Reducing Reoffending Change Fund Evaluation of Year 1 - Public Social Partnership Development

This research report outlines findings of an evaluation of Public Social Partnership development funded by Year One of the Reducing Reoffending Change Fund. It focuses on how the funding was used, and what was achieved by the partnerships in the first six months of the Fund.


1 Introduction

1.1 This evaluation assesses the development of Public Social Partnerships during Year 1 of the Reducing Reoffending Change Fund. The overriding aim of the evaluation is to examine how organisations awarded Development Funding in Year 1 of the Reducing Reoffending Change Fund have used the funding to develop Public Social Partnerships, and to examine what has been achieved in this initial six month period.

1.2 The Reducing Reoffending Change Fund is one of three Change Funds created by the Scottish Government to help drive a decisive shift towards preventative spending. It was launched in August 2012 to provide offenders with substantial one-to-one support through evidence-based mentoring schemes, and to promote strong, equal partnership working between third and public sector organisations. Public Social Partnerships were prescribed as the partnership model.

Public Social Partnerships

'A Public Social Partnership (PSP) involves public and third sector bodies co-designing services or interventions to deliver agreed social outcomes. This approach encourages effective partnership working across sectors, places the third sector at the heart of service design and delivery, and explicitly emphasises outcomes rather than activity'[1].

1.3 PSPs originate from Italy where the public and third sectors have jointly developed, designed and delivered services which are focused on improving outcomes for service users in relation to services that the public sector is seeking to commission. Public sector procurement is at the heart of the concept which consists of three phases: 1) design, 2) piloting and 3) tendering. PSPs therefore provide third sector organisations with a different role in the process of commissioning public services compared to the traditional purchaser and supplier model.

1.4 The PSP concept was first piloted in Scotland in 2006. Three PSPs were developed and a review[2] of the pilots identified seven common lessons which the report authors felt had the potential to inform any future roll out of PSPs in Scotland. The lessons were:

  • PSP partners from the public and third sectors must buy-in to shared problem definition and solutions.
  • High level public sector support helped to counter fears about the innovative and riskier approach to public service delivery.
  • Culture change is essential and includes entering into partnership as equals, having a clear and shared understanding of the outcomes, sharing information, and being open to a change in funding (investing to save for the public sector and investing to gain for the third sector).
  • Scale and scope are important so partners understand the problem, buy-in to it, and design a manageable service, and so the level of investment and resources are proportionate to the value of the services implemented.
  • There was a clear need for capacity building and development support for participants within both the public and third sectors.
  • Good communication and relationship building within and between the sectors was invaluable in achieving buy-in.
  • Time and resources are required as progress was markedly longer than expected, and future projects should consider whether the opportunity merits the allocation of resources required to support it.

1.5 The Scottish Government launched a PSP pilot programme in 2009 involving ten PSPs. These PSPs covered a range of policy areas including one focused on reducing reoffending. A small number of organisations involved in the pilots have also been involved in bids to the Reducing Reoffending Change Fund[3]. The learning from these PSPs informed 'A Practical Guide to Forming and Operating Public Social Partnerships' (Scottish Government, 2011). The Guide includes the following description of a PSP which emphasises that co-design and commissioning are at the heart of the model:

'A strategic partnering arrangement which involves the third sector earlier and more deeply in the design and commissioning of public sector services'.

1.6 More recently, a number of strategic PSPs have been developed across Scotland. Ready for Business[4] is supporting these PSPs as part of the 'Developing Markets for Third Sector Providers' support delivered on behalf of the Scottish Government. Some of the organisations involved in these strategic PSPs have been involved in the Reducing Reoffending Change Fund PSPs, including a number of the partners from HMP Low Moss PSP. Drawing on their experience of supporting PSPs to date, Ready for Business has highlighted[5] the key aspects of the PSP model as follows.

Table 1.1: Ready for Business' Key Aspects of a PSP

Key PSP Themes PSP Triggers Benefits of a PSP
  • Service Design
  • Equal Partners
  • Consortia Building
  • Community Benefit
  • Capacity Building
  • Intermediary Support
  • Engaging Service Users
  • Piloting
  • End of a contract
  • Recognition of existing issues
  • Service review process
  • Structural changes
  • New innovations or delivery approaches available
  • Deliver provider market
  • Cultural change
  • Iteration through piloting
  • Simpler, innovative services
  • Better outcomes for users
  • Embedding social values
  • Funding
  • Changing public sector focus
  • Develop capacity of the third sector
  • Sustainability
  • Inclusive commissioning
  • Transparency

1.7 Based on the above sources, key elements of PSPs can be said to be partnership working, service user involvement, co-production, and sustainability. These four elements are adopted in this evaluation as a framework to assess the development of the Reducing Reoffending Change Fund PSPs and the report structure reflects these key features.

Public Social Partnerships in the Reducing Reoffending Change Fund

1.8 The Review of Community Justice Funding Group agreed in early 2012 that PSPs would be the delivery mechanism for the Reducing Reoffending Change Fund. The group has a broad membership[6] demonstrating that many of the key stakeholders from the public and third sectors were involved in the discussions to adopt the PSP model. We understand that a number of delivery mechanisms were considered alongside PSPs. The main drivers for the PSP model were identified by some of those involved as:

  • A desire to implement change - in keeping with the Change Fund ethos - which could be assisted by adopting a new model of working.
  • Political support for testing new models of delivery in Scotland.
  • The national agenda to promote the role of the third sector in the delivery of public services.
  • The Christie Commission's recommendations that public services should be built around organisations working collaboratively to address outcomes, and to constantly seek to improve performance, reduce costs and be open, transparent and accountable.
  • The attractiveness of the PSP model in terms of building in co-production and sustainability at the outset.

1.9 A unique feature of the Reducing Reoffending Change Fund PSPs was that it was prescribed that a third sector organisation must lead the partnerships. The reasons for this appear to be partly pragmatic, as the Third Sector Division has part-funded the pilots, and partly policy-based with the Scottish Government[7] highlighting that:

'The third sector's distinctive attributes of responsiveness and flexibility, innovation, connectivity and community assets and the trust and relationships it can build with offenders gives it an essential and increasing role to play in reducing reoffending'.

Reducing Reoffending Change Fund

1.10 In Year 1 (2012/13) of the Reducing Reoffending Change Fund two strands of funding were available - Development and Delivery Funding. Development Funding up to a maximum of £40,000 per applicant was available to support third sector and public sector organisations to develop a PSP to develop plans for service delivery in Years 2 and 3. Delivery Funding was also available to third sector organisations to support the expansion or enhancement of existing mentoring interventions. For both strands, mentoring was to be targeted at two groups of offenders: prolific male offenders, typically aged up to 25, and women offenders of all ages. The Robertson Trust administered applications for both strands of the Change Fund on behalf of the Scottish Government.

1.11 The Guidance stated that Development Funding was made available in recognition that 'the formation of robust, effective partnerships takes time and resource, and preparing a detailed application can place significant demands on organisations'. The funding was intended to cover the costs of a) project workers to assist partnerships to develop their proposals, and b) activities to increase the capacity of the partners to deliver their proposed interventions, such as training staff. The Guidance included the following examples of ways in which project workers could progress PSP development:

  • Mapping existing service provision and needs in the partners' areas of operation, to enable proposed mentoring schemes to be positioned strategically for maximum effectiveness.
  • Identifying other key partners to potentially involve in the partnership.
  • Helping the partnership to set up a steering group.
  • Coordinating the involvement of service users in the design of interventions.
  • Considering how the proposed mentoring schemes would form robust working links with existing and developing interventions in the area of operation.
  • Coordinating engagement with Ready for Business.
  • Exploring any potential for sources of additional funding for the interventions, and options for funding the interventions beyond April 2015.
  • Drafting a Memorandum of Understanding, outlining each partner's responsibilities.

1.12 In total 31 applications were received for Year 1 Development Funding by the September 2012 deadline. Bids were assessed by the Decision Making Group[8] against criteria shown in Appendix 1. The Group approved bids from 14 organisations worth a total of £426,000; the awards ranged from £39,991 to £15,000 as shown in Appendix 2. The Robertson Trust provided feedback to the 17 unsuccessful Year 1 bidders via e-mail with more detailed feedback available on request.

1.13 All 14 PSPs awarded Development Funding submitted Year 2/3 bids by the January 2013 deadline. In addition another six bids were submitted from PSPs that did not have Year 1 Development Funding although they had all benefitted from Year 1 Delivery Funding. Following an assessment of the bids by the Decision Making Group against criteria shown in Appendix 1, six PSPs were awarded Year 2/3 funding. Five of these PSPs received Year 1 Development Funding.

Support available to Lead Organisations Year 1

1.14 The Scottish Government and The Robertson Trust supported the 14 partnerships awarded Year 1 Development Funding as follows:

  • Guidance for Year 1 and Year 2/3 bidders provided a range of information, a web link to Scottish Government guidance on best practice in PSP development and bidding templates.
  • Both the Year 1 and Year 2/3 Guidance highlighted that general advice and support in creating and operating partnerships was available from Ready for Business.
  • Two workshops in November 2012 attended by over 60 organisations, featuring presentations by The Scottish Government, The Robertson Trust and Ready for Business and a question and answer session. At the second workshop it was announced that bidders could call on Ready for Business for support in developing their PSP proposals.
  • The Robertson Trust was available to answer bidders' queries throughout the bidding process and a significant number of enquiries were fielded.

Research Brief

1.15 The Scottish Government commissioned this evaluation to examine how these 14 projects have used the Year 1 Development Funding to develop PSPs, and what has been achieved in this initial six month period. Specifically, the evaluation is intended to address the following questions:

  • Why did the organisations choose to get involved with a PSP? What did they hope to get out of this model of working?
  • What activities did organisations undertake as part of the PSP development? How successful or unsuccessful do they feel these were?
  • Do they feel that the PSP model is having a positive, negative or no impact on the quality of the service that has been/is being developed? What is it about the model that is having this impact, if any?
  • What impact has the model had on partnership working? What mechanisms have been put in place to ensure an equal working relationship between partners and are these successful?
  • What challenges are they facing through the process?
  • Do they feel that the service being developed through the PSP model is likely to be sustained after the Change Fund ends. Why or why not?
  • Are they achieving what they wanted to from being part of a PSP model? Would they be part of a PSP model again?

1.16 This evaluation does not cover the Delivery Funding activity during Year 1 or the mentoring services to be delivered in Years 2 and 3.

Methods

1.17 A mixed methods approach was adopted for this evaluation, as summarised below. Research tools for all tasks were agreed in advance with the Study Steering Group.

1.18 A document review was conducted at the outset covering Reducing Reoffending Change Fund specific and other contextual documents. The Reducing Reoffending Change Fund documents included the Guidance, the successful Year 1 bids (in full), the Year 2/3 bids (in part) submitted by the PSPs with Development Funding, and a range of documents supplied directly by some of the PSPs such as the findings of their service user engagement and mapping exercises. The contextual documents are listed shown in Appendix 3.

1.19 Depth interviews were undertaken across all 14 PSP lead organisations which involved face-to-face interviews with 28 individuals and 1 telephone interview. The interviews were conducted with 24 staff from the lead organisations who were involved in the PSP development process and 5 interviews with external support brought in with the Development Funding.

1.20 An e-survey of PSP partners was distributed to 168 individuals named in the 14 Year 1 or Year 2/3 bids with Development Funding. In total, 61 responses - a response rate of 36% - were received from 31 third sector respondents, 17 local authority respondents, 9 respondents from other public sector organisations and 4 non-specified returns. Responses covered all 14 Year 1 Development Funded PSPs.

1.21 Depth interviews were undertaken with 34 individuals from a cross section of partners from across the 14 PSPs to gather partners' views on the PSP development process. The interviewees were drawn from local authorities (16), third sector organisations (14), NHS (1), SPS (1), Police (1) and Alcohol and Drug Partnerships (1).

1.22 PSP meetings were observed at the Alternatives, NHS Lothian and The Richmond Fellowship led PSPs.

1.23 We conducted depth interviews with 21 individuals from national stakeholders, including the Scottish Government's Community Justice Division and Third Sector Unit, The Robertson Trust, SPS, ADSW, COSLA, Ready for Business, all eight CJAs, and the Scottish Mentoring Network.

1.24 Depth interviews were conducted with 16 individuals from bidders not awarded Year 1 Development Funding, or organisations involved in mentoring or reducing reoffending that did not bid for Year 1 Development Funding. These interviews were conducted to gather additional views on the PSP development process.

Report Structure

1.25 The remainder of this report presents the findings of the evaluation including the specific study questions. The report is structured around the key elements of a PSP identified above - partnership working, service user involvement, co-production, and sustainability; the prescribed third sector-led PSP approach is also reflected in the report structure. The report is structured as follows:

  • Chapter 2 focuses on the lead organisations and leadership
  • Chapter 3 focuses on partnership working
  • Chapter 4 focuses on service user involvement
  • Chapter 5 focuses on co-production
  • Chapter 6 focuses on sustainability
  • Chapter 7 brings together our conclusion on the RRCF PSP development process and the impact of funding.

Contact

Email: Carole Edwards

Back to top