboration of 11 academic institutions in England and Scotland specialising in research to inform policy). Wellcome Fellowship - The impact of policies that aim to reduce child poverty on child and maternal mental health and health inequalities. NIHR North West Coast Collaboration for Leadership for Applied Health Research and Care (a collaboration of 9 local government authorities, 15 National Health Service primary and secondary care organisations, and 3 universities in North West England). These collaborations have involved sharing of expertise and infrastructure for data analytics and developing common methods for investigating the impact of policy on employment and poverty of people, with disabilities across the life course. 8. COLLABORATION WITH OTHER JTC 2015 PROJECTS Please describe connections, bilateral meetings, knowledge exchange etc. with the other four JTC 2015 projects. 29/11/2016 participation in JPI MYBL networking meeting, Rome. 30/3/2017 participation in JPI MYBL networking event, London. 9. COMMUNICATION OF OUTPUTS Please list any papers, case studies, project factsheets, policy briefs, that have been generated by the project. A paper investigating the differences between study countries in working beyond the retirement age is currently under review in a peer-reviewed journal. Policy Brief for the Social Security Commission of the UK labour party. Book chapter - The rise and fall of income replacement disability benefit receipt in the United Kingdom: What are the consequences of reforms? A blog post examining the disability poverty gap was published at Better Health for All, which is run by the Faculty of Public Health a UK professional body for Public Health practitioners. 10. ADDED VALUE OF THE JPI MYBL FUNDING What has this funding enabled that was not possible through national or other EU funding schemes? The JPI MYBL funding has particularly enabled greater collaboration with partners in Canada,

5 which would not have been possible with national or other EU funding. This has included the consortium enabling a member of the Swedish team to spend 6 months on a placement at the Institute for Work and Health to support joint working across the collaboration. All members of the consortium had worked together previously apart from the Institute for Work and Health, Toronto, Canada. This JPI MYBL therefore helped to expand previous collaborations, which brought in some specific additional expertise particularly strengthening the research output and impact. 11. JPI MYBL CALLS Please provide any feedback from your experience as a JPI MYBL funded project that could help in developing and running future JPI MYBL calls. The JPI MYBL has provided opportunities for developing new collaborations and enabled international comparative research supporting action on an important public policy issue. 12. AWARENESS OF JPI MYBL Please provide details to the following questions: Which members of the consortium were aware of the JPI prior to the first call? How did you find out about the First Call? All members of the consortium were aware of the JPI MYBL through publicity about funding opportunities during the First Call. No members were aware of the initiative before the official call. Contact: 1 st Call Secretariat of JPI MYBL at VDI/VDE Innovation + Technik GmbH: Annette Angermann, Phone: , annette.angermann@vdivde-it.de