Abstract
Background: Short-term funding initiatives are often used to stimulate innovation and improve service delivery. They are a main source of funding for voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) organisations. However, reliance on these short-term grants can limit their funded activities and sustainability. In 2023, the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) set up the Suicide Prevention Grant Fund (SPGF). This was awarded to VCSEs for a single year to deliver diverse, innovative interventions aimed at preventing suicide. This study aimed to explore service managers’ perceptions of the SPGF’s impact. Specifically, we sought to identify key factors that contributed to a successful delivery of the projects, any challenges in the implementation process and the services’ capacity to carry on beyond the funding period.
Methods: We conducted semi-structured online interviews with managers from 20 SPGF-funded services across England. Representatives from an additional 31 services completed a short survey to complement the interview data. Data were analysed using a framework analysis, with a combination of inductive and deductive coding. The analytic framework was developed and refined in collaboration with our expert working group, including our team of Lived Experience Researchers.
Results: Data were categorised into three overarching themes, shaped by our objectives (impact, implementation, and sustainability), with 16 sub-themes identified across these themes. Funding had a clear impact in expanding service provision. Managers identified the importance of the funded projects, which often filled gaps in service provision, targeting underserved groups. Many reported improved well-being, coping, and a reduction in distress. Implementation facilitators included co-designed interventions, skilled staffing, and productive partnerships with external agencies. However, short timescales, administrative burden, and a retrospective payment model particularly strained smaller charities. Sustainability outlooks were mixed. A minority (notably digital or embedded services) expected full continuation; most anticipated partial continuation or closure without further funding.
Conclusions: Short-term grants can catalyse impactful, targeted suicide prevention, but sustainability is jeopardised by brief funding windows, reimbursement models, and administrative load, especially for smaller VCSEs. Many services indicated perceived benefits of their interventions, but further evaluation of the impact of novel initiatives in reducing suicide rates is desirable, where possible.
Competing Interest Statement
Authors JT, KA, RD, AG, PN, AS, SJ, RA, BLE are co-Investigators or employed research staff in the NIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, which undertakes commissioned research for the English Department of Health and Social Care, who also funded the Suicide Prevention Grant Fund programme.
Funding Statement
This study is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Policy Research Programme (grant no. PR-PRU-0916-22003). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Our protocol was reviewed by Noclor NHS Research Office, the R&D department of North London Foundation Trust on 2nd April 2024, in line with HRA guidance to seek R&D advice not REC advice for projects which will not be managed as research Noclor confirmed that the study meets criteria to be classified as a service evaluation.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
We have added a Lived Experience Commentary at the end of the paper. This is a brief reflective discussion of key issues relating to the study and its findings, from the perspectives of two authors with mental health lived experience. We include a Lived Experience Commentary with all papers connected to the NIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, to provide an unmediated lived experience voice. The text of the paper is otherwise unchanged.
Data Availability
Anonymised data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
