When is a power not a power? When what the left hand giveth, the right hand taketh away. Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, it would be presumptuous of me to expect you to read my mind. Allow me, rather, to concentrate on the evidence.

After an exhausting campaign (that was for me, and I was just watching on the telly!), Scotland voted in a national referendum on Thursday 18^th September, 2014, six months ago. The question put was ‘Should Scotland be an Independent Country?’ On a record-breaking turnout of 85% the nation voted 55% ‘No’ against 45% ‘Yes’.

• At daybreak on Friday, the Prime Minister stepped out onto Downing Street to announce his plan. As promised, Scotland – having decided to remain part of the Union – would get a range of new powers; further devolution to Scotland would grow ‘in tandem with’ new powers for English cities and regions; Lord Smith of Kelvin would prepare firm proposals for reform regarding Scotland; the future status of the Barnett funding formula was left tantalisingly open.
• Set up that very day, the highly-regarded Smith Commission reported by the end of November, and draft legislation (Scotland in the United Kingdom, an enduring settlement) was published before the end of January 2015. The report is built upon three pillars: a durable but responsive settlement for Scotland’s governance; delivering prosperity and social justice; and strengthening the Scottish Parliament’s financial responsibility. The draft legislation is now making its way through the UK Parliament.

A ‘Yes’ vote in Scotland’s Independence Referendum would have had significant and far-reaching consequences for us all. The ‘No’ vote similarly means significant changes, but different ones. The draft legislation before Parliament will have impacts on citizens, communities, Government and on the Third Sector. EVOC is hosting a thinkSpace event to consider just what impacts the Third Sector might expect, and especially what opportunities we might hope for. Take a look at the programme, and we hope you’ll book to join us. Let’s consider together whether the ‘new powers’ – on taxation, on welfare, on elections – are indeed new powers, or whether you think ‘what the left hand hath given, the right hand hath taken away’.

By: Milind Kolhatkar; @evoc_milind

DO you go to meetings where the chair will say, as part of the welcome, ‘Chatham House rules, by the way’?

I’ve been to meetings where people will preface almost every contribution they make with ‘Chatham House rules, by the way’. Let me put my cards on the table – I think we have very different perceptions of just what that means, and I don’t think that’s helpful.

The Chatham House website helpfully has a page devoted to the Rule and the way they put it is: When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed.

Well, that’s pretty clear, isn’t it? The meeting is not confidential (we don’t mention the content), nor is it super-confidential (we don’t mention that the meeting took place at all), we simply don’t say who was at the meeting. Unless, of course, that’s a matter of public record – in which case we are punctilious about not attributing anything that was said to anyone at the meeting.

The Guardian newspaper has an ‘online community site’ accessible via email – the Guardian Public Leaders Network – covering a wide range of issues of interest to those interested in ‘public service’ (understood very broadly). It follows, therefore, that each year the paper recruits public leaders to help guide the editorial staff through the complex public service landscape. The Network has over 25,000 members, and the publication normally attracts more than 225,000 page-views.

Earlier this week I attended my first meeting of the Guardian Public Leaders Network editorial board – and a fascinating experience it was. About a half-dozen people from very different walks of life gathered to share views on the context, drivers and future direction of public service in their area of work. Oh, and our views on Leadership, of course.

One of the most encouraging things about our morning spent together was the level of coherence between what the very different people around the table were saying:

• Public finances represent a very significant concern;
• Business-as-usual is simply not an option;
• There is a growing interest in ‘spin-outs’ and outsourcing;
• Despite this interest, there is simply not a matching capacity to commission intelligently;
• Despite a commitment to evidence-based service-planning, the Public Sector does not have access to the best evidence, nor the skills to commission the best research;
• As pressures on Public Services grow, workers lose their ability to be creative, and a discernible ‘blame culture’ is taking hold;
• Despite the pressures and significant risks there is still much hope that public service, a lifeline for so many communities, will define its own new narrative;
• The growing interest in public engagement and involvement in public service may have been sparked by a crisis in funding, but it just might lead to a creative paradigm and a compelling narrative…

Now, all we need is inspirational leaders.

 

 

In April 2014 the Public Bodies (Scotland) Bill was enacted. Essentially building on Community Health Partnerships, the Act legislates for local authorities and health boards to combine some of their health and social care functions. The intentions, in short, are to create efficiencies, synchronise operational and strategic arrangements and produce better outcomes for people using services.

The Act takes the form of enabling legislation and offers four models of integration:

1. Delegation of functions by the local authority and health board to a body corporate
2. Delegation of functions by the local authority to the health board
3. Delegation of functions by the health board to the local authority
4. Delegation of functions by the local authority to the health board and delegation of health board functions to the local authority   

In Edinburgh the preferred option is to form a ‘body corporate’, in the shape of an Integrated Joint Board. A board of governance will be formed of equal numbers of local authority elected members and non-executive health board members, along with representatives of clinical and allied professions, GPs, Third Sector, carers and service users. None of the last three groups will have voting rights. In Edinburgh the TSI will occupy the place reserved for the Third Sector.

A consultation has been launched on local proposals and papers are available on the CEC website:

The consultation ends on February 20^th.

As many aspects are prescribed in the Act officers from the local authority and health have agreed to attend the EVOC thinkSpace on February 18th to give a presentation on the Scheme of Integration to explain the scope of the consultation, highlight those aspects open to choice and the rationale behind those recommendations.

Of particular interest to the voluntary sector will be

• The delegation of functions, in which health and social services overseen by the Partnership are listed. For example some have a view that the inclusion of housing would be preferable; and the inclusion of accident and emergency comes as a result of considerable debate. A question in this respect: Will the Partnership have the powers to arrive at decisions without recourse to the discrete processes of the respective public bodies? (see section 10.1.9 among others)
• Local arrangements to support preparation of the strategic plan – locally a Strategic Planning Group is proposed with voluntary sector representation, and there is room for negotiation on suitable arrangements.
• Local operational delivery arrangements – the Scheme describes these arrangements with particular reference to performance management and the importance of the role of Chief Officer. Additionally voluntary agencies may wish to seek information on community planning arrangements.
• What are the implications of set aside budgets – could this mean protected/set aside services and functions fare differently from functions not set aside; and by what criteria are decisions regarding set aside budgets arrived at?
• Participation and Engagement – A general outline of commitments to participation with a range of stakeholders, including the voluntary sector, service users and carers, is described. Further work will be developed on this theme and there is a clear opportunity for influence in this respect.
• Data sharing – many agencies have experience of data sharing protocols and requirements, providing a valuable intelligence resource across the voluntary sector. Does this section (Section 12) provide assurance on a particularly complex matter?

The foregoing is very much an edited version of the full consultation document.  There are of course other questions, and coming at a time when survival and sustainability are paramount concerns for voluntary agencies the very short consultation period may have a limiting effect on agency capacity to respond.  EVOC wishes to ensure as many voluntary sector voices as possible are heard and welcomes comments and views to inform a broad based response. 

EVOC is holding a thinkSpace event on Friday February 20^th  8.30-10.30 at 14 Ashley Place, EH6 5PX. 

Please note places are limited and will be allocated on a first come first served basis.  To make a reservation email [email protected].

 

 

… have faith that a basic income would strengthen people’s resources to be resourceful!

#conditionalityscrap

#basicincome

Just before Christmas a colleague passed me an article – ‘Informing investment to reduce health inequalities (III) in Scotland: a commentary’ – which set me thinking. It examines the effects of different forms of interventions to tackle health and health inequalities and finds that the most significant benefit in terms of health inequality derived not from some of the most time intensive work but from a relatively small increase in income:

The most effective (and likely cost-effective) interventions for reducing inequalities were regulatory and tax options which affect income.  Interventions focused on individual agency were much less likely to impact on inequalities, even when targeted at those in the most deprived communities.

Of course that is not to say that individual agency work is not of value – it will have numerous other impacts and positive outcomes but think of the simplicity of an income increase and, as the report highlights, the potentially low cost of achieving it – what is not to like?

Working in an Edinburgh-based project (Recovery Essentials) that delivers welfare rights and financial inclusion advice, the team focus is income maximisation. We see the impact of our work on a daily basis. An increase in income that reduces the daily grind and struggle can turn someone’s life around.

One of our clients was regularly in contact with us needing help with referrals to foodbanks and with accessing crisis grants as she was unable to manage on the benefits she was receiving. The struggle exacerbated her mental health issues and in so doing increased her drug dependency. A successful benefit claim brought a significant increase in weekly income and a consequent turnaround in her health. Now she tells us she is planning for the future for the first time in a long time and has opened savings accounts for her children.

Comas, another Edinburgh based project is set to launch a project ‘20 More’ with the goal of increasing the income of each household in the local area by £20 a week.  It will be fascinating to see the impact – a combination of individual agency work AND increased income. 

As the evidence builds to show the positive impact of increased income on health, teamed with evidence of the negative effects of welfare conditionality and the costs of administering the system, I am left thinking that more support and impetus for the idea of a ‘Basic’ or ‘Citizens’’ income must gather. It is already supported by the Green Party. There is also some support within the Liberal Democrat party.

See more:

https://www.welfareconditionality.ac.uk/

https://basicincome.org.uk/

Follow us @evoc_Finclusion

 

The people behind Edinburgh’s Third Sector are heroes; but you already knew that. This (Social) Justice League accounts for nearly 2000 of all registered charities in Scotland. OSCR (The Office of the Scottish Charity Regulators) is an independent regulator and registrar of Scottish charities, and is the main body for managing charities, charity law, and the public’s confidence in charities, in Scotland. 

EVOC’s ‘Governance Four’ training is a lifeline for Edinburgh’s Third Sector heroes; offering advice and support in both the setting up and running of charitable organisations, in line with OSCR regulations. This FREE training highlights the essential knowledge required for Third Sector organisations in Edinburgh.

The Governance Four training includes the following sessions:

• An Introduction to SCIOs (Scottish Charitable Incorporated Organisations)
• Setting Up a Charity (passing the Charity Test)
• Introduction to Charity Finance
• Trustees Roles & Responsibilities

Held in EVOC’s main offices, this training is absolutely FREE, and provides invaluable information, whether you are in the process of starting a charity, or if you have already started a charity but would like to know more about your role as a trustee, or the principles of charity finance.

These training sessions are mostly held in the evenings over the course of 2015. To check available dates and book your place, take a look at our course programme. 

 

2015, as any stalwart Back to the Future fan will tell you, should be the year of hoverboards, double ties and self-tying shoes. Unfortunately, Marty McFly & co missed a few vital staples of the future; such as the explosion of the digital platform (if it was up to them, we’d still be using fax machines – can you imagine!?). With the help of a few industry experts, as well as our own Comms team know-how, we have made our predictions for digital communications, and what these developments might mean for Edinburgh’s Third Sector’s prospects and reach in 2015.

The Need for Digital

A digital presence is more vital than ever for Third Sector Organisations, yet SCVO estimate that up to 1 in 5 charities have no web presence, with 50% needing help with social media. OfCom have found that young people (16 – 24) spend 24 hours+ online per week, and even the over 65s, a demographic that was initially slow to adapt to new technology, are accessing the internet more and more with the help of tablets. A resource that has such a wide reach with such low overheads cannot be ignored as the funding routes begin to narrow; and a small amount of time to set up a website/social media channels at minimal cost could prove invaluable to your organisation. Let’s Get On & LearnMyWay have free courses and online resources available to help sharpen those digital skills!

Content

The battle for your online voice to be heard over the vast digital din of the internet will continue into 2015 and beyond. The easiest way to engage with your market is, quite simply, to create content people want to see. According to Smart Insights, visual content remains the most effective way to grab peoples attention. Photos, videos & real time conversation provides content that is worth sharing. Start shouting out about what your organisation is doing!

Unsure if your content is up to scratch? The development of ‘Content Curating’ software will be able to measure how your content is performing, and automate marketing tasks to help leverage your organisation’s ‘brand’ and improve conversion rates (whether this is from browser to volunteer, or browser to making a donation). Alternatively, the well established Google Analytics is a good, free resource to monitor the ways in which people are accessing your website. 

Transparency

According to Forbes, transparency in what your organisation is doing will be key in 2015. This can be particularly important for Third Sector organisations, as people are keen to see where their donations are going, and to get the most ‘bang for their buck’. A clear picture of your organisation’s strategy, and the measuring of social/environmental/economic impact could make all the difference.

Personalisation

Personalisation can be referring to two different things. Firstly, there have been dramatic changes in the past few years in how digital content is accessed. No longer are we chained to a desktop computer, as tablets and smartphones usage continues to grow rapidly. Websites have to reflect this, and become mobile and tablet friendly. This will ensure people who access your website will stay interested.

Personalisation can also refer to the content, who is accessing it and where. Does your organisation offer services to more than one demographic? Make sure the tone and content is appropriate to that audience. It sounds obvious, but saying ‘Yo dudes, wassup?!’ to an older group is hardly going to make you a market leader & influencer in that field!

What are your predictions for 2015? Please feel free to share with us!