The purpose of this paper is:

a)    to set out what we are currently doing to address social isolation as a key component to tackling mental illness;

b)    how we’re responding to the amplified need, specifically for key cohorts who have become increasing isolated due to COVID and its restrictions, both through formal support and building resilience; and

c)    to seek the views of HWB members as to where and what the gaps are in our approach, and the consider what remedies are available.

Summary of Issue

The Committee heard how the impact of social isolation and loneliness on an individual’s physical and mental wellbeing were well known. Social isolation had been recognised as a risk factor for suicide with an increased risk of depression, low self-esteem, reported sleep problems and increased stress response. Loneliness was considered to have an adverse impact on the condition of the heart and was a strong predictor of premature death, with people who were lonely more likely to be readmitted to hospital, had longer stays and more visits to GPs or A&E.

The Impact of COVID on social isolation and loneliness

The Committee also heard that the COVID pandemic had posed significant health risks to the District’s population; however, the risk to health outcomes extended beyond the clinical risk of COVID. The socio-economic and lifestyle factors that influenced health outcomes had also been adversely disrupted during the pandemic.

Members were informed that COVID had also amplified and increased the pace at which cohorts of people who would traditionally be at risk of social isolation were impacted, but also it had created a new group of people who had become increasingly anxious about the disease itself and the impact on their life. These included parents who had become increasingly isolated either due to financial impacts or the absence of informal connections through schools; people whose employment had changed through furlough, working at home or unemployment; and the recently bereaved who had been unable to have the normal in-person connections that would have supported them during that difficult time.

There would also be a generation of children and young people who had been adversely affected by the pandemic and that would likely have long term impacts for their emotional wellbeing, educational outcomes and longer-term economic wellbeing.

It was reported to the Committee that the Essex Joint Health and Wellbeing Strategy 2018 – 2022 identified social isolation and loneliness a key priority. A whole system approach had been mobilised in 2019 designed to connect resources across the system.

The key aims were:

·         Communities had a better understanding of the impact of loneliness and how to help each other.

·         There was a range of community led support to prevent and reduce loneliness and build capacity to support people to live well.

·         People who were lonely, or at risk of loneliness were recognised and could access local information and support to live well.

·         People with complex needs could access support to reduce loneliness and feel part of their local community.

This approach included:

·         Commissioned services addressing social isolation and loneliness as part of their wider response to improve independence. There were a range of ECC commissioned services that delivered specialist services to support people, promoted wellbeing and helped them to gain/regain independence, those included the Essex Children and Family Wellbeing Service, Alzheimer’s Society - Dementia, Carers First - carers, ECL - sensory, Summit – Learning Disabilities and Autism, Futures in Mind – mental health to name but a few. Beyond that, there were a range services commissioned by CCG/health partners as well as other local programmes that addressed the issues of social isolation and loneliness.

·         Services directly commissioned to tackle social isolation and loneliness, Provide,  had been the strategic partner to tackle loneliness, delivered a single point of access for the Livewell/Linkwell network support that included the Care Navigator Plus network (a partnership between a number of voluntary sector and community sector providers using a social prescription approach). The Rural Community Council of Essex (RCCE) as a Livewell Linkwell partner delivered the social prescribing and the social isolation model, including the United in Kind coaches – as did the West Essex Community Action Network (WECAN). Social engagement partners delivering Essex Befriends, or befriending service, included Action for Family Carers, MIND, Mencap and independent Age.

·         Place based community care and support. Primary Care Networks were key to integrating primary care with secondary and community services, pivotal to improving population health and taking a proactive approach to hidden needs to support. Social Prescribing Link Workers helped to reduce health inequalities by supporting people to unpick complex issues affecting their wellbeing, and enabled people to have more control over their lives. There was also a multitude of smaller and larger infrastructure organisations such as the Council for Voluntary Service (CVS) organisations and volunteer centres who worked to build community resilience and in doing so tackle loneliness.

·         Community Networks. Faith communities played a positive role in neighbourhoods and supported those most in need, strengthening resilience, reinforcing local identity and helped to connect communities. The Essex Faith Covenant continued to drive the partnership between faith communities and public services. Parish and Town Councils, as the first level of local government provided communities with a democratic voice. Networks like those played a key role in the identification of local needs and utilising community assets that provided a structure to take local community action. The importance of Neighbourhood level schemes had emerged as an effective means to reduce loneliness and isolation during the pandemic.

The future model for tackling social isolation and loneliness

Members heard how there was a need in any future model to amplify what already existed in terms of the offer to increase the connectedness and ensure that the scope of the offer addressed the needs of emerging cohorts who were becoming increasingly isolated because of COVID. An offer was needed that sought to provide formal support alongside resilience building and encouraged conversations around isolation and loneliness that built on existing pathways and expertise within the system.

People’s identities were being impacted and generated a negative sense of being; such as:-

·         Sense of loss, shame, confusion, failure, frustration and range of other emotions  leading to feelings of helplessness, a lack of confidence and self-esteem and sense of belonging thereby:-

·         Leading to isolation and/or loneliness and whilst this might have been felt previously in those families and areas that were more deprived, this was now transcending populations regardless of personal socio-economic status.

·         Those groups included:

-          COVID recovery; long COVID suffers,

-          minority groups; faith groups;

-          new parents; lone parents

-          young men and women

-          Those who were now unemployed or had seen changes in their employment

-          The bereaved

There was therefore a pressing need to innovate responses that resonated and engaged those, who unaware about the support available, or that they could benefit from some support and where to get it.

Next Steps: 

The Committee heard that the Health and Wellbeing Board members would discuss the issues, provide their different perspectives, and consider what and where the gaps might be in the current approach.

The Committee thanked Kirsty O’Callaghan (Head of Strengthening Communities at Essex County Council) for her report and RESOLVED to note its contents.