An evaluative case study of the mental  health and wellbeing response to the Grenfell Tower fire; Lessons for disaster preparedness and management

<ns5:p>Background The Grenfell Tower fire, London, in 2017 caused 72 deaths, and mass evacuations. This evaluative case study examines the disaster response, particularly the mental health and wellbeing programme delivered by statutory services, notably the NHS and local government (RBKC). It explores what they did, and how they worked together and with voluntary sector organisations (VSOs) to identify key lessons for the planning of disaster responses. Methods The study focused on the first two years of the response. Data was gathered from publicly available sources and interviews with key informants. Uncertainties and missing information were clarified with organisations. A timeline of the response was created as well as an overview of key lessons for future responses. Results In national guidance RBKC was responsible for co-ordinating the longer-term recovery response. That was difficult because it had lost the trust of the local community. The NHS had to go beyond its assigned role of treatment and advice, which was too narrowly envisaged in national guidance. Both mental health and wellbeing need to be addressed after a disaster. Wellbeing is poorly defined, inadequately measured and rarely researched. Local and national VSOs played a vital role, but our understanding of the details is incomplete, as for most disaster responses. Conclusions Local communities must be fully involved in decisions about recovery programmes. Mental health and wellbeing are not synonymous but closely linked. Far more people will be injured psychologically than physically in a disaster. Large disasters require multi-agency partnerships sharing expertise and resources, rather than tasks being allocated between organisations through commissioning. There is a need to further develop and disseminate evidence-based mental health interventions delivered by non-experts as part of these partnerships. Training needs to teach practical skills as well as awareness. These lessons are also relevant to mainstream mental health services.</ns5:p>

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
NIHR Open Research
Published
2026-06-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3310/nihropenres.14277.1
Primary Topic
Disaster Response and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

An evaluative case study of the mental  health and wellbeing response to the Grenfell Tower fire; Lessons for disaster preparedness and management

Farrah Hassan, Robyn Fairman, Amrit Banstola, Jason Strelitz et al.
NIHR Open Research
Disaster Response and Management
article

An evaluative case study of the mental  health and wellbeing response to the Grenfell Tower fire; Lessons for disaster preparedness and management

Farrah Hassan, Robyn Fairman, Amrit Banstola, Jason Strelitz, Victoria Barber, Ben Hannigan, Jonathan I. Bisson, Ágnes Kocsis, John Green, Chris Brewin, Carla Semedo, Jai Adhyaru, Jo-anne Hawthorne, Polly Crisford, Julie Derwig
article en

Abstract

<ns5:p>Background The Grenfell Tower fire, London, in 2017 caused 72 deaths, and mass evacuations. This evaluative case study examines the disaster response, particularly the mental health and wellbeing programme delivered by statutory services, notably the NHS and local government (RBKC). It explores what they did, and how they worked together and with voluntary sector organisations (VSOs) to identify key lessons for the planning of disaster responses. Methods The study focused on the first two years of the response. Data was gathered from publicly available sources and interviews with key informants. Uncertainties and missing information were clarified with organisations. A timeline of the response was created as well as an overview of key lessons for future responses. Results In national guidance RBKC was responsible for co-ordinating the longer-term recovery response. That was difficult because it had lost the trust of the local community. The NHS had to go beyond its assigned role of treatment and advice, which was too narrowly envisaged in national guidance. Both mental health and wellbeing need to be addressed after a disaster. Wellbeing is poorly defined, inadequately measured and rarely researched. Local and national VSOs played a vital role, but our understanding of the details is incomplete, as for most disaster responses. Conclusions Local communities must be fully involved in decisions about recovery programmes. Mental health and wellbeing are not synonymous but closely linked. Far more people will be injured psychologically than physically in a disaster. Large disasters require multi-agency partnerships sharing expertise and resources, rather than tasks being allocated between organisations through commissioning. There is a need to further develop and disseminate evidence-based mental health interventions delivered by non-experts as part of these partnerships. Training needs to teach practical skills as well as awareness. These lessons are also relevant to mainstream mental health services.</ns5:p>

NIHR Open ResearchVol. 6
Department of Health and Social Care (GB), Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Health Foundation (GB), National Center for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (US), University College London (GB), Brunel University of London (GB), Cardiff University (GB), University of Wales (GB)
National Institute for Health and Care Research, Department of Health and Social Care, Cardiff University, Research for Patient Benefit Programme
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Disaster Response and Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.