Joseph Rowntree Foundation

<< Back to calls for proposals

Call for expressions of interest:

The dynamics of debt and poverty

Summary: Understanding the changing relationship between personal debt and poverty over time.

Deadline: 3 April 2007 (Expressions of interest)
29 May 2007 (Full proposals)
JRF Committee: Poverty and Disadvantage Committee
Timescale: Up to 24 months initially (negotiable)
Budget: £250,000 in total
Key contacts: Chris Goulden (Principal Research Manager), chris.goulden@jrf.org.uk
Louise Ross (Secretary), louise.ross@jrf.org.uk, 01904 615942

Supporting documents:

Project summary

The extent of personal debt in the UK and its impacts are key policy issues. There is a lack of an in-depth understanding of the interaction between debt and income – and specifically poverty – over time for different kinds of people. The JRF is seeking to remedy this through longitudinal research. The aim is to examine both the impact of living in poverty on the extent and nature of debt, and of debt upon poverty. The subject matter is sensitive, so the research design and ethical approach will be paramount. The goal is to better inform strategies and policies on over-indebtedness about the impact of poverty and vice versa. We are asking for expressions of interest initially before requesting full proposals. We will either fund a single larger project or several smaller, yet interconnected, ones.

Background / context

Whilst there is considerable interest from government and other stakeholders in the issues, there remains a lack of in-depth and up-to-date research into debt and its relationship to poverty over time. This is particularly the case for the impact of debt repayments on quality of life, standards of living, deprivation and social exclusion.

There are however plenty of statistics available on the extent of personal debt in the UK; for example, official indicators from the Government’s action plan on overindebtedness. There is also some cross-sectional, quantitative research on the links between poverty and debt (see links section) but there has not been recent in-depth, longitudinal qualitative exploration of these relationships. A rare example is “Hard times: how poor families make ends meet” by Kempson, Bryson and Rowlingson but this was published some time ago. This research with 74 families set out four basic states in terms of the dynamics of financial situations: “keeping heads above water”, “sinking”, “struggling to the surface” and “drowning”. Quantitative and longitudinal aspects of debt will be something that is examined in the new, government-funded, Wealth and Assets Survey. This has a large national sample and a panel element, with first results expected this year.

We know that the reasons for debt problems vary. Quantitative research has indicated that causes include, for example, over-commitments on borrowing, having to survive on a persistently low income, job loss, illness, a death in the family or a relationship breakdown. Debt itself can also lead to long-term illness (See: Balmer, N. et al. (2006) Worried sick: the experience of debt problems and their relationship with health, illness and disability, Social Policy and Society, 5(1): 39-51) and there are indicative links with mental health and alcohol issues particularly.

Before strategies to tackle the problems caused by debt can work well, however, there needs to be a much better understanding of how people – particularly those on lower incomes – manage their financial resources, how they respond to ‘shocks’ and the accumulated impact of debt repayments on standards of living and quality of life. Research that seeks to gain an in-depth understanding of how debt and poverty interact with each other over time is therefore vital in this context, yet it remains rare. We need to investigate directly the lives of people who are experiencing the problems that can be caused by debt and poverty, as well as the solutions that they are employing and the opportunities that are available to them. There is also a risk that data collection from a single moment in time might generate an understanding only from people’s immediate viewpoints, suggesting the need for a longitudinal approach.

Aims

The issue is two-fold and centred on the unfolding relationship between debt and poverty. The aim of this call is therefore to generate an in-depth understanding of both the impact of poverty on debt and of debt on poverty in the UK context. The focus is not just on money but also about generating a broader and deeper understanding of debt and the part that it plays in helping and hindering people’s lives.

The questions that the research should be designed to answer include:

  • What is the relationship between debt and poverty? Proposers should discuss how they plan to define these terms in their research. How and why does the relationship between poverty and debt change over time for people and how can we better describe and understand the mechanisms at work in this relationship?
  • How and why do people get into and out of debt over time? How far is debt a short term or a longer term experience? What part does debt play in people’s lives? How do some people avoid getting into debt in the first place and what is the changing impact of this?
  • At what point do people feel that a level or type of debt becomes ‘over-indebtedness’ or causes problems and why? How does this then evolve and how do people respond, as well as to the interventions of others? Why do some people living on low incomes get into debt, become ‘over-indebted’ and cope less well with events when others in similar circumstances do not?
  • What is the impact on people of the changing wider political, social, economic and technological context?
  • How might people’s experiences differ along lines of diversity and location?

The research should aim to provide a much deeper understanding of how people feel about the role debt plays in their lives, what coping strategies they use and how levels of debt change in relation to:

  • External factors such as: key life events, effect of employment transitions in and out of the labour market, persistent poverty, moving house or getting a mortgage, family changes.
  • Personal capabilities such as: financial management abilities, attitudes to debt, attitudes to work, financial capability, access to sources of credit.
  • Market factors such as: the availability of credit (including informal and illegal sources), advice, information and knowledge, people’s experience of the market and the organisations and people that work in the financial services sector.

It will also be important to look at the interaction between debt and other aspects of people’s lives, for example:

  • The impact of debt on ‘social inclusion’, their social lives, relationships with friends, family and others; and their general well-being.
  • How debt repayments interact with household spending, budgeting and saving patterns as well as levels and experiences of deprivation.
  • How debts might affect decisions about working (including informal and illegal work) and people’s ability to escape life on a low income in the longer term.

The research that we commission should be of relevance to policy and practice. This should be taken into account when thinking through the research questions and the design. In broad terms, the sorts of policy and practice issues that the research might address could include: how can policy, practice and other stakeholders (including the financial services industry) better respond to the problems caused by debt for families on low incomes? And also: how can ‘overindebtedness’ and the problems that are caused by debt, including poverty, be better prevented, where these occur? The research should help to better inform strategies and policies tackling over-indebtedness about issues of poverty as well as informing anti-poverty policy better about issues to do with debt.

It is accepted that not all of these questions may be answerable through a single, even large-scale, study. Therefore proposers may consider putting a bid for part of the funding available for a smaller study. Proposers should therefore prioritise where necessary and give reasons for their chosen focus.

Methods

This call is for research that investigates how things change over time and therefore – vitally – needs to be longitudinal in nature. This could include a combination of prospectively and retrospectively collected information, as well as both qualitative and quantitative dimensions. The key group of interest is people in or at risk of poverty (however defined) who are experiencing debt and/or at risk of problems from their debts. We are also interested, as indicated above, in people who are living on low incomes but avoid getting into debt. We are less interested in those on higher incomes who are over-committed on their debts, except perhaps where they become significantly at risk of more than simply transient poverty (accepting that this can sometimes have longer term effects).

Proposers should explain how their methods will answer the aims as set out above, as well as any proposed supplementary project aims. As the research requested is longitudinal, proposers should suggest optimum phases for data collection (e.g. monthly, quarterly or less often) and the nature of the data to be collected (i.e. in qualitative and/or quantitative terms). If the project will be looking at details on the income and expenditure of individuals and family/ household members, then these methods should be described.

The research will need to investigate sensitive topics around family income and relationships and the activities that people undertake to ‘make ends meet’. This means that the sampling strategy and ethical considerations will be crucial and these should be outlined in detail in the final proposal.

Expected outputs

Typically, the expected outputs are a 15,000 word report, detailing the methods, results and policy and practice implications, and a 2,000 word summary (the “Findings”). However, we are open to other ideas about effective outputs beyond or instead of these usual ones. Given the longitudinal nature of the call, interim reports on preliminary phases of research may be necessary. If more than one project is funded from this call, then contributions to joint publication(s) may be required.

Previous outputs

Other recent work funded by the JRF that may be of relevance to this call for proposals includes:

These other documents and links may also be useful:

Research and information

Policy

Submitting an Expression of Interest

It is imagined that the aims of this call could be met either through a single, larger longitudinal study or through a few connected but separately-commissioned smaller studies. Whichever route is taken, proposers should identify what groups of people will be prioritised and what sampling strategies will be used. A final decision will be taken by the Foundation depending on the nature of the expressions of interest received. If several studies are commissioned, then successful proposers will need to participate in activities designed to share learning across the projects and initially work towards a degree of correspondence in methods. This might include workshops, joint project advisory groups, regular email exchange to share information and so on.

This call is for expressions of interest (EOI) in the first instance rather than full proposals. This is in order to reduce the time and effort expended by proposers who are eventually unsuccessful. EOI should be limited to 1,000 words and should focus on the groups, aims and methods proposed and the ideas underpinning the suggested project, as well as an estimated outline cost. Full costs should be confirmed in the main proposal process. Please use the EOI form provided (Word, 39KB).

Once EOI have been received and assessed, full proposals will be requested from leading proposers. Partnerships between proposers may be suggested depending on the nature of the EOI received. Feedback regarding particular areas of interest or concerns in relation to the EOI will also be provided to these proposers. EOI will be judged primarily on the relevance of the ideas underlying the project to the interests of the call, the appropriateness and clarity of the suggested methods, indicative costs and coverage/ complementarity of the projects, where relevant. Proposers are free to submit more than one EOI.

Submitting a Full Proposal

It is essential that you read the How to apply for funding section of our website before submitting your proposal, together with the Application guidelines containing the necessary forms for completing your application. There are also details available on what makes a good proposal and projects the Foundation does not support, which proposers should read, as well as some other useful information.

Three unbound, hard copies of all documents are required. Please also e-mail a Word version of the complete proposal, summary and budget forms to Louise Ross by the deadline below.

Proposals should be submitted to:

Louise Ross
Joseph Rowntree Foundation
The Homestead, 40 Water End
YORK YO30 6WP

Timetable

  • The deadline for receipt of email and hard copies of Expressions of Interest is 2.00 pm on Tuesday 3 April 2007.
  • Proposers from whom a full proposal is requested will be informed of this by Tuesday 17 April 2007.
  • The deadline for receipt of email and hard copies of full proposals will be 2.00 pm on Tuesday 29 May 2007.

Unfortunately, late submissions cannot be accepted. Following review by JRF staff and advisers, proposals that meet the required standards will be submitted to the Poverty and Disadvantage Committee on Thursday 28 June 2007 for their consideration. Each proposal is reviewed by two external members of the Committee. The Trustees of the Foundation will meet to give final approval for funding on Tuesday 18 September 2007. In the event that Trustees do not approve the work, preliminary costs of up to £2,000 will be reimbursed.

Budget

The maximum budget for this call overall is £250,000. It is expected that individual projects should not take longer than 24 months and cover several waves of interviews, but this is negotiable. Further interview waves may be considered for funding at a later stage, depending on how the project(s) progress.

How we make funding decisions (full proposals)

The following criteria will be used in coming to a decision on full proposals:

  • How far the work will offer new insights or developments.
  • The soundness and appropriateness of how the work will be done (i.e. design, methods and analysis).
  • Whether partnerships with relevant other organisations are in place, where these are important.
  • The ability of the proposers to carry out the work and complete on time.
  • An understanding of the policy and practice dimensions.
  • A thorough approach to dissemination.

Other issues that will be considered include: whether the proposal pays attention to diversity where appropriate (i.e. attending to gender, ethnicity, class, disability etc.) and whether it is written in accessible, lay language. A full yet accessible explanation of the proposed methods to be used is essential, as is full consideration of the ethical implications of the work and the implications for policy and practice across different nations of the UK.

Key contacts

For queries about the research, including the methods, please contact:

Chris Goulden, PAD Principal Research Manager (01904 615942; chris.goulden@jrf.org.uk)

For queries about the application process, deadlines etc., please contact:

Louise Ross, PAD Team Administrator (01904 615942; louise.ross@jrf.org.uk)

Privacy policy | Terms and conditions | Accessibility | Listen Listen to our website | Top of page

Share/bookmark this page

© Joseph Rowntree Foundation 2008

Investors in Diversity