Debate contribution: IMPACTAgewell: Mid and East Antrim Borough Council
Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on .
- MLA
- Mr Mike Nesbitt
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 18 November 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- IMPACTAgewell: Mid and East Antrim Borough Council
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4656107
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member. The IMPACTAgewell project delivered by the Mid and East Antrim Agewell Partnership is an integrated community development approach to improving the health and well-being of older people. The approach brings together those involved with the care and support of an older person: the GP, community pharmacists, social care workers and the practice manager of a locality hub. IMPACTAgewell is continually developing to meet the needs of local older people and recently commenced work in Inver rehabilitation ward, with officers being involved at the very start of the rehab admission to ensure that, when the older person is ready for discharge, everything is in place for them to return home, including food packs, meals on wheels, key safes and referrals to occupational therapy and so on. IMPACTAgewell has reported that, since its inception, as well as improving outcomes for older people, it has saved approximately £6·1 million by avoiding unscheduled care costs to the health service in this area over the past seven years. I see it as an example of best practice that I would like to see rolled out across Northern Ireland to become common practice in how we deliver healthcare and support to an ageing population. I recently visited the Mid and East Antrim Agewell Partnership premises and confirmed a two-year funding extension. That reaffirms the Department's commitment to supporting innovative, community-based solutions that address the health and well-being of ageing populations. That funding will enable IMPACTAgewell to continue its vital work of delivering integrated support and services for older individuals, particularly those facing challenges with isolation, long-term health conditions or limited access to community resources.
272 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.02 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.83).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.83 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.89 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.10 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:31 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.