Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Cross-sectional survey reveals high interest but limited production capacity among community health and social service staff, highlighting structural barriers like fee-for-service funding.
Background As health and social care services are increasingly delivered by organisations in the community, there is a need for them to prioritise research capacity building. Research-active organisations have been found to deliver better care processes and client outcomes, yet little is known about the capacity of community organisations to engage in and produce research. Methods A cross-sectional online survey was used to explore the research interest, self-rated skills and organisational support for research as a ‘for-purpose’ organisation delivering health and social care services in the community. Data were described descriptively, and qualitative data were collated and analysed thematically. Results Respondents (n = 135) reported higher levels of research skills required as evidence-based practitioners – identifying, evaluating and using research in service design and provision – compared with research skills required to fund and produce research outputs. Engagement with research was seen as core to service delivery, professional satisfaction and positive consumer outcomes. The key barrier was a lack of time, with fee for services funding models nominated as a primary cause. Insufficient research support, knowledge and confidence must be addressed to build capacity. Research was perceived as an opportunity to share the positive impact of the work, and potentially lead to policy and funding change. Conclusions Research is perceived as an opportunity to improve care and attract high-quality staff. The results inform strategies that organisations can undertake to build research capacity, and improve evidence-based practice and community outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mitchell et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: