12 What

8/4/2019 12 What

1/681

An Open Space event1st March 2007

What should we do to improve supportfor frontline organisations and how will

we know when weve done it?

8/4/2019 12 What

2/68

Open Space Session Report

What should we do to improve support for frontline organisations and how will we know when weve done it?2

Introduction

City Parochial Foundation commissioned Steve Burkeman and AlisonHarker to research and produce Building Blocks because of its long-

standing interest in ensuring that frontline organisations get the highest

quality of support from second tier organisations (STOs).

We are extremely grateful to the authors for their stimulating report and

to all of you for giving up your time today to come and discuss and

debate this important question:

What should we do to improve support

for frontline organisations and how will

we know when weve done it?

I look forward to participating in what I am confident will be a useful

and enjoyable day.

Bharat Mehta

Chief Executive

City Parochial Foundation

8/4/2019 12 What

3/68

Open Space Session ReportOpen Space Session Reports

3

*Delegates put their number against a recommendation that they intended to pursue

Nour-Eddine Aboudihaj 1 Wandsworth Voluntary Sector Organisation Agency

Sasan Abtahi 2 London Councils

Noeleen Adams 3 Law Centres Federation

Saeed Ahmed 4 Harrow Council for Racial Equality

Hanif Ahmed 5 Consortium of Bengali Associations

Tanzeem Ahmed 6 Olmec

Kate Aldous 7 NCVO

J Adams 152 Connexions TAPA

Atifa Alikhan 9 West London Network

Carl Allen 10 Local Compact Voice for England Andrea Allez 11 National Assoc.for Voluntary and Community Action

Xhevat Ademi 159

Simin Azimi 13 Refugee Womens Association

Sean Baine 14 Southwark Action for Voluntary Organisations

Hosna Bangladesh 15 Bangladeshi Womens Society

Susanna Bennett 19 Sutton Centre for the Voluntary Sector

Tim Brogden 21 London Voluntary Service Council

Emily Buchanan 23 Sheila McKechnie Foundation

Nicola Busby 24 Facefront Inclusive Theatre

Steve Burkeman 25 Author of Building Blocks

Tania Bronstein 151 Consultant

Ben Cairns 150 Institute for Voluntary Action Research

Rachel Carter 26 London Voluntary Service Council

Lisa Charalambous 28 Central London CVS Network

Obi Chinyere-Ezeh 30 Lifecare Consulting Limited

May Chung 31 Milton Keynes Council for Voluntary Organisations

Kevin Clifford 32 People First

Birgitta Clift 33 Lloyds TSB Foundation for England and Wales

Paul Conway 35 Hackney Training and Employment Network

Annie Cooper 36 Office of the Third Sector

Julie Corbett-Bird 37 Blackfriars SettlementGemma Cossins 38 London Voluntary Service Council

Dinah Cox 39 Race on the Agenda

Linda Damerell 41 Development Trusts Association London

Sandya Dass 42 Consultant

John Denny 43 Vassell Elderly Project

Jo Ecclestone 46 Sainsbury Family Charitable Trust

Jacqui Finn 49 South London CVS Partnership

Ian Foster 51 LVSTC

Maknun Gamaledin-Ashami 52 Paul Hamlyn Foundation

Hilary Garner 53 Kingston Voluntary Action

Lisa Greensill 153 GOL

Andy Gregg 155 LASA

Martin Hall 56 The City Bridge Trust

Mubin Haq 57 City Parochial Foundation

List of delegates


8/4/2019 12 What

4/68



Deborah Hart 58 Women in London Vivienne Hayes 59 Womens Resource Centre

Sarah Hayward 60 Employability Forum

Robin Hazlewood 61 City Parochial Foundation

Jill Healey 62 Greater London Authority

Karen Heart 63 North London CVS Partnership

Ted Hill 64 Hillingdon Association for Voluntary Services

Bob Holt 67 London Borough of Hounslow

Zoe Howes 68 An Viet Foundation

Noel Hudson 69 Peckham Voluntary Sector Forum

Nicola Humberstone 70 Association of Greater London Older Women

Paula Jeffery 75 Enfield Voluntary Action Vaughan Jones 76 Praxis

Chuks Kamalu 78 Evelyn Oldfield Unit

Kishore Kanani 79 Hackney Council for Voluntary Service

Keefa Kiwanuka 82 Brent Association for Voluntary Action

Helena Kowalska 83 Southwark Supplementary Education and Mother Tongue Assoc.

Elizabeth Ladimeji 84 NCVO

Diana Leat 85 Carnegie UK Trust

Andrew Lee 86 People First

Kay Lee 87 Evelyn Oldfield Unit

Jain Lemom 88 London Councils

Alison Licorish 89 Lewisham Council

Rob Macmillan 91 Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research

Sheffield Hallam University

Mr Maharasingham 92 Tamil Action Committee

Mohamed Maigag 94 Haringey Somali Community

Sharon McGilchrist 158 London Borough of Tower Hamlets

Rachael McGill 95 Southwark Community Care Forum

Wendy McGuire 96 Southwark Community Care Forum

Bharat Mehta 97 City Parochial Foundation

Joan Millbank 98 Consultant

Dr. Harshad Mistri 99 Ashram Lambeth Asian Elderly Day Centre Alastair Murray 101 Housing Justice (Un-leash)

Colin Nee 103 Charities Evaluation Services

Janice Needham 104 Consultant

Itango Ngondo 105 Congolese Community Council

Henry Nicholson 106 Blind Africans and Caribbeans

Mara Normile 107

Mahmood Norouzi 108 Freelance Consultant in the Third Sector

Gerard Omasta-Milsom 109 REACH

Patrick Opendi 110 Generation Roots

Sarah Oyedele 111 Voluntary Action Camden

Dr. Pambu 113 Corecog

Wai-Fong Pang 114 East London Financial Inclusion Unit

Elahe Panahe 115 City Parochial Foundation

List of delegates

8/4/2019 12 What

5/68



List of delegates

Ian Perkins 116 Off the Streets and into WorkHeather Petch 117 HACT

Debbie Pippard 118 Big Lottery Fund

Karin Podschun 119 LVSTC

Ian Redding London Councils

Marcia Roswell-Joseph 122 London Funders

Sarah Ruiz 123 Newham Voluntary Sector Consortium

Olivia Sixsmith Citizens Advice

Angela Spence 125 Black Training and Enterprise Group

David Spence 126 Kairos in Soho

Mark St. John Reedman 127 Consortium of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered

Voluntary and Community OrganisationsEsther Sterngold 129 Interlink Foundation

Emma Strang France 131 Consultant

Rajah Thangarajah 132 Haringey Association of Voluntary and Community

Organisations

Vu Khanh Thanh 133 An Viet Foundation

Tim Walker 136 Citizens Advice London Region

Alice Wallace 137 East London CVS Network

Jill Walsh 138 Capacitybuilders

Joseph Wattes 140 One Drop Presents....

Shaheen Westcombe 141 Bexley Council

Jane Wilmot 144

Jenny Willmott 145 National Council for Voluntary Youth Services

Tim Wilson 146 Performance Hub

Alastair Wilson 147 School for Social Entrepreneurs

George Wright 148 Stockwell Partnership

City Parochial Foundation:

Jaspal Babra

Chris Bazlinton

Sioned ChurchillRay Eden

Mubin Haq

Robin Hazlewood

Bharat Mehta

Mara Normile

Elahe Panahi

Jane Wilmot

8/4/2019 12 What

6/68


6

On arriving at the meeting delegates were invited to review and respondto the Key Points from the Building Blocks Report

Key Points from Chapter 3: Frontline groups

1. There is an imbalance between the number and type of groups wanting help, and the amount of

help available.

2. Small groups which have been established in recent years seem to be better supported than

medium-sized ones.

3. Lesbian, gay, bisexual & transgender organisations face particular difficulties in finding appropriate

support.

4. There is a wide range of support for black, minority ethnic and refugee organisations, but despite

this there are continuing problems.5. Disability organisations report a variety of experiences.

6. Local branches of national organisations tend to be better supported than those without such a

structure behind them.

Responses

Seems to be a perception that BME groups are somehow all united with the same concerns (similar

assumption about faith groups). This is not necessarily the case many have more differences than

similarities. Cant just all be covered by any one programme.

Medium sized organisations speak about this as stand alone. They must jointly identify needs and

request the support from second tier organisations.

BME groups get support but have difficulty to continue infrastructure due to no core funding.

This needs unpicking. There is little or no support for LGBT-specific frontline groups, its true, but

does this mean that LGBT frontline groups cannot access appropriate support from generic and

specialist support from organisations like CVS, Hubs, CES, NCVO etc?

There is a danger of suggesting that there is a wide range of support for BME organisations without

qualifying this as it can leave people assuming that this is adequate. It may be that given there are

more emerging small organisations in this sector there is always going to be a demand for support.

Key points

What should we do to improve support for frontline organisations and how will we know when weve done it?

8/4/2019 12 What

7/68



Chapter 4: Second-tier organisations1. There are many second-tier organisations (STOs) other than Councils for Voluntary Service (CVSs)

providing support. CVSs and some STOs share similar issues.There are mixed opinions about the

quality of infrastructure support.

2. There are a number of intrinsic difficulties with the CVS model. They are burdened with high

expectations and heavy demands. As generalist bodies with an all encompassing brief they can

quickly become overloaded. Specialist STOs, because of their constituency or the issues with

which they deal, can more easily control what they take on.

3. CVSs and other STOs face increasing difficulty in raising funds from local authorities and primary

care trusts, which, with the tacit support of many frontline organisations, are under pressure to fund

direct improvements in frontline services.

Responses

CVS tends to tackle issues of FLO with no concern about diversity and cultural issues of FLO

Many if not most frontline groups are unaware of the role and value of CVS and may turn instead to

specialist/sub-sector support (if available). I have worked for frontline groups for 17 years before I

became aware of the existence of CVS.

CVSs do not tend to be funded to do a lot of marketing/PR/outreach very time consuming.

The current (structure) of 2nd tier organisations is too broad and general with limited resources theycannot be all things to all people. The presumption than an organisation can speak for or represent

the sector as a whole does not make sense or stand up in practice. They need to have clear limited

roles. One size does not fit all. We need different models for different parts of the sector. Training

needs to be general and specific to cater for the needs of different organisations. It can only speak

for the sector as a whole on general issues funding, premises and perhaps providing a forum for

the wide and varied views.

STOs and CVS often work along very separatist lines. In order to promote efficiency would it be

possible for STOs and CVSs to be less possessive as it were and join forces more regularly.

This would enhance knowledge, expertise and access to funding.

Staff are on overload in all CVSs. However we cannot stop as those demands are on us. A greatdeal of time is spent on reporting for grants. Can this be changed a little?

Intrinsic difficulties? Does this mean/imply the CVS model is flawed from the outset? I dont think a

generalist model is a bad one perhaps the high expectations and demands indicate that groups

want/need CVSs.

Key points

8/4/2019 12 What

8/68



Second-tier organisations1. There is a lack of clarity about where appropriate support for different kinds of groups at different

stages of development might be found. There are many second-tier organisations but who they

benefit, how they do it and when their intervention is appropriate is unclear to those who might

seek their help. This encourages haphazard working in the sector.

2. Perhaps the CVSs (Councils for Voluntary Service) most important role - that of facil itating the voice

of voluntary organisations to statutory bodies is most difficult to fund because smaller frontline

organisations either do not understand the nature or significance of the work involved, or because

it is difficult for the CVSs to convince such organisations that they have the competence to do the

job well.

3. Support is also provided by others, such as local authorities, the Charity Commission, consultants,the business community, ACAS, helpful individuals, and funders.

Responses

BMEs have a great role to play as they understand the issue facing their front line organisations.

It is the funders who need to recognise this.

STOs should work within an evidence based culture, i.e. where they can show (independent

verification) the added value theyve given their clients.

It is not just the campaigning/promoting voice role that is often not fully understood by frontlineorganisations also all sorts of CVS services are needed but they dont know they do.

Good critical analysis of 2nd tier BUT very little critical analysis of frontline organisations

skews conclusions and recommendations and what they need to do also very important.

Recommendations to withdraw from 2nd tier and give ring-fenced money for training to frontline

organisations could lead to problems, for example: a) frontline groups use money to pay

consultants with dubious credentials to train them b)most money will be channelled into paying

consultants to do fundraising. This suggests wants rather than needs if consultants no good will

not be successful. If successful, still danger that project will not succeed because capacity of

group will be strengthened and all money will be wasted. Threat to sustainability of 2nd tier support

if no longer have funding streams available will not survive or groups potentially paying for support

services.

Key points

8/4/2019 12 What

9/68



What frontline groups want or need1. Groups tend to say that what they most need is help with funding. But this may mask other more

urgent needs.

2. Frontline groups listed many areas in which they need support both hard and soft skills.

3. The way in which help and especially information is provided is just as important as the content.

4. Second-tier organisations need better ways of identifying what frontline organisations need by way

of support, including seeking feedback from users and potential users.

5. Much training on offer is seen as repetitive and too basic.

6. A clear expression by frontline groups that they need support from knowledgeable, experienced,

committed and skilled individuals/bodies which are not their rivals for funding.

Responses

Many frontline groups struggle to raise core costs e.g. rent. Funders could help with this.

Medium sized organisations that deliver services for public bodies may benefit from training and

one of support of various kinds. That is necessary but not sufficient. Front line organisations need

consistent support over a couple of years to organise for full cost recovery and simultaneously

improve HR, IT, financial management and enable them to compete in the world of contract and

tender.

These groups need to build up their infrastructure and demonstrate to funders that they will show

value for money.

And you cant separate funding from other very important and less accessible/more complex areas

politicise, procedures, finance.

Training for CVS workers on a regular basis is vital to cope with the changing climate, eg

commissioning, employment law, child protection, full cost recovery.

There is obviously a need for a range of training to be provided to the sector recognising the

different stages of development STO need to be able to work together to develop their unique

areas of specialism and not re-create each others work.

STOs need to prove that they have the support of FLO before they get funded!

Key points

8/4/2019 12 What

10/68



Key points

What works best?1. One-to-one help works best, but it is also expensive, time-consuming, and hard to find.

2. Support is often provided by relatively inexperienced people, whereas frontline organisations

especially value help from people with experience and knowledge.

3. Help is especially valued at the early stages of a groups development.

4. As groups grow, they need more specialist help, covering issues such as fundraising and IT.

5. There seems to be a lack of support around diversity issues and community development.

Responses This is partly because staff in STOs may not stay in their organisations long enough to gain the

experience and knowledge partly because the STOs themselves are under-funded so that staff are

underpaid. Over-stretched and leave, look to move on.

Refugee groups in particular need support with the language of funding applications. They often

have good project ideas but struggle to articulate.

Offer training to staff in CVS that have a proven track record.

But it works best so is worth funders paying for.

The role of the Charity Commission and others

1. The growth in the number of voluntary and community groups is not, in the authors view, entirely a

good thing, for a variety of reasons.

2. The Charity Commission, working with others, has a role to play in signposting people to sources

of advice about governance and other issues, in order to ensure that those organisations which do

register as charities are soundly based.

3. The potential for more confusion as more players enter the stage through initiatives such as

ChangeUp.

Responses

The Charity Commission must require groups to show that they do network with STOs before being

registered.

C.M. should make sure trustees understand and are skilled to fulfil their roles.

In Stockwell and Lambeth there are several, often competing, groups from the Horn of Africa, many

doing similar work. The challenge for funders is to encourage joint working whilst acknowledging

political sensitivities.

Theres duplication and extremely patchy quality. But theres no helicopter view of the profile of

the sector, so groups starting up dont always know if they are duplicating effort and hence wasting

resources.

Good idea for Charity Commission to do this will they?

8/4/2019 12 What

11/68


11

The role of funders1. Many organisations have good relations with funders and see them as a source of more than

merely money.

2. There is some doubt about the extent to which funders now focus on the support of capacity-

building, and a feeling that this support needs to be more strategically planned.

3. There is room for more coordination between funders.

4. Confusion over who determines needs, who decides which of those needs should be met. Small

organisations fell that their voices are not heard that it is funders and outside agencies which

decide what these organisations need, rather than the organisations themselves.

Responses

STO support, even on a borough-wide basis, is too widely spread. Where possible it should be

provided more locally.

There are very few funders but important ones who fund capacity building work. Thank you CPF for

being a forerunner.

Funders should encourage organisers of small VOs to improve their skills to provide better services

sign post to get training.

Funding criterial generally getting narrower makes this situation worse project is packaged to fit,

not based on real and specific needs.

Funders should admit where they lack knowledge of BMEs and ask. Never too late to learn!

STOs know more about local need than funders do.

STOs tend to dilute specialisms in order to fit funders criteria. They should not be threatened by

lack of funds for their area of work.

Much closer collaboration between STOs and funders needed for funders to establish need.

Funders need to be more culturally aware and should approach the relevant organisation to provide

the relevant training.

Key points

What should we do to improve support for frontline organisations and how will we know when weve done it?

8/4/2019 12 What

12/68



Open Space

The following reports were typed by participants

and the votes taken from recommendation sheets.

We apologise for any inaccuracies.

8/4/2019 12 What

13/68



Topic: Votes/delegateWhat should national infrastructure do to

support STOs (to support frontline VCOs)

Participants

Jenny Willmott, NCVYS Andrea, NAVCA (sorry I didnt take note of the other particpants names.

Main points discussed

Gaining information from national infrastructure can be difficult often goes to director/ chief

officers can be difficult for workers to access. How do we make sure info gets to STOs and is

seen as relevant?

Voice function how can national infrastructure be a representative voice?

What about those that are

arent members? Who hears the voice of those that arent engaged?

How to involve small VCOs and diverse groups in infrastructure provision (local, regional and

national)

Difficulties in understanding whats out there all the different information from national andregional infrastructure/ Changeup consortia/ hubs etc etc how can the information be

coordinated, collated and disseminated effectively?

Very little work has been done on commissioning and procurement - role of national infrastructure.

NAVCA have a new project on this.

Who monitors STOs quality? Role of national infrastructure in driving up quality. To what extent can

going through quality marks be compulsory? What about small groups that dont always have the

capacity and resources to go through quality marks? How can we ensure the creativity of the sector

isnt affected by additional requirements/ regulations?

Need to share learning from research and from pilot projects the learning, not necessarily the

process. Need to not be scared to learn from mistakes/ bad experiences.

Need to be confident to say to funders when something isnt working.

Recommendations

The group recommended that national infrastructure should support STOs by:

1. Looking at how information is disseminated to the sector ensuring information sent out gets to

the right people.

2. Making and coordinating the information thats out there (regionally, nationally, from ChangeUp

consortia, national hubs)

3. Driving up the quality of STOs via quality marks etc (to what extent should national infrastructure

encourage or require STOs to go through quality marks?) 3

4. Sharing and disseminating learning from research and pilot projects that have taken place.

5. Play a role in influencing commissioning and procurement

6. Carry out research and collate evidence on the benefits of infrastructure 4 91

7. Support STOs in marketing and PR

8/4/2019 12 What

14/68



Topic: Votes/delegateFunders should only fund: access to finance and

funding; voice and advocacy; marketing; legal forms;

governance. Everything else can be done through

generic infrastructure/business support.

Participants

Colin Nee; Mark St John Reedman; Dinah Cox; Diana Leat;

Karin Podschun; Alice Wallace; Ian; Lisa Charalambous


Training standard does not exist that provides basic; intermediary and higher level skills on the

distinct business support/infrastructure needs of the sector.

Funders put pressure on groups to organise and incorporate when, particularly with small

grassroots/community groups this is neither necessary nor desirable. These external pressures

drive the growth in STOs and frontline organisations, often inappropriately.

STOs to develop effective and efficient back-office functions that meet the needs of frontline

organisations (particularly small groups) e.g. being the accountable body/providing contract

management services for small/frontline organisations.

Recommendations

1. Use the inbuilt expertise in STOs to provide services (e.g. contract management and

monitoring) for small groups, relieving the constraints from these groups from managing

contracts. For example, a health and social care contract held by an STO can also fund

a small group providing arts access to disabled or mental health users where the

group itself would not have the capacity to bid to the PCT and where the PCT would

not fund such work. 5

2. Need to be far more creative in terms of how frontline organisations are helped by STOs,

it is not about often poor quality and duplicative capacity building. 3

8/4/2019 12 What

15/68



Topic: Votes/delegateWhat is the specific role of a CVS

e.g. strategy and voice

Participants

Ian London Councils, Jacqui SLCVS network, Mark consortium LGBT, Lisa GoL,

Birgitta TSB Lloyds foundation, Tim - LVSC


Interesting to see now opening up of NAVCA impacts

CVS coverage across London is variable Las have to realise that they need support in this role.

Need to be representative of different sub-sets of communities

Funders have skewed the roles of CVSs CVSs can suffer mission drift. Need to concentrate and

define what core services are strategy, voice, engage needs to be resourced

CVSs do see themselves as the voice of the sector; cross sectoral forums help to get small and

medium sized organisations but there is a challenge getting to the very small orgs combined withpublic service delivery agenda. Do need a single body that brings all voices in a borough together

Do CVSs have alternative methods of communicating community development skills

How do we ensure that all voices are heard? Some of the voices can get lost dilemma between

local groups

Need to be critical and look at whether there is a need for all these infrastructure services; need to

be clear about referral systems; need to honestly look at whether they are providing services that

they really need. Not sure whether CVSs should be solo performers; connection

VCS needs to be clearer about what/who they are representing

Recommendations

1. Need to have a focal point, single point of contact (the CVS) but they have to be

linked to all the subsets and networks of the community not the voice in its own

right but the facilitator of the voice 1

2. Or CVSs should be doing more around representation; or there should be sharing

of the voice 2

3. Need to have structure in place to facilitate a voice function 11 138, 28

8/4/2019 12 What

16/68



Topic: Votes/delegateHow do we effectively and realistically measure the

support we provide (topic 14, second group)

Participants

Rachael, Emma, Olivia, Ben, May, Tim, Paul, Sandhya, Sasan, Colin


Qualitative/Soft data: Distance travelled not numbers. How do you measure things like self esteem/

improved quality of life? Is someones opinion of their own development valid? Is one workers

opinion of this valid? Do funders recognise this? Numbers can be meaningless you may see lots

of people but give a bad service, they dont know it could be better.

STOs having to prove themselves to funders and frontline and its difficult because not obvious

results. Frontline wonder where all the moneys going, think its wasted on bureaucracy core

services hard to explain. The added value given by the existence of an STO in a neighbourhood isintangible but important. Results will be at one remove.

How do you capture long-term change? Outcomes might be five years later staff change, orgs

change. Do funders understand this?

This is not an exact science organisations are messy things, hard to separate services and issues

out. Need to distinguish between generic services and targeted project work.

STOs often in competition and duplicating services we all think we do it best. Funders want to

stop this.

Recommendations

1. Ideas for things to monitor: how easy is it for people to access you and be seen quickly?

Evidence of what groups youve helped are actually doing, how their services have developed,

I have learned something new that no one else taught me

2. Phone people or ask them face to face. Customise it. Keep track of them dont say this is

monitoring,; say just wondering how its going.

3. Self evaluation is meaningful if done often enough and over a long time period.

4. Measurement methods need to be customised to the activity, may need a variety of different

approaches stemming from an understanding of the projects purpose. Ned to be able to discuss

this with your funder and gain their understanding.

continued

8/4/2019 12 What

17/68



5. Mainstream monitoring 5 minutes added on to every session for feedback, incorporatedinto events, not an add on at the end. Change culture of frontline groups so they understand

monitoring is part of everything, will always happen.

6. Funders need to understand long timescales real change may only be seen after 5 years.

7. You cant have good measurement if youre not clear about your aims, plans etc. Have a well-run

organisation and have a monitoring and evaluation strategy.

8. Think about using generalist standards, e.g. NAVCO, and supplementing these with your specific

ones.

9. Work meaningfully with other local orgs dont duplicate. This is very hard change is always

resisted and if its to happen funders need to be behind it too e.g. fund events on a local level

for people to discuss issues and areas of duplication and clarify their roles, short, medium and longterm. Will take time and need expert support and consultancy.

8/4/2019 12 What

18/68



Topic: Votes/delegateIf funds are given to front line organisations

for 2nd tier provision how will 2nd tiers survive?

Participants

Compact Voice

HTEN

London Funders

Office 3rd Sector

LB Hounslow

NAVCA

LVSC

Sheffield Halam Uni

Charities Eval Service


If new system happens in haphazard way no guarantee that only the weakest 2nd tiers would

disappear

How will we quality control the competition between STOS and consultants?

How will groups know which STOs to access for quality support?Need accreditation and

standards so that front line orgs are ensured of quality services

Concept of purchasing only works when you know what services you want

Some front line orgs may not be aware of the services they need

The market may lead to sustainable STOS surviving but not necessarily the survival of orgs with

the interests of a diverse range of front line orgs at heart

Do we want to transfer resources from 2nd tiers to consultants? STOs will not be sustainable if funded by spot funding from front line orgs this income will be

erratic and will negatively impact on cash flow, financial planning etc this in turn will inevitably

lead to reduction in staff and services

Front line orgs will have a reduced service if have to pay on day rate will get very little for e.g.

2000. In addition, if core funding to STOs is reduced there will be fewer services available for

front lines to access. The smallest front line orgs who do not receive funding will also not have

access to ring fenced funds for STOs and may no longer have access to some of the free services

currently offered.

STOs would begin to compete and may well lead to few large orgs surviving and rest crumbling.

Loss localised service. Could develop register of STOs with quality control.

8/4/2019 12 What

19/68



STOs best provided locally. If front line orgs dont know what need free lance consultants may not be best placed to guide

them.

Hard for STOS to charge for some services not necessarily value e.g. policy and voice

Impossible to get all funders to act in same way

What would happen to orgs with internal ST provision e.g. CAB

If divide funds available locally e.g. Hounslow has 50k for local CVS if divide will purchase v little.

Could LAAs be vehicles for ST funding?

STOs need to win arguments about their existence need

Recommendations

1. Explore quality / assessment and register of STOS to ensure service level adequate

2. Explore opportunities for assessing / meeting needs of front line orgs in other ways than market

forces e.g. ST bids needing to be supported by front line orgs, market research etc

3. Look for international models to see if applying market forces has been effective in VCS concern

that most marginalised groups will be excluded.

8/4/2019 12 What

20/68



Topic: Votes/delegateHow do we ensure the needs of communities of interest

(equalities groups) are met in the services provided

Participants

Hesna, Vu, Jill, Amanda, Lisa, Andy, Nic, Mark


We need to assess what the needs are of these groups before actually trying to provide services

asking the question why they might have different needs and what these are (Are there any

differences)

Be aware that certain groups or organisations are only set up to deal with one specific interest

(included in their mem and arts) and thus might not need opening up to all (might not be relevant)

The agenda of the 2nd tier structures does not fit what is needed they do not look at issues of

equality, human rights and justice

Need to work together more effectively and link up CVS bodies could work to translate and facilitate for communities in other arena, but need to be

clear about what is sensitive and the sensitivities of others but also force groups to be aware of

this themselves

Knowledge of smaller organisations and groups about what there issues are or their differences are

should be part of the sensitivity awareness.

Voice and Choice distinction about the role of the CVS challenging and needs to have more

thought around because of natural tensions or difficulties with funder and advocate function.

Create realistic partnerships with specialist infrastructure to ensure that equalities issues are

included and supported

CVS could /should analyse and represent the needs of smaller VCS in a geographic area and then

lobby on its behalf to ensure these needs are met /funded at the local level (space, resources etc)

Inclusivity begins at home. All infrastructure organisations go through an equality Impact

Assessment of what they do themselves (processes and procedures) so that they can be more

inclusive and are practicing what they preach

Good model of how 2nd tier infrastructure is inclusive- Community Accounting Service

Tokenistic equalities inclusion more lobbying needed on equalities issues CEHR and Goods and

services regulations already a hierarchy of groups based on existing power that is exclusive rather

than equal

RECOMMENDATIONS ON NEXT PAGE

8/4/2019 12 What

21/68



Recommendations1. Hear small organisation voice is included

2. What do communities of interest actually need

3. Assessing equalities internally (who and what are we supporting)

4. CVS Staff trained in equalities awareness

8/4/2019 12 What

22/68



Topic: Votes/delegateShould we be worried about the effect on

quality of the idea of frontline organisations

being able to purchase services?

Participants

Jane, Noel, Wendy, Rachael, Lisa, Jain, Azina, Simin, Karin, Jill


Specialist/technical services and services for medium sized groups could be appropriate

for purchasing (this could be done at a regional/national rather. Core services, information,

campaigning, partnership, representation are not appropriate for this. Could have both purchasing

and non-purchasing. Those who can pay could subsidise others.

National and London level support available is not being communicated to groups e.g. Change

Up hubs.

Organisations may not have the expertise/knowledge to know what they need they will buy whatthey want which may not be the same as what they need. Or they will pay for the advice they want

to hear which may not be the best advice, or they will choose the cheapest.

Varied quality of CVSs want to be able to shop around.

Market may be taken over by consultants offering quick fixes rather than a holistic service. Long

term one to one relationship with an STO worker very important for developing groups long term.

OK for funders to signpost as well as STOs but not instead of STOs have local knowledge.

How would STOs plan and budget if not sure how much income will come in from services being

purchased?

National quality standards will help groups to judge. External, informed, specialist monitoringneeded. You cant just leave it to the groups to decide area is too complex.

The market-driven model has failed in other public areas health, schools, etc and been shown

to provide less rather than more choice, less sustainability, shiny marketing brochures and less

investment in services. If an organisation thrives it may not be because its services are good and

vice versa.

Could create a two tier frontline sector the groups who can pay to go to Waitrose and the ones

who have to go to the Pound Shop.

If STOs have to sell themselves in a market they will need funding for and help with this.

RECOMMENDATIONS ON NEXT PAGE

8/4/2019 12 What

23/68



RecommendationsSee flipchart

1. Some areas of work might be fit for purchasing, others definitely not where do you draw the line,

e.g. core services for small orgs to be free, medium size funded to pay for specialist advice

2. How will STOs plan and budget without knowing what takeup of service will be?

3. How to prevent e.g. consultants providing quick fix advice?

4. Free market does not ensure quality (front line groups may not have info to judge) so other

standards needed.

5. Funders to recognise this will increase pressure on STOs to spend time and money on marketing

8/4/2019 12 What

24/68



Topic: Votes/delegate

How do we effectively measure the support

STOs provide to frontline groups?

Participants

Mubin, Bob Alifai, Wendy, Gemma, Noel, Olivia


As well as capacity building, measuring service delivery

Need for independence

Not always talking about measuring same things when dealing with large number,

often just a signposting role

Dont measure outputs, only outcomes

Recommendations

1.Sample measuring only, dont measure everything

Anonymity for groups when seeking evaluation

2. Someone other than advisors undertaking evaluation meeting with group

e.g capacity building workers in neighbouring boroughs undertaking this task

for each other. NACVA competence standard qualification should be

extended to all STOs 5 11, 155

3. Valuing Advisors own feedback

4. STOs need to work and plan together to avoid duplication funderscan help this agenda allocate funds, facilitate local events 15 96, 63, 89, 67, 95, 155, 159

8/4/2019 12 What

25/68



Topic: Votes/delegateIf we cannot support all frontline groups, how

do we select which groups to support?

Participants

Mubin Haq, Sarah Ruiz, Andy Gregg, Gladys, Ben, Tania Bronstein, Joan Millbank, Mohamed,

Mahmood, Steve Burkeman and Maknun.


General agreement that all frontline groups cannot be supported and sustained. That there needs to

be a process in which groups are selected. At present this does happen amongst some STOs, but

it happens in an informal way. This can lead to discrimination. The process therefore needs to be

formalised.

Some groups seeking support are not going to get off the ground, they may not be real, they may

be duplicating existing groups. This needs to be addressed.

There is a lack of knowledge as to what is happening in the field. There is a lack of intelligence

amongst funders, STOs and frontline groups. This leads to haphazard working.

STOs should be supporting groups where there is a need for them.

Frontline groups choose who they get support from. There is a market place already. However, this

increases the need for STOs.

A significant need for support arises from funders and charity commission requirements. Are all of

the policies and bits of paper they require needed?

Growth in groups has arisen from: the growth of community chest/small grants programmes

geared to small groups; and the failure of more established organisations in meeting needs of their

communities.

Recommendations

1. STOs can only provide a universal service in some areas of work e.g. information sharing.

It is unlikely that they (especially CVSs) can provide a universal service in all areas they work in e.g.

1-2-1 support. They therefore need to prioritise. 4

2. STOs and those providing support to frontline groups need to develop procedures/policies/priorities

as to which groups they are going to support. This could include asking the following questions

when assessing which groups to support: is there a need for the group and what it is trying to

achieve? is there genuine involvement in the group e.g. more than one individual? does it have

the ability to achieve some of its goals? Is it inclusive, open and willing to collaborate with others?However, these are relative questions. 4

continued

8/4/2019 12 What

26/68



3. Support should be based on need. Is there a need for a group? Should a group behelped to merge or close down. They should be equipped to deal with realities. It should

be more geared towards community development rather than organisational development.

There therefore needs to be better intelligence gathering as to what is needed. And

there needs to be better resources to analyse it. 20 108, 126


What role for service users (frontline organisations)

in determining the services provided by STOs?

Participants

Ian, Gemma, Tim, Tim B, Diana


What principles should consultation with users adhere to? Who determines this? Who should beconsulted? Should it be Trustees, staff, funders or all of these?

How often should service users/members be surveyed? How well do STOs do this currently?

Good consultation is rarely funded and therefore rarely monitored externally.

Often service users/members will claim consultation fatigue by being over-surveyed, and yet

many will say STOs dont understand their needs. We need to ensure there is a clear outcome to

consultation, including feedback and outcomes.

STOs and frontline organisations need to better understand each others expectations. Should we

develop some sort of charter?

Recommendations

1. There should be some central body in London that conducts a periodic census of the needs

STOs have identified through consulting their service users/members. 1

2. There should be more tailored support to help organisations articulate what they want and need.

Perhaps a role for business planning support or diagnostic assessments. 2

3. Ensure better mutual understanding amongst STOs about the services they provide.

Ensure active implementation of the new STO database hosted by LVSC.

8/4/2019 12 What

27/68



Topic: Votes/delegateStopping new groups from forming

Participants:

Bob, Angela, George, Paula, Sarah & Joan

Main points discussed A lot of new groups are led by people with a strong ego and who often have a personal agenda

A lot of BME communities set up a new group because their needs are not being met elsewhere

Established FLOs need to be more inclusive e.g. actively work on issues of concern to BME

communities, disability interests, etc

Some (individuals set up) groups because they see it as a way into employment

There is a lot of status associated with being a charity director/trustee and CEO even if you are

unpaid and have no staff / resources

Too many sources of small start up funds, which encourage groups to form

Recommendations

1. Need local organisations to shelter new/ small groups, leaving the groups free

to focus on direct activities i.e. set up a service/activity for community benefit

without setting up an organisation. Examples : Age Concern and Age Well Groups,

Settlements and small neighbourhood groups. 11 98, 67, 96

2. Funders should act as gatekeepers i.e. need to understand more about need in

locality before allocating a grant to a new group

3. References are barely worth the paper that they are written on....4. There needs to be closer working relations amongst funders e.g. local authorities,

charitable trusts, charitable foundations, Big Lottery, to share information about

who funds want 14 153, 62, 75

5. We need to stop defining communities by exclusion i.e. they are different from us

therefore they are not us...

8/4/2019 12 What

28/68



Topic: Votes/delegateIs there a need for specialist technical services to

be delivered by organisations that are able to serve

organisations at different levels of development

Participants

Tanzeem Ahmed- (Olmec), Dr Mistry- (Ashram), Angela (BTEG), Zoe (An Viet),

Obi (Life Care Consulting), Andrea (NAVCA), Jane


Need for more partnership work between small front line organisations and larger organisations

where infrastructure can be shared. Here is different level of support needed at different times

and for different levels in the development process. This support is not universally available across

London. Support is a postcode lottery.

Where there is technical support e.g from the Cranfield Trust or solicitors firms , this is not well

known to front line organisiations. Sometimes even the services available through the CVSs are not

known to frontline organisations. There are pockets of good practice and examples of where this

very good support or partnerships are in place.

Infrastructure support can be provided by other front line agencies who have progressed

and developed systems or policies or put in place certain financial or IT systems which other

organsiations can learn from. Perhaps these agencies can be funded to support others.

There are capacity issues in infrastructures organsiations, both in terms of the level of resources as

well as the skill sets that are available. These need to be acknowledged and honestly assessed so

that appropriate referrals can be made to other organisations that may be better placed to deliver

the service.

Often front line organsiations have very extensive needs and these needs sometimes rest with

one person trying to set up an organisation and deliver services. A lot of investment goes into the

individual who has o be trained to be multi tasked . This takes a lot of one to one support and

some of this is abortive is the person leaves and joins another sector.

Recommendations

1. Carry out a mapping of what second tier support is available and how far this matches the

needs of organisations at different levels . Also identify what support is available from the

private sector and other social enterprises 5

continued

8/4/2019 12 What

29/68



2. Establish more partnership work and collaborative work where better resourced organsiationswhere the infrastructure is already in place can share their systems so smaller groups do not have

to recreate this. Where there are synergies in the work, smaller organsiations can be freed up to

do the community engagement and service delivery whilst the larger groups take charge of all the

backroom functions.

3. Set up a business centre in each borough for voluntary organsiations which brings groups together

and all the technical functions are provided so there is no duplication of finance, IT, payroll etc

functions and costs are shared. 2

4. Provision of technical training that is accredited for advisors. Advisers need to adhere to

industry specific skills standards . STO need to deliver services to sector standards so there

is consistency across London. STAN should coordinate this as well as coordinate links

between providers 16 104

Acknowledge that there are services that are working well and these should be part of the

standards that all providers work towards.

8/4/2019 12 What

30/68



Topic: Votes/delegateMentoring: How can it be used to support

frontline organisations

Participants

Emma, Emily, Zoe, Simin, Jane, Andrew, Kevin


Support needs to be bespoke

People who have had a good experience of mentoring are likely to want more

The mentor asking the right questions is crucial

Mentoring can become a self-sustaining project with the mentee becoming the mentor

Organisations mentoring other organisations

Mentoring can reduce isolation and create solidarity and confidence

Need for mentors with user experience or clear understanding of the relevant issues

Mentoring can take different forms, peer to peer, group mentoring or 1-1 consultancy

Mentoring should start from where mentee is at and be tailored accordingly

Mentoring as useful way to set objectives and analyse the needs of the organisation

Recommendations

1. Mentoring in a funding capacity. Direct some funding resources towards mentoring capacity

building throughout life of project, to improve effectiveness. 2 131

e.g: Award less money and spend some of money having upfront conversations at the beginning ofthe process about funding needs and capacity building requirement

2. That mentoring as capacity building should be funded more widely 5 131

3. The variety of forms of mentoring should be more widely promoted, particularly by funders. 1

8/4/2019 12 What

31/68



Topic: Votes/delegateHow important it is that funders should encourage

organisers of small groups to get training


How do you change the way small groups work?

Do you force groups to get training?

STOs need to provide for groups who do not want growth.

Charity Commission also encourage groups to get training

Recommendations

1. Funders should ask small groups to get when allocating funds and monitor at the end

2. STOs should work toward strengthening the infrastructure of frontline organisations.

3. There should be enough resources available to Second tier organisations to provide tailored

support to meet the need of particular frontline organisation rather than a generic support scheme.

4. Representatives from frontline organisations should be involved in the Management Committee of

the STOs.

8/4/2019 12 What

32/68



Topic: Votes/delegateEngagement of disadvantage groups with

Building Blocks


Access to mainstream voluntary sector, Lack of engagement with the sector, Issues of resources

and sustainability, 2nd tier organisation of refugee sector in service delivery rather than voice,

representation, advocacy for human rights, justice, equality issues taking into consideration the size

of the refugee sector and its vulnerability to exclusion, marginalisation etc. This session includes

other equality groups such as LGBT, BME

The impact of commissioning on the refugee sector and the effect of the ending funding regimes like

renewal SRB on the structure of the whole sector in West London.

Knowledge gaps of rights and systems .Discrimination

Disconnection with Race equality councils and VSC

Gap in mainstream service delivery for the sector leaded to 2nd tier being service delivery

Disengagement with the well established , developed organisations within the sector

The need for partnerships within the disadvantaged groups

The cultural issues within the refugee sector and the funders and the need for change

Lack of recognition of the extra need of the refugee sector for both VSC and refugee sector 2nd tier

organisations

Change in funding criteria to include support for establishing voice for the sector

The impact of political environment and hostility towards the refugee sector to be explored

Lack of skills for community development

Refugees are not part of the equality agendas, to be highlighted

Lack of engagement with decision making process at local and pan London level

Issues outside London ant the impact on the refugee sector to be explored and acknowledged

Lack of funding and support choices for the refugee sector and losing out of opportunities

Recommendations

1. Extra support for the engagement of the disadvantaged group

Extra support to develop specific functions for 2nd tier voice , representation, human rights

and RCOs service provision. Role of the biggest organisation as strategic and policy support

and establish clear lines of communications

Support the well established organisations to grow. 4 138, 62

2. Develop connection with local racial equality councils and VSC, generic organisations

and the refugee sector 5 87

3. Better investment in the refugee sector

4. Community development both geographical for 2nd tier organisations and for specificcommunities RCOs. Diversity within the sector is important in terms of service delivery

5. Broadening the race equality and human rights remit to include immigration

8/4/2019 12 What

33/68



Topic: Votes/delegateHow do we get the groups to take up the

support on offer?

Participants

Paula Jeffery EVA,Martin Hall City Bridge, Sioned City Parochial,Julie Corbett-Bird,

Blackfriars Settlement, Rachel Southwark Community Care Forum


It is a time issue for really small groups. They focus on task of delivery rather than organisational

development and maintenance

There are few people in the group taking responsibility there difficult to sustain activities and access

the support needed

Encouraging mergers with larger organisations to ensure best service for users --- there are difficult

issues to be addressed to achieve this

Recommendations

1. Funders encouraging mergers where appropriate between small groups and larger ones 1

2. Funders make accepting developmental support a condition of grant 13

3. Funders checking and making it a condition of grant that HR,Financial and other policies are

updated and when????? Also business plans ?????

8/4/2019 12 What

34/68



Topic: Votes/delegateHow can we challenge the hidden networks

that influence decisions makers / funders so

the FLOs can have their needs met?

Participants

Those who had access to decisions makers here need local people with overview and wider

understanding who can represent needs.

Hune ? Supplemental Education;Pat H&F Disability;

Julie Blackfriars Settlement;

Robin CPF;

Sarah - ??;

Deborah Women in London


Its who you know - 2 voluntary sectors (1) the mainstream (2) the small marginalised vol.

Vol sector has lost its independent voice

Difficulty for vol sector of influencing the mainstream (Byzantine bureaucracies)

Need to work to gether to have more impact / influecene

Continuing networking needed to maintain influence with funders

Anger at direction of central government vis a vis vol sector eg Change Up

Central Government is driving vol sector agenda (not hidden) where is hidden whether people who

are talking to government whether they are good for sector

Vol sector is not homogenous

What about that vol sector that was not about public sector provision but additionality

Cynicism lagerd groups come along and appropriate the ideas and experience that others have

built up

Need better ??? and provide voice and technical support, advice and local voice

Vol Service councils can only do work which they are paid to do and not necessarily what is needed

locally.

Recommendations

1. Maintaining equality of access is necessarily a continual struggle 2

2. Funders and decision makers must recognise multi-layered nature of voluntary sector 11 993. Consciously consult these different layers one size does not fit all 7 99

8/4/2019 12 What

35/68



Topic: Votes/delegateWhat do we want from Change Up?

Participants

Tamil Action Cttee, Off the Streets and In to work, Reach, HACT, Organisation of blind African

Caribbeans, Office of the third sector, Capacity builders, CPF trustee, CPF officer.


Groups not up to date on what is happening with change up

Where is the money going as front line orgs being told there is no new money?

Up date given by Jill about change up

How long will it take to see real difference on the ground for front line gps? Jill another

year before we see any changes

It was important initially to get more data on what the key issues were, these were premises,

finance etc.

Discussion about what would success look like? This would be the improved performanceof front-line orgs (Jill)

Better access to STOs by front line gps e.g. how do they get to know about developments

such as the LVSC website and London Funders?

Information overload

Should funding be invested directly to providing intensive support to front line gps

There are about 40,000 charities in London and 400 STOs

Recommendations1. Better marketing and communication of how change is structured and what its doing and

what its vision is what difference will it make? 1

2. Needs to be targeted and better marketing of about information available and updates

e.g. LVSC and London Funders websites

3. But too much information is creating confusion and need more practical assistance

and tailored on-to-one support to ensure funds are benefiting all communities 109

8/4/2019 12 What

36/68



Topic: Votes/delegateWhat could be an indicator for successful support?

Participants

Janice Needham, Sharon McGilchrist, Ian Foster, Nour-eddine Aboudihaj, Jenny Nillmett, Hanif

Ahmed, Shakeen Westcombe


Different stakeholders may want different measures. FLO able deliver more/better services, STO

stronger VCOs, funders value for money

STO could be clearer on what change or outcome trying to achieve (e.g raise money for groups

or improve sustainability) and what priorities are (but should be drawn up with FLO) and publicise

these it is not possible to provide support to all. But funding can cloud this, as have own agenda.

Indicators should draw on customer feedback, be quantitative and qualitative and ultimately look

at beneficiaries, e.g. number of people accessing services provided by front line organisations.

Examples more confident in approaching funders, more able to work in partnership, engagement

with local decision-making eg LSP, more groups with quality assurance system. Report says little on hard to reach groups. How do we know we are reaching these, providing

appropriate support and measure success? Also need to support development of these

communities. And lots of skills within hard to reach communities need to draw on these to a

greater extent.

Stress independence of STO essential for building trust.

Recommendations

1. STOs to clearly define outcomes, strategic priorities (in consultation) and then identify

relevant indicators 1

2. Greater focus on hard to reach or excluded groups how they can be identified,

supported and this support evaluated 4 138

3. Need input from groups on measuring success, eg score on confidence in accessing

funders, confidence in developing partnerships etc and then reassess at a later point

(but cannot always attribute to STO intervention!)

8/4/2019 12 What

37/68



Topic: Votes/delegateFrontline Purchaser power can we get from A to B

without carnage at the level of second tier support?

Participants

Mubeen Haq (CPF), Rob Macmillan (Sheffield Hallam), Colin Nee (CES), Bharat Mehta (CPF),

Mahmood Norouzi (consultant), Emma Strang Francs (consultant), Sharon McGilchrist (Lb Tower

Hamlets), Paul Conway, Hackney, Jaqui Finn, (South London CVS Partnership), Paul Conroy (Hackney

Training & Employment Network)....sorry if Ive left anyone out.


Members of the group felt that some second tier organisations had become disconnected from

the frontline orgs they exist to serve, and had lost their customer focus. No one expressed

disagreement with Building Blocks reports diagnosis of the problem, but the group appeared evenly

divided on whether shifting funds from STOs to create greater frontline purchasing power could form

a key part of the solution.

Shifting funds from second tier to frontline and ringfencing this for the purchase of infrastructuresupport could enable FCOs to have more control over how their needs are prioritised and met; it

could shake out the second tier and make some of the less effective ones unviable; it could force

STOs to be come more enterprising and customer focussed.

However, it could be that other, less positive, outcomes may occur as well or instead. Theres no

guarantee that it will be the less effective STOs that lose out; chunks of second tier provision would

disappear and with them the choice of frontline orgs to purchase services from them; many frontline

orgs would only be able to exercise their purchasing well without support and education; at the

macro level, there would be a transfer of funds from STO orgs to individual freelancers with some

like casualties being support for voice function including advocacy to maintain a healthy level of

funding for infrastructure support.

There might be more suitable alternative ways of addressing the problem of the currently (very)

suboptimal STO support to the frontline eg. more effective needs assessment; smarter evaluation

of STOs (why do funders insist on continuing to fund STOs which dont even collect let alone

provide convincing data on customer satisfaction and customer outcomes?); more prescriptive

commissioning and dropping providers which fail to meet the specification for service quality and

results.

So while there was agreement that greater purchaser power could be part of the solution, it would

only be one part and would need to be introduced intelligently along with a package of other

measures.

If the Building Blocks recommendation are to go ahead, the issue of how funders would manage

the new market to ensure that good STO survive, and are joined by good new STO provision, will becritical. Smart commissioning / contracting with approved providers is a part of this. Without this,

moving ahead with the BB recommendations could have some very bad and irrevocable results.

continued

8/4/2019 12 What

38/68



The recommendations below are limited to the narrow question of how best to introduce an elementof greater purchaser power in a way that maximises the benefits and minimises the unwanted

consequences.

Recommendations

1. Research the extent to which purchaser power is already operating in the VCS, and

the positive and negative outcomes of this trend as this is a better predictor than a pilot

(eg. in one borough) of how Building Blocks would operate if rolled out widely. 1 91

2. Carry out some market research into whether frontline orgs actually want more

purchasing power and see this as a solution to the problem ; and also how theywould use it as this would help us predict whether it would have perverse effects,

eg. on the survival of the effective parts of second tier support. 6 108

3. Optimise the quality of freelance consultants through methods such as TSO offering

associate membership to them, through training and licensing schemes (eg. the existing

PQASSO licensed mentors programme) and through accreditation.

4. Smart commissioning and contracting, eg. with preferred providers, will be critical to

ensure the survival of particular functions and valued providers and services which

might otherwise be lost in a rush to marketisation. 2

8/4/2019 12 What

39/68



Topic: Votes/delegateSheltering organisations delivering services in a local

neighbourhood

Participants

Julie Blackfriars Settlement

Joan Consultant

Vaughan - Praxis

George Stockwell Partnership

Robin City Parochial


Does the system of capacity building individual groups accentuate and perpetuate fragmentation of

conflictive communities?

Are we supporting groups for groups sake or for the wider benefit of the local community. Starting

point should be community needs who is there, what is needed, bringing groups together to meet

need local neighbourhood organisations best placed to take on this role? Who holds overview? How do you get it? Who can mediate between groups?

Need to create a model of networking between frontline organisations

Recommendations

1. There should be recognition that some local organisations working in neighbourhoods

have a STO function in addition to delivery of frontline services and can be more

effective at working with others to meet local needs. 8 148

2. Are we addressing these questions in the context of the way the sector is moving

e.g Stronger Communities....... 1

3. We need a model that promotes clustering and networking creating an environment

where organisations complement each other and develop their own specialisms in

relation to each other thereby promoting mutual sustainability. 26 98, 37, 44

8/4/2019 12 What

40/68



Topic: Votes/delegateHow can STOs commit to working more

productively & efficiently together: minimising

duplication & wasted effort.

Participants

Mary, Robin, Diana, Susanna, Sandriya, Olivia, Rajah, John


How can STOs nationally/locally share expertise what are the obstacles (time, money,

organisational culture, not wanting/being able to share)

Funders could play co-ordinating role do we want funders setting the agenda, imposing

collaboration which is not real

Collaboration needs to be facilitated & co-ordinated

BASA clustering approach

National collaboration to support frontline orgs duplication between national & local STOs

Recommendations

1.Identify what is common to all VCOs & put it in one place with open access e.g. web portal,

common resource 1

2. Co-operation at national & local level needs financial support & funders have a role here. 2

3. Need to develop local collaboration to share specialist knowledge could be facilitated

through trading schemes (LETS) 6

8/4/2019 12 What

41/68



Topic: Votes/delegateTo be effective, STO support needs to be

delivered more locally than borough-wide

Participants

George, Pat, Jill, Linda, Amanda, Helena, Wendy, Eshter


Current borough-wide CVS model isnt working, seem to have lost their focus. -

Some advice/information is relevant on a nation-wide level whilst others is needed at a local

neighbourhood level

There is a real need for local 1:1 support on-going if necessary BUT locally based support is

resource intensive

Some specialist support e.g. supplementary school can be delivered borough-wide or beyond

BASSAC model: Sharing without Merging. IT, HR support, purchasing power.

Neighbourhood STOs could apply for funds on behalf of local partnerships. Particularly relevant

for refugee groups who often struggle with the language of fundraising.

Recommendations

1. Neighbourhood based STOs should consider seeking funds on behalf of, and in

partnership with, local groups. This could help avoid duplication and assist small

groups to focus on the things that really matter

2. Local STOs could provide a central bank of support services such as IT, HR support,

purchasing power.

8/4/2019 12 What

42/68



Topic: Votes/delegateEnsure the needs of all communities of interest

(Equalities Groups) are met.

Participants

BIG, People First, Kairos, Olmec, Consultants (X2), LVSC, London Funders, Kay, ROTA (two others

people whose names I didnt get.


Access to funding/ monitoring etc needs to be improved

Recognition of expertise within equalities groups that is needed in service delivery, capacity building

and policy development. For example a generic group may be able to explain the practicalities of

filling in a funding application but not understand the funding climate, policy developments, other

players and strategic issues with an area such as LGBT issues

Longer term funding to develop underdeveloped sectors

Need for partnership within each strand (e.g. race), Between strands (e.g. race and disability) and

between equalities and mainstream organisations

Sharing examples of good practice e.g. sharing back room staff, swaping membership rather than

paying each other

Need to develop trust and empathy within communities which can be done by people within

community. Leads to people developing skills and becoming engaged within wider society

Understanding that communities of interest do not necessarily fit into geographic boundaries

Recognise that people belong to more than one equalities group

Small organisations (equalities and mainstream) may find it difficult to cater to all different groups

hence need for specialists

Importance but difficulty of mapping impact, especially in influencing policy

Need to outreach to find out needs of equalities frontline organisations and difficulty of accessing

new groups do you walk the streets until you bump into them?

Expense staff and money of outreach.

Fear that move towards single equalities (CEHR etc) will lead government to look at specific areas

such as employment, and not at the difference in employment faced by people from different

equalities groups.

Fear that this move will also lead to lack of funding and therefore loss of shared expertise within

equalities sector.

Is the saturation within equalities organisations or is it choice?

continued

8/4/2019 12 What

43/68



Recommendations1. VOICE Fund it! (Properly) 23 28, 70, 101, 39, 26, 99, 127, 26

2. Prove that we need separate equalities groups to work on

issues or we will find that needs will not be met. User Led = Expertise. 8 76, 39

3. Work within different equalities strands and between them. Also work

with the mainstream to ensure frontline equalities groups get support they

need, to support communities. 6, 8, 26


Refugee community organisations (RCOs) and

their access to community accountancy services

Participants

Saeed Ahmad, Vu Thanh , Patrick Opendi, Chukwunyere Kamalu


Funders have concerns on financial management of RCOs

Groups fail because they have no finance workers

But funders will not fund finance workers or core posts

More and more difficult for RCOs to get funding

Outsourcing clear tasks (eg payroll) to local accountancy projects would help

Communication and matching of needs and services between community accountancy projects(CAPs) and RCOs is poor

Community accountancy projects should help groups with new SORP (2005) and make them aware

of their legal obligations

Recommendations

1. For frontline organisations to survive they need to have funded finance workers

2. There needs to be a network set up between community accountancy services and RCOs

3.To prevent groups failing funders should support CAPs to provide required community accountancyservices to RCOs and wider voluntary sector.

8/4/2019 12 What

44/68



Topic: Votes/delegateOne to One Support

Participants

Mohamed Maigag, Itango Ngondo, John Denny, Nour-eddine Aboundihaj, Kay Lee

Main points discussed Frontline organisations agree that one-to-one support is one of the most effective ways to receive

assistance. Frontline organisations want and need tailored-made, customised one-to-one support

(which should also have a holistic approach).

Areas where one-to-one support is needed are finance, accounting, business planning, fundraising,

policy development, quality standards and IT

Frontline organisations are unique and have different needs. One-to-one support is the best way to

address their issues and needs.

Frontline organisations should be able to purchase their own support.

Recommendations

1. Local CVSs (and other STOs) should be providing tailored,

customised one-to-one support. 18 89, 87, 96, 89, 148

2. Funders should ensure that there are enough resources for one-to-one support.

CVSs should receive adequate funding to provide this service. 10 29, 19, 23

3. Monitoring and evaluation between STOs and frontline organisations is key to

improving one-to-one support and consultancies 7 1

8/4/2019 12 What

45/68



Topic: Votes/delegateHow would purchasing by frontline groups work?

Participants

CVSs; council officer; academic; front line organisations; third tier organisation; report author

Main points discussed Recognition that there is a problem object of the exercise is to improve performance of front line

organisations and in many cases second tier organisations do not meet needs although in some

cases they do.

Report proposes a purchasing/market approach. But there are problems with this. How would it

work? Pure market or some form of voucher system? Potentially high transaction costs. Small

groups may not know what they want/need. Markets may accentuate inequalities i.e. large

organisations know how to take advantage of the system and small organisations may lose out.

Particular problems with small BME groups and issues of cultural appropriateness of services

provided. Purchasing unsuitable for voice and representation functions. Still a need for core

funding. Spot purchasing may be expensive. In a market system problems of quality control of

providers and of learning from experiences.

There are different issues for small and new groups and for established medium and large groups.

There is a need to explore alternative approaches better market research by second tier

organisations when requesting support possibility of applications for support for particular services

actually coming from front line organisations in conjunction with a second tier organisation which

would deliver the service. Need to make costs of STOs more transparent and justified.

Recommendations

1. Accept that there is an issue how do front line organisations get their support needs metmost effectively? 3

2. Agree that there are flaws in the market/purchasing approach and more work needs to be

done on it at both a practical and theoretical level. 2 155

3. Explore other ways in which the objective of meeting front line organisations needs

can be met through STOs e.g. better market research, joint applications with front line

organisations to funders 5 14

8/4/2019 12 What

46/68



Topic: Votes/delegateHow do we best support bigger frontline

organisations and/or those with more complex needs?

Participants

Noel, Gerard, Karin, Gemma, Esther, Elizabeth, John


Can find individuals to help out with specific issues (e.g starting to trade, writing a business plan).

Some groups use trustees but this can be awkward if trustees dont really have the skills. Specialist

volunteer support can provide consultants to advise a group through a specific issue. 2/3hrs a

week of support until task is complete. Independent agencies (like Reach) can act as a broker, or

funder (e.g Princes Trust). Maybe CVSs and other STOs could also have a brokerage role.

How do we know that the support is of a good enough quality? Need funding for training advisors

if you give money to CVSs to provide specialist support how do you know that what theyll deliver

will be useful?

What are complex needs? BME groups by their nature have complex needs are misunderstood

by funders, local authorities etc. However, BME is too much of a broad term some of the newer

groups to the UK are from Europe and their needs are different to those of maybe more established

BME groups. Cultural understanding is key, and perhaps specialist agencies (for example Interlink)

are best placed to work with these groups, rather than generic CVSs

Complex needs (and also the part of the question referring to bigger groups) can also mean the

need/wish to move to the next level, i.e to progress beyond the small groups survivialist stage of

getting small greats to perhaps taking on a first full time staff member, or going for a bigger Lottery

grant, deciding to set up a social enterprise, taking on a council contract etc. However, not all

groups NEED to grow we need to challenge this assumption and empower groups to make their

own decisions/choices about how to develop, rather than be driven by funding/politics etc. We

need advisors/development workers who can help groups through this process and who can advise

them on the specifics relating to their choices.

Recommendations

1. Funding for second tier organisations (both specialist and CVS, and also for organisations

like STAN) to train up their existing advisors/development workers in specialist issues (e.g

commissioning and procurement, social enterprise, employment law) 17 109, 88

2. Greater intelligence on whos already delivering what so we can make informed referrals on

particular topics. 11 69, 132

3. A more detailed (and continuously updated) STAN directory, listing not only who advisors are and

where they work, but

Documents

12 What