Independent research

The JRF community capacity research, explained

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation published analysis on 6 March 2026 looking at community need and the 'Engaged and active communities' measure across Pride in Place neighbourhoods. It is widely quoted and widely misread. Here is what it actually is. (20 March 2026 is a different document — MHCLG's Phase 2 expansion place selection methodology note.)

JRF is an independent charitable foundation. Its analysis is not an MHCLG assessment of any neighbourhood, Board or plan, and it carries no consequence for funding.

What it is

What the analysis actually looked at

The research combined published deprivation and need data with the Community Needs Index measure of how engaged and active a community is, for the initial English Phase 2 cohort.

Community need

How much disadvantage a neighbourhood carries relative to others, using published national datasets.

Engaged and active communities

A Community Needs Index component covering civic participation, local organisations and community activity.

Why the pairing matters

Places with high need and low civic activity may find it harder to mobilise quickly — which is an argument for capacity support, not for less funding.

Coverage

The analysis focused on the initial English Phase 2 cohort, so it does not describe every named community across the four nations.

Read it right

What it does and does not tell you

It does tell you

How your neighbourhood's measured need compares with others in the cohort
Whether published indicators suggest lower civic activity locally
Where extra capacity-building support may be worth planning for
A useful prompt for conversations with your accountable body

It does not tell you

Anything about the quality of your Neighbourhood Board
Your programme phase, plan stage or funding status
Whether your area will succeed or fail — it is a national dataset, not a verdict
What is actually happening on your streets today

This is why the Hub labels JRF findings separately from programme information on every community profile. Independent research and programme status are different things and should never be shown as one badge.

Use it well

How Boards should use the research

Treat it as one input among several, alongside your own evidence and what residents tell you.

1
Check it against local reality
National indicators lag. If the data says low civic activity but you know three thriving groups, record that in your evidence pack.
2
Use it to justify revenue
If capacity is genuinely thin, independent evidence strengthens the case for funding coordination, training and organisational support.
3
Never use it as a label
Do not describe your area, or another area, by its research ranking. It measures published indicators, not people.
4
Pair it with self-assessment
Your own capacity self-assessment is closer to the truth than any national dataset. Run both and compare.

Run the capacity self-assessment Visit the Joseph Rowntree Foundation