View in EDS

The Capabilities in Academic Policy Engagement (CAPE) Programme in England: A Mixed Methods Evaluation

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Capabilities in Academic Policy Engagement (CAPE) Programme in England: A Mixed Methods Evaluation
Language: English
Authors: Petra Mäkelä (ORCID 0000-0002-0938-1175), Annette Boaz (ORCID 0000-0003-0557-1294), Kathryn Oliver (ORCID 0000-0002-4326-5258)
Source: Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice. 2026 22(1):2-22.
Availability: Policy Press, an imprint of Bristol University Press. University of Bristol, 1-9 Old Park Hill, Bristol BS2 8BB, UK. Tel: +44-117-954-5940; e-mail: pp-info@policypress.co.uk; Web site: https://policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/journals/evidence-and-policy
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 21
Publication Date: 2026
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Foreign Countries, Intervention, Program Evaluation, National Programs, Research, Policy, Models, Researchers, Professional Personnel, College Faculty, Higher Education, Attitudes
Geographic Terms: United Kingdom (England)
DOI: 10.1332/17442648Y2025D000000050
ISSN: 1744-2648
1744-2656
Abstract: Background: Interventions to support engagement between academics and policy professionals have proliferated, yet little evidence is available to guide what works, how, or for whom. Aims and objectives: To evaluate the activities, outcomes and impacts of the Capabilities in Academic Policy Engagement (CAPE) programme and identify enabling conditions, using a modified framework for academic-policy engagement. Methods: Mixed methods evaluation across four intervention types (seed funding, policy fellowships, training, knowledge exchange events), between 2021 and 2024. We interviewed academics, research support staff and policy professionals (n=129), observed 32 activities, and distributed a survey (n=42, 27 per cent response rate). We analysed data using inductive and framework analyses. Findings: CAPE interventions focused at the linear (training) or relational (fellowships, seed funding and knowledge exchange) levels. Interventions led to outcomes in capacity-building, connectivity, conceptual and attitude change, and tacit knowledge development. Interventions were resource-intensive and required responsive intermediary skills, particularly fellowships. We found influencing factors at individual, organisation and system levels. The most experienced participants preferentially benefited from opportunities, potentially perpetuating or even exacerbating inequalities. We did not find evidence of impact on policy processes or outcomes. Discussion and conclusions: CAPE led to an increase in academic-policy engagement activities, mostly as linear and relational interventions. These generated costs as well as benefits and often advantaged individuals with significant prior experience of academic-policy engagement. Future academic-policy engagement interventions should consider motivations, capabilities, goals and resources at the individual and organisation levels, while using strategic planning and coordination to maximise their value, and address diversity and inclusion.
Abstractor: As Provided
Notes: https://doi.org/10.25398/rd.northumbria.27951654.v1
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1497380
Database: ERIC
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1497380
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Capabilities in Academic Policy Engagement (CAPE) Programme in England: A Mixed Methods Evaluation
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Petra+Mäkelä%22">Petra Mäkelä</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0938-1175">0000-0002-0938-1175</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Annette+Boaz%22">Annette Boaz</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0557-1294">0000-0003-0557-1294</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kathryn+Oliver%22">Kathryn Oliver</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4326-5258">0000-0002-4326-5258</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Evidence+%26+Policy%3A+A+Journal+of+Research%2C+Debate+and+Practice%22"><i>Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice</i></searchLink>. 2026 22(1):2-22.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Policy Press, an imprint of Bristol University Press. University of Bristol, 1-9 Old Park Hill, Bristol BS2 8BB, UK. Tel: +44-117-954-5940; e-mail: pp-info@policypress.co.uk; Web site: https://policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/journals/evidence-and-policy
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 21
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intervention%22">Intervention</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Program+Evaluation%22">Program Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22National+Programs%22">National Programs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research%22">Research</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Policy%22">Policy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Models%22">Models</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Researchers%22">Researchers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Professional+Personnel%22">Professional Personnel</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Faculty%22">College Faculty</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Attitudes%22">Attitudes</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22United+Kingdom+%28England%29%22">United Kingdom (England)</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1332/17442648Y2025D000000050
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1744-2648<br />1744-2656
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Background: Interventions to support engagement between academics and policy professionals have proliferated, yet little evidence is available to guide what works, how, or for whom. Aims and objectives: To evaluate the activities, outcomes and impacts of the Capabilities in Academic Policy Engagement (CAPE) programme and identify enabling conditions, using a modified framework for academic-policy engagement. Methods: Mixed methods evaluation across four intervention types (seed funding, policy fellowships, training, knowledge exchange events), between 2021 and 2024. We interviewed academics, research support staff and policy professionals (n=129), observed 32 activities, and distributed a survey (n=42, 27 per cent response rate). We analysed data using inductive and framework analyses. Findings: CAPE interventions focused at the linear (training) or relational (fellowships, seed funding and knowledge exchange) levels. Interventions led to outcomes in capacity-building, connectivity, conceptual and attitude change, and tacit knowledge development. Interventions were resource-intensive and required responsive intermediary skills, particularly fellowships. We found influencing factors at individual, organisation and system levels. The most experienced participants preferentially benefited from opportunities, potentially perpetuating or even exacerbating inequalities. We did not find evidence of impact on policy processes or outcomes. Discussion and conclusions: CAPE led to an increase in academic-policy engagement activities, mostly as linear and relational interventions. These generated costs as well as benefits and often advantaged individuals with significant prior experience of academic-policy engagement. Future academic-policy engagement interventions should consider motivations, capabilities, goals and resources at the individual and organisation levels, while using strategic planning and coordination to maximise their value, and address diversity and inclusion.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Note
  Label: Notes
  Group: Note
  Data: https://doi.org/10.25398/rd.northumbria.27951654.v1
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1497380
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1497380
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1332/17442648Y2025D000000050
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 21
        StartPage: 2
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Intervention
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Program Evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: National Programs
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Policy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Models
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Researchers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Professional Personnel
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: College Faculty
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Higher Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: United Kingdom (England)
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Capabilities in Academic Policy Engagement (CAPE) Programme in England: A Mixed Methods Evaluation
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Petra Mäkelä
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Annette Boaz
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kathryn Oliver
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1744-2648
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1744-2656
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 22
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice
              Type: main
ResultId 1