Bridging the Gap Between Formal and Informal Care

The Clapton Care Circle map reveals an area rich in informal care and support: emotional check-ins, shared meals, cultural gatherings, companionship. But it also exposes a stark divide between this community-driven activity and the formal care system delivered by statutory services like GPs, social workers, district nurses or mental health teams.

A Fragmented Landscape

While informal care is highly visible in the map - through the work of volunteers, community groups, and neighbours - formal care services are largely absent. This isn’t because they don’t exist in the area, but because:

They operate in silos, often behind closed doors
Their rigid procedures and structures don’t always lend themselves to open collaboration
There is a lack of sustained, cooperative relationships between formal professionals and grassroots actors

This gap represents a missed opportunity. When formal and informal care remain disconnected, people are more likely to fall through the cracks.

Why Formal Care Is Often Invisible

Some of the reasons formal care actors were hard to include in the mapping process:

Trust and relationships: Community networks rely on relational trust. Professionals may be seen as external, time-limited or bureaucratic.
Capacity and time: Formal providers are often stretched thin, with little time to participate in community-building.
Structural barriers: Regulations or professional boundaries may prevent staff from forming the informal, mutual relationships that underpin local support.
Lack of reciprocity: Formal services often extract information or referrals from community groups, without investing in the relationships or recognising their value.

This results in community support networks doing vital work—without being resourced, connected or even recognised by the formal care system.

What We’re Missing Without Collaboration

Early intervention: Informal networks often notice when someone is struggling before it becomes a crisis.
Continuity of care: Emotional and social support doesn't end when the visit or referral does. Community networks offer ongoing presence.
Person-centred planning: Those closest to someone - friends, family, faith groups - can help tailor support that fits.
Resource sharing: From spaces and volunteers to meals and transport, community assets are plentiful—but underused.

Principles for Integration

To move toward a more joined-up model, we suggest the following principles:

Mutual respect: Value both professional expertise and lived experience. Informal networks are not “lesser” or “unofficial” - they’re just different.
Flexible structures: Create low-barrier spaces (e.g. joint workshops, shared digital tools, liaison roles) where collaboration can happen.
Shared outcomes: Align around goals like reducing isolation, improving well-being or enabling people to live at home for longer, then find joint ways to get there.
Relational investment: Integration is built on trust. Time needs to be spent forming human relationships, not just transactional ones.
Visibility and celebration: Make formal care part of the local story. Put professionals on the map - literally and figuratively.

PreviousWho’s in the Network?NextMapping Care Wealth

Last updated 12 days ago

Was this helpful?

A Fragmented Landscape

They operate in silos, often behind closed doors

Their rigid procedures and structures don’t always lend themselves to open collaboration

There is a lack of sustained, cooperative relationships between formal professionals and grassroots actors

This gap represents a missed opportunity. When formal and informal care remain disconnected, people are more likely to fall through the cracks.

Why Formal Care Is Often Invisible

Some of the reasons formal care actors were hard to include in the mapping process:

Trust and relationships: Community networks rely on relational trust. Professionals may be seen as external, time-limited or bureaucratic.

Capacity and time: Formal providers are often stretched thin, with little time to participate in community-building.

Structural barriers: Regulations or professional boundaries may prevent staff from forming the informal, mutual relationships that underpin local support.

Lack of reciprocity: Formal services often extract information or referrals from community groups, without investing in the relationships or recognising their value.

This results in community support networks doing vital work—without being resourced, connected or even recognised by the formal care system.

What We’re Missing Without Collaboration

Early intervention: Informal networks often notice when someone is struggling before it becomes a crisis.

Continuity of care: Emotional and social support doesn't end when the visit or referral does. Community networks offer ongoing presence.

Person-centred planning: Those closest to someone - friends, family, faith groups - can help tailor support that fits.

Resource sharing: From spaces and volunteers to meals and transport, community assets are plentiful—but underused.

Principles for Integration

To move toward a more joined-up model, we suggest the following principles:

Mutual respect: Value both professional expertise and lived experience. Informal networks are not “lesser” or “unofficial” - they’re just different.

Flexible structures: Create low-barrier spaces (e.g. joint workshops, shared digital tools, liaison roles) where collaboration can happen.

Shared outcomes: Align around goals like reducing isolation, improving well-being or enabling people to live at home for longer, then find joint ways to get there.

Relational investment: Integration is built on trust. Time needs to be spent forming human relationships, not just transactional ones.

Visibility and celebration: Make formal care part of the local story. Put professionals on the map - literally and figuratively.