Some measurement options and issues around the social impact of purchasing Chris Ford WLC & Legal...

Chris Ford WLC & Legal Work Shop 4 Feb 09 1

Some measurement options and issues around the social impact

of purchasing

Chris FordWLC & Legal Issues Workshop

4 Feb 2009


Presentation Outline

• Some starting points• Three measurement frameworks – Social Return On Investment– Social Accounts and Auditing– Social Capital

• Some questions


Starting point 1

“1.1 All new policies, programmes and projects, whether revenue, capital or regulatory, should be subject to comprehensive but proportionate assessment, wherever it is practicable, so as best to promote the public interest.”

“5.76 Costs and benefits that have not been valued should also be appraised; they should not be ignored simply because they cannot easily be valued...”

The Green Book, HMT. Emphasis added.


Starting point 2

Registered Charities in England and Wales. 2005

Turnover No of orgs

Under £10k 95,526£10k-£100k 48,781£100k-£1m 18,258£1m-£10m 4,331>£10m 570

Total 167,466

(Charity Commission, quoted in UK Voluntary Sector Almanac 2006. NCVO)


Starting point 3

“There was strong evidence from TSOs that funders do not link monitoring requirements proportionately to size of organisation or level of funding...”

“TSOs should work more closely with funders and commissioners to ensure a closer match between their own information needs for learning and development, and those required for compliance and accountability.”

Accountability and Learning; developing monitoring and evaluation in the Third Sector, Ellis (2008) CES.


Framework 1Social Return On Investment

Stages of SROI (from p22 Investing in Impact, Social Economy Scotland, undated)

1 Understand and plan2 Stakeholder analysis3 Outcome map4 Key outcomes5 Collect initial data6 Impact map


7 SROI8 Implement the plan and data collection9 Projections10 Analyse income and expenditure11 Calculate SROI12 Sensitivity analysis13 Report14 Verification


Framework 2 Social Accounts and Audit

• Agency mission • Objectives and Values• Social book keeping records/indicators; quantitative

and qualitative against objectives and values• Social Audit. Book keeping collated in draft social

accounts which explain the performance of the organisation against its objectives and its values. Checked and verified by independent panel. (from ‘SAA in 1 Page’ www.socialauditnetwork.org.uk)


Pembrokeshire FRAME Ltd Social Accounts 2006/7

Mission Statement: FRAME promotes social inclusion, self worth and personal well being through supported, meaningful occupation and education, particularly for those with or recovering from mental ill health and/or with a learning disability.

Values• Professionalism and integrity• Service provision• Communication• Confidentiality


Objectives:• Social inclusion• Develop self worth and wellbeing• Education and training• Relief of poverty and social deprivation• Environmental good practice

Services provided: • Work practice• Personal support and planning• Training• Re-use of household items


Social Audit and Schools

• Roger Catchpole quoted in ‘Governance and Accountability’ Gibbon, Fenwick McMillan. Public Money & Management (Dec 08)

• UK inspection has moved towards social audit practice. Before 2002 OFSTED inspection “being done to them (schools) not with them.”

• Changes in inspection processes by 04 (when article written) suggest possible relevance of SAA.


• “The shift is now strongly towards schools sharing the ownership of the process with self-evaluation, an aspect which has always been fundamental to social auditing.”

• “The shift towards social audit practice has been to start to put a much higher value on stakeholder feedback and involvement.”

• “The report is seen as a vehicle for school improvement, providing an agenda for development that can be owned by the school.”

• “... Social objectives have slowly become important in school inspections. For many years a schools record in delivering on key social aims such as inclusiveness were not at the forefront.”

(Emphasis added)


Framework 3 - Social Capital

Proxy Indicators

• “Membership in local associations and networks. Using membership in local associations as an indicator of structural social capital consists of counting the associations and their members and measuring various aspects of membership (such as internal heterogeneity) and institutional functioning (such as the extent of democratic decision making)....

• “Indicators of trust and adherence to norms. Measuring trust and adherence to norms (cognitive social capital) requires asking respondents about their expectations about and experiences with behavior requiring trust....

• “An indicator of collective action. The provision of many services requires collective action by a group of individuals. The extent to which this collective action can be measured and is an indicator of underlying social cohesion....”

(Understanding and measuring social capital. Social Capital Initiative. Working Paper 24, World Bank.)


Key features of the model for inclusion of relevant community benefits in procurement.

1) Examples of the sorts of community benefits that the delivery agency may be able to bring as part of the contract delivery are included in the specification document. These are identified through engagement with ultimate beneficiaries early in the commissioning cycle.

2) As part of the tender evaluation criteria, a percentage of the quality aspect

is allocated to community benefits. 3) Tenderers are invited, as part of the method statement or equivalent, to

express all community benefits, identifying the relevance of these benefits to the subject matter of the procurement and suggesting methods for evidencing their delivery.


The following wording may be used;

“Please outline all community benefits your organisation can offer the Council when providing this contract. Contractors should be aware that only those community benefits that relate to the subject matter of the contract itself can be taken into account in the evaluation of any tender. Although the judgement of relevance is a matter for [procuring agency], an innovative approach towards how those benefits relate to the subject matter of the contract is encouraged.”

4) At the tender evaluation stage, the procuring agency or evaluation panel ensure

that the proposed benefits are relevant to the subject matter of the contract and within the powers and policies of the agency. They are then assessed against the evaluation criteria.

5) As part of the pre contract clarification and mobilization period (ie between the

awarding of the contract and the contract starting), the procuring authority and delivery agency agrees the contract management arrangements. As part of this the proposed monitoring and evaluation framework to verify the delivery of the relevant community benefits is reviewed and if necessary refined.


Issues and Questions - 1

• Premise that adequate emphasis on social aspect of sustainable procurement will lead to increased access for TS to delivery opportunities. This is questionable.

• Premise that assuring social aspect of sustainability requires TS engagement. They can also be delivered by public and private sector. What’s the translation between added value, corporate citizenship, and corporate social responsibility?

• Beyond wellbeing duty what are the institutional drivers on social aspect?


Issues and Questions - 2

• Approach of Flexible Framework is broadly transferable to address social issues. Is the prioritisation methodology?

• If TSOs are recognised as an economic actor what opportunities may there be in the Sub National Review?

• Supply chain management?


Thanks for your time

Chris Ford

[email protected] 14 Durham Dales Centre01388 528 256 Castle Gardens

StanhopeCo Durham DL13 2FJ

mailto:[email protected]

Some measurement options and issues around the social impact of purchasing Chris Ford WLC & Legal...

Documents

Transcript of Some measurement options and issues around the social impact of purchasing Chris Ford WLC & Legal...