The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

ANNEX C
RESULTS OF INTERNAL RESEARCH WITHIN THE SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS

Introduction

1. In order to inform the Scottish Executive's contribution to a vision for the Voluntary Sector, Voluntary Issues Unit ( VIU) and DD-Analytical Services Division agreed that it was vital that systematic research should establish the extent of the Executive's current relationship with the sector. Further analysis should take place on senior management's attitudes to the sector, and how the relationship between the sector and the Executive should develop in the future.
2. The definition of "voluntary organisation" was agreed with VIU. Respondents were told that it was a "non-statutory, not for profit organisation with a high degree of volunteer organisation in its management and oversight".

Methodology

3. A two stage methodology was adopted:

4. The survey was issued by the Chief Researcher to all Heads of Division. The surveys were either completed by Heads of Division or by those able to answer questions on behalf of the entire division's activities. An online questionnaire was used, which enabled respondents to be routed past questions of no relevance. The responses were automatically logged and coded, enabling cross-tabulations to be made as appropriate. The response rate was 100 out of a possible 197 (50.7%).
5. Respondents were asked to indicate their willingness or otherwise to be contacted with regard to the results, and participation in the focus group. The volunteers were bundled into departmental groups to ensure that each focus group would have a representative sample of senior management across the Executive. We specifically excluded anyone who had no contact with the sector, so the focus group data needs to be viewed in this light. Two focus groups were run in August 2005.

Breakdown of engagement with the sector by type of group.

6. In our survey of senior management, 67% percent involved the voluntary sector in their ministerial priorities. Of the 33% who did not have an engagement with the sector, it seems that around 47% are in Legal and Parliamentary Services, Finance and Central Services or the Office of the Permanent Secretary. Further analysis of the divisions with no sectoral contact; seem to point to a high degree of support functions, such as analytical services, finance, IT, solicitors and personnel. This suggests that lack of contact with the sector is generally a function of a lack of need, due to largely internal nature of the work. We have not been able to interview anyone in this group, but would expect this view to be confirmed.
7. Of the group who had engagement with the sector, 94.1% had contact with infrastructure bodies (43% to a "high" or "very high extent"); the same proportion had contact with campaigning or advocacy groups (35% to a "high" or "very high extent"); 97.1% worked with service-provide groups (44% to a "high" or "very high extent).
8. In terms of geographical coverage of groups surveyed, there is a lower contact rate with international groups (59%) with only 4% having a high extent of contact in working relationships. 87% worked with UK-wide groups (21% to a high or very high extent). Scotland-wide groups had the highest extent of contact with the Executive at 98.5%, with 45% of mangers claiming a high or very high degree of working relationship. Perhaps not surprisingly, given that the SE works on a national basis, the figures are lower for local and community groups, but still substantial, at 33%.

Trends in working with the sector.

9. Our survey of senior management indicates that the sector is a key partner at a range of points in the policy cycle. The most significant area, where over 55% of managers ⁵ reported that they worked with the sector to a "high" or "very high extent" was to "implement and deliver policy", to develop policy", "to monitor and evaluate policy, "to deliver services to the public", "to deliver services to hard-to-reach groups and "to provide expert advice" all appeared as "high" or "very high extent" in excess of 30%. Other areas included the provision of training and support to other voluntary sector groups, increasing capacity in service areas, delivery of services not available elsewhere, raising public awareness, working with sector as advocates for service-users. Use of the sector as an intermediate funding agency, or to take forward consultation exercises on behalf or the Executive, show a "high" or "very high extent" below 10%.
10. In focus groups with senior management, it was clear that, while use of the sector to deliver policies and all services was valued, the key role of the sector was to provide unique perspectives on service-user need, which could help design better policy. In some cases the sector was uniquely-placed to provide a particular service, but in principle other groups could often provide a service, but the role of the sector in policy development could not be replicated. Accordingly, while the sector provided more services than before, it was not necessarily an inevitable process, while the need to have the sector at the table in policymaking was.

Voluntary Sector as Service Delivery Partner

11. 91% of those divisions with contact with the sector, worked with them to provide services to the public (24% to a "high" or "very high extent"). 83% used them to provide services to hard to reach groups, and the same number to provide services not available elsewhere.
12. From these numbers, and the focus groups, it is clear that there are vital reasons why the sector has a role in service delivery. In many cases, the sector is simply better able to reach target groups, and no-one else is equipped or inclined to provide a service. However, there was a very clear feeling in the groups that the sector had to prove that they were the most appropriate choice to provide a service. While it might be argued that the interpretation of Best Value in many local authorities did not provide a "level-playing field" for voluntary sector organisations pitching for contracts, it was necessary not to lose sight of such issues as value for money and fitness for purpose. Accordingly, there was little support within the groups for an extension of voluntary sector provision for the sake of it, but support for allowing the sector all opportunities to prove that they can take on more services. The sector is not to be viewed as a "worthy recipient of our largesse and charity" but as a people who can "do something useful for us". At the same time, we need to treat them in a "business-like way and give them "equal billing in bidding for services".
13. Performance management of the sector is vital in order to retain the confidence of the public. Not only is public money on the line, but statutory responsibility still remains with government, which makes assessment of how it's chosen vehicles perform an imperative. The effectiveness of the sector, in delivery of services, is measured by the sponsoring policy teams. It is right that those who commission services determine the correct objectives and design performance management systems accordingly. Much of the performance management function is undertaken within local government. Within SE, 86% of managers with contact with sector measure its effectiveness is delivering key policy priorities, 26% to a "high" or "very high extent". Performance management tools vary, but include targets, conditions of grants, performance indicators, contacts and annual reports.
14. Discussion from the focus groups suggested that while there was a powerful desire to minimise bureaucracy, there should be a process whereby voluntary organisations who were recipients of public funds had to account for their use. This was not easy to set aside, although organisations could prove themselves worthy of trust.
15. As with many aspects of our relationship with the sector, there is a potential conflict between facilitating the sector to do what its independence and innovation allow it to do, and smothering it with the need to retain public accountability and value for money. In this case, we should give clear unambiguous signals about what the SE is trying to achieve in a given policy area. In this way organisations can decide how best to buy into it. This way, voluntary organisations will only give up as much independence as any other organisation who undertakes to provide a service under contract would do.
16. It was recognised that some groups may well have relationships with different parts of the Executive, and we should be careful that we can demonstrate outcomes for all the funding streams which we make available.

Voluntary Sector's role in advocacy and policy making

17. 91% of managers working with the sector do so to develop policy - 28% to a "high" or "very high" extent. 85% involve the sector in the monitoring and evaluation of policy (22% to a "high" or "very high extent"). 90% work with the sector when they are advocates for communities and/or service users (16% to a "high" or "very high extent").
18. The focus groups with senior management suggested that the involvement of the sector in policy making was vital to its success for a variety of reasons. These included detailed knowledge of the problem, closeness to service users, and expertise in delivery that it would not be easy to replicate within the state. Problems in the relationship would tend to arise if there was impaired communication, either through late involvement in consultation or an insufficient articulation of where the SE needed to be in the policy process.
19. It was sometimes difficult to identify key partners. This was particularly the case if there were a number of overlapping groups, or organisations with slightly different objectives. In many ways it would be simpler if some of these groups could be rationalised, but it is not necessarily the SE's role to suggest it. Equally, care has to be taken to not cut out groups who have something useful to contribute.
20. In some cases the partner is the sole organisation working in an area. In this case the SE must decide how it can give support to a group without compromising its independence that it becomes ineffective at reaching a target group due to an inadvertent undermining of the organisation's credibility with users.
21. Other groups effectively rule themselves out of partnership, either because they do not wish to make compromises, or do not see association with government as an advantage, or indeed they involve themselves in activities which government cannot endorse, e.g. illegal direct action.
22. Again, clear signals about the SE's intentions are required. We have a responsibility to deliver Minister's priorities, and this sets the parameters within which we engage the sector on any given issue. This does not rule out a vital role for the sector in policy making, and exercising influence over Ministerial priorities, but it does set boundaries for what we can promise to partners. Once these signals are established, then other organisations can decide how best to respond.

Voluntary Sector's role in building stronger communities.

23. The range of respondents indicated that the sector was involved in a large number of Executive policies which can have a positive impact on building strong communities, including regeneration, housing, education, and health and literacy projects. While voluntary action is often an indicator of healthy community action, there are some capacity concerns that arise when SE tries to "add-on" a wider agenda where the relationship is primarily devoted to providing services. Some organisations felt that they were ill-equipped to deliver additional objectives, and that this began to pull them away from their core purpose. This suggests that we need to consider carefully how much we load onto voluntary sector organisations. We can recognise that organisations may well promote strong communities as part of their inherent activities, or can relatively easily incorporate activities such as community consultation or inclusive delivery into their projects.

Voluntary Sector as "agent of change".

24. The research did not specifically cover the role of the sector as an agent of change, but it is clear that the sector is involved in a variety of areas, such as health, education and justice, which will be key to the Executive's agenda for society.

Conclusion

25. Voluntary Sector organisations are partners in a wide-range of Executive priorities, of which policy and service delivery is most prominent. The sector attains this level of importance, not simply because it is the voluntary sector, and not because it is an alternative to the private and public sectors. It is valued precisely because in each case, it justifies its role, by being the most effective option. This implies that the Executive should examine its procedures to ensure a level playing field where the sector's merits will stand for themselves, rather than conferring an artificial advantage.

26. Development Department- Analytical Services Division
    November 2005

« Previous | Contents | Next »