Bridging the Gap: Building practical policy partnerships between universities and local authorities 

Across the UK, local authorities are under increasing pressure to produce evidence‑based policy at speed, often with limited capacity and shrinking research functions. 

Universities, meanwhile, generate large volumes of relevant research but frequently struggle to connect it to policy timelines and decision‑making processes. Much engagement still depends on personal relationships, one‑off projects or informal requests, which makes it hard to sustain impact or scale good practice beyond a single policy area. 

Over the past year, I have been leading a London Research and Policy Partnership (LRaPP)‑funded project to develop a small, practical toolkit designed to make university–local authority collaboration routine rather than exceptional. The toolkit, which is openly available and free to use, was originally developed around ageing policy, but the underlying challenges it addresses are much broader – how to enable councils to access a wider range of research insight, including arts and humanities perspectives, without increasing workload, and universities to contribute in ways that are timely, useful and grounded in local priorities?

The toolkit consists of three linked elements: an Evidence Gap Map to identify what kinds of evidence are currently being used in policy, an Engagement Protocol to structure collaboration and decision‑making, and a short Policy Brief to support senior buy‑in and implementation. 

A key part of the project was the process of developing the toolkit itself. Rather than starting from university assumptions about what councils need, we began by reviewing live policy documents and then working directly with council officers through a co‑creation workshop. This helped surface very practical barriers such as time pressure, consultation fatigue and the need for clear ownership of actions. It also shifted the conversation away from abstract ideas about impact towards simple questions: where does evidence actually enter the policy process, what types of evidence are missing or only implicit, and what would make collaboration easier next time? 

One important learning was that frameworks only work when they fit existing routines, rather than requiring officers or researchers to create new ones. 

The toolkit is currently in use at both Ealing and Hounslow Councils, where it has informed policy review and supported more structured engagement with the University of West London. It has also begun to inform early conversations with the London Assembly around how arts and humanities evidence might be better embedded across strategic policy areas. While those Assembly discussions are still at an early stage, they point to the wider applicability of this approach. 

The tools are deliberately lightweight and can be used across policy domains such as digital inclusion, youth, housing or pride in place, and they are relevant to councils of very different sizes and contexts. For universities, the model offers a way to align research, student involvement and impact work around real policy needs rather than isolated projects. 

Each part of the toolkit can be used on its own, or together, depending on local need: 

Evidence Gap Mapping for Local Ageing Policy 

A short, practical guide for scanning existing strategies and reports to see what kinds of evidence are being used, and where cultural or experiential insight is missing or only implicit. Useful as a starting point for review or before engaging a university partner. 

Engagement Protocol: Co‑Producing Inclusive Ageing Policy 

A step‑by‑step guide to running focused collaboration between councils, universities and communities, designed to fit policy workloads and lead to clear actions rather than open‑ended dialogue. 

Policy Brief: Embedding Arts and Humanities in Ageing Well Policy 

A short decision‑facing brief setting out why this approach matters, what it delivers, and how councils can implement it over a 90‑day period. Useful for senior sign‑off and internal advocacy. 

My experience so far suggests that modest, well‑designed infrastructure can make a significant difference to how policy partnerships function, particularly when it fits existing ways of working rather than competing with them. It is also clear that this is an area where there is still plenty of room to learn from each other, across places, policy areas and institutional settings. 

If you work in a local authority, combined authority or university and are interested in trialling any part of the toolkit, or adapting it to your own context, I would be very happy to talk. Please feel free to reach out to me at Dennis.Olsen@uwl.ac.uk.