» Articles » PMID: 36905435

Evidence-based Recovery Colleges: Developing a Typology Based on Organisational Characteristics, Fidelity and Funding

Abstract

Purpose: Recovery Colleges (RCs) have been implemented across England with wide variation in organisational characteristics. The purpose of this study is to describe RCs across England in terms of organisational and student characteristics, fidelity and annual spending, to generate a RC typology based on characteristics and to explore the relationship between characteristics and fidelity.

Methods: All RC in England meeting criteria on recovery orientation, coproduction and adult learning were included. Managers completed a survey capturing characteristics, fidelity and budget. Hierarchical cluster analysis was conducted to identify common groupings and generate an RC typology.

Results: Participants comprised 63 (72%) of 88 RC in England. Fidelity scores were high (median 11, IQR 9-13). Both NHS and strengths-focussed RCs were associated with higher fidelity. The median annual budget was £200,000 (IQR £127,000-£300,000) per RC. The median cost per student was £518 (IQR £275-£840), cost per course designed was £5,556 (IQR £3,000-£9,416) and per course run was £1,510 (IQR £682-£3,030). The total annual budget across England for RCs is an estimated £17.6 m including £13.4 m from NHS budgets, with 11,000 courses delivered to 45,500 students.

Conclusion: Although the majority of RCs had high levels of fidelity, there were sufficiently pronounced differences in other key characteristics to generate a typology of RCs. This typology might prove important for understanding student outcomes and how they are achieved and for commissioning decisions. Staffing and co-producing new courses are key drivers of spending. The estimated budget for RCs was less than 1% of NHS mental health spending.

Citing Articles

Developing and testing Advance Choice Document implementation resources for Black African and Caribbean people with experience of compulsory psychiatric admission.

Simpson J, Babatunde A, Simpson A, Gilbert S, Ruck Keene A, Stephenson L BMC Psychiatry. 2024; 24(1):777.

PMID: 39506658 PMC: 11539294. DOI: 10.1186/s12888-024-06213-0.


28-country global study on associations between cultural characteristics and Recovery College fidelity.

Kotera Y, Ronaldson A, Hayes D, Hunter-Brown H, McPhilbin M, Dunnett D Npj Ment Health Res. 2024; 3(1):46.

PMID: 39379618 PMC: 11461659. DOI: 10.1038/s44184-024-00092-9.


Exploring the role of the Recovery College model as a transformative tool for recovery-oriented practice: perceived benefits and perspectives from health practitioners in Quebec, Canada.

Bellemare J, Vallee C, Briand C, Sauvageau A, Drolet M Front Psychiatry. 2024; 15:1440840.

PMID: 39290297 PMC: 11405206. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1440840.


Operationalising the Recovery College model with people living with dementia: a realist review.

Handley M, Wheeler C, Duddy C, Wong G, Birt L, Fox C Aging Ment Health. 2024; 28(8):1078-1089.

PMID: 38850259 PMC: 11262432. DOI: 10.1080/13607863.2024.2356878.


Investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on recovery colleges: multi-site qualitative study.

McPhilbin M, Stepanian K, Yeo C, Elton D, Dunnett D, Jennings H BJPsych Open. 2024; 10(3):e113.

PMID: 38751202 PMC: 11363083. DOI: 10.1192/bjo.2024.70.


References
1.
Tse S, Tsoi E, Hamilton B, OHagan M, Shepherd G, Slade M . Uses of strength-based interventions for people with serious mental illness: A critical review. Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2016; 62(3):281-91. DOI: 10.1177/0020764015623970. View

2.
Toney R, Elton D, Munday E, Hamill K, Crowther A, Meddings S . Mechanisms of Action and Outcomes for Students in Recovery Colleges. Psychiatr Serv. 2018; 69(12):1222-1229. DOI: 10.1176/appi.ps.201800283. View

3.
Hayes D, Henderson C, Bakolis I, Lawrence V, Elliott R, Ronaldson A . Recovery Colleges Characterisation and Testing in England (RECOLLECT): rationale and protocol. BMC Psychiatry. 2022; 22(1):627. PMC: 9509550. DOI: 10.1186/s12888-022-04253-y. View

4.
Hoffmann T, Glasziou P, Boutron I, Milne R, Perera R, Moher D . Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ. 2014; 348:g1687. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.g1687. View

5.
Eysenbach G . Improving the quality of Web surveys: the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res. 2004; 6(3):e34. PMC: 1550605. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34. View