Chris Johnes, a Board member of the People and Work Unit, and the Unit's Director, Sarah Lloyd-Jones, discuss the current state of the third or voluntary sector in Wales and look at possible positive future options in the light of the current demise of much public sector provision. For more about the Unit:- www.peopleandworkunit.org.uk

1. Where next for the Welsh Voluntary Sector?
A discussion paper by Chris Johnes
Preamble: this paper has been produced following discussions among a group of leaders across the
third sector. We do not presume to represent anyone but ourselves in this paper but the reflections
shared here have found widespread, although not universal, resonance among those we have shared
them with. Over the coming months, during the autumn of 2014 we intend to disseminate the paper
and its key ideas widely, to provoke discussion and we hope action. The paper contains a critique of
how the sector works at present and some people may read implied criticisms of certain
organisations in what is written. We feel that the critique is important to help us understand where
we are and what we need to change as a sector but the purpose of the paper is to help shape what
we do next, not to criticise what has happened.
State of the sector
This paper is the sequel to a paper published by the Bevan Foundation in March i which
looked at the situation facing the voluntary sector in Wales at the moment. The paper drew
on some 30 interviews with senior sector leaders and was followed by a seminar involving
some 23 organisations. This follow on paper reflects and builds upon discussions at that
seminar.
The ‘third sector’ in Wales currently includes a vast range of organisations from unfunded
groups of volunteers, local groups with small budgets and no staff to national Welsh and
Welsh branches of UK-wide charities to housing associations with multi million pound
turnovers.
There is also an interesting geographical distribution to the sector in Wales with
proportionately far more organisations in rural areas than elsewhere, with numbers in the
Valleys being especially low and those in the cities being around or lower than the GB
average (per head of population).
Welsh third sector activity is notable by the overwhelmingly numerical dominance of small
bodies without staff (proportionately a much higher percentage than elsewhere in the UK).
These groups include sports clubs, religious bodies, pensioners’ bodies, local environmental
and heritage bodies, local WIs, PTAs and many many more. Some of these organisations are
affiliated in some way to professional charities whilst a very large number are linked to or
fall under the governance of non charitable umbrella bodies (e.g. FAW, WRU) whilst another
significant element are those groups are linked to religious activity. Collectively these groups
organise a very large amount of social and cultural activities in Wales and without their
activities our social lives would look very different and, to use the jargon, the levels of
horizontal social capital in Wales would be much lower. Nevertheless collectively these
groups draw on a relatively small proportion of external grants and are relatively indifferent
1

2. to Government activity: they are probably most affected by Government as a regulator (e.g.
CRBs or Disclosure and Barring as it is now known) rather than by specific policy.
However in terms of finance and wider influence the sector is largely dominated by a
smaller group of a few hundred (mostly) indigenous local and national Welsh organisations
delivering a range of quasi public services, or projects which complement public services,
usually through paid staff. Much of this group is heavily dependent on a range of public funding (Governments at
different levels, the Lottery and European funding) which strongly influences the nature of its work.
The other prominent group of organisations, indeed those with the most recognisable
names are the Welsh branches of UK wide organisations. They often draw on a wider range
of funding sources which allows them to be most vocal in policy debates but also have to
work hard to ensure that Welsh needs are understood within their own wider organisational
decision making.
Focus of this paper
This paper is looking predominantly at the experiences of and challenges facing the
professionalised end of the sector although these in some cases have knock on effects on purely voluntary
organisations. (elements of the paper draw upon the experiences of the social housing sector which has traditionally been
regarded as a very distinct part of the Third Sector, somewhat removed from the mainstream because of size and its
regulatory relationship with Government but as it diversifies the nature of its work is having more in common with other
more traditional Third Sector bodies)
There is a widespread, although not universal, view that the sector (albeit probably excluding housing) is facing a
combination of challenges unsurpassed since devolution and that ironically the gains made since devolution leave the
sector ill prepared to deal with the new challenges, as it left it overly dependent on relationships, ways of working and
funding which have disappeared to a significant degree.
Understanding the Challenges
Following the introduction of the National Assembly in 1999 the voluntary sector made considerable
gains, notably, but not exclusively, at national level in terms of influence and resources. The
establishment of the Third Sector Scheme gave the sector unprecedented regular access to Ministers
and parallel local authority level schemes opened up influence on local decision making processes.
Resources also increased significantly with the sector receiving increased funding directly from the
Welsh Government, as well as via EU Structural Funds and from the Lottery in its different guises, as
a relationship based on partnership more than critical engagement developed. In this sense the role
of the sector, as assumed by both sector and Government, was to deliver services and to be well
resourced to do so. This has had several, largely unintended, consequences which included marking
a significant dividing line between organisations, almost all professionalised, which engaged in
delivering services on behalf of or alongside the public sector and those, largely voluntary run, which
did not. It also saw a narrowing of the funding base that some organisations accessed with relatively
2

3. easy to secure Welsh Government funding replacing hard earned grants from Trusts and
Foundations.
It also led to a predictably ii greater focus on service delivery than on advocacy as the biggest priority
for these organisations as it drove both their funding and their main relationship with their funder.
This was extremely unfortunate in its timing as a series of Government policy initiatives where the
sector’s influence could have been most helpful (Design for Life, Making the Connections and
Communities First were in place at the time but benefited too little from the sector’s informed
reflections. It was doubly unfortunate in that the focus on funding for delivery led, in some cases, to
organisations working in the same field competing for funds rather than cooperate on better
programme delivery or in influencing better mainstream service delivery or policy making: funding in
other words was in danger of trumping core organisational purpose.
The 2008 Recession marked the beginning of a series of both changes and reinforcements in the way
the professional end of the sector has worked in the public arena in Wales. Inevitably there has been
a significant degree of financial retrenchment. This has affected the Third Sector significantly, some
would argue disproportionately, with estimates that the sector has faced funding cuts of some 25%
in the last five years (figure provided by WCVA). It has also, understandably, led to more rigorous
questioning of the performance of Third Sector organisations by public bodies, more price sensitive
commissioning and procurement arrangements (sometimes at the cost of quality and transparency )
and a more challenging approach to voluntary sector lobbying demands. None of that is hugely
surprising or in essence unreasonable. What is more worrying has been the tendency for some
organisations to be warned that future funding could be jeopardised by criticism of public bodies,
either at local or national level which has inevitably had some impact on the sector’s contributions
to public debates. This was illustrated in the discussions leading to the production of this paper by
contrasting the freedom of organisations without public funding to speak out compared to the
reticence of those that did receive funding.
There is now little doubt that the sector collectively faces a greater range of challenges than at any
time in the last twenty years, over resources, the sector’s wider purpose (the purpose of individual
organisations remains for the most part much clearer) and status. What seemed like a “Golden Age”
in the first decade of devolution has undeniably passed.
The Challenges facing the Sector
The writing of the forerunner to this paper involved a number of conversations with people involved
in a wide range of organisations across the third sector. These conversations uncovered if not a crisis
of confidence – both within and about the work of the sector – then a great deal of uncertainty
about its role, its added value and how it works with others to pursue its goals.
There is particular uncertainty about relationships with Government at various levels and over how
the sector projects and delivers on its various core goals. This is especially challenging when funders and policy
makers share only partial agreement with many in the third sector on its role in tackling issues of key concern. What is
widely seen is agreement on broad principles but a marginalisation of the sector and, more importantly, the concerns of
people the sector works with, when it comes to detailed delivery. This marginalisation can also extend to an intolerance of
3

4. criticism of delivery and has also seen public sector resources protected ahead of third sector resources seemingly
regardless of strategic delivery requirementsiii. This has been made more likely by a failure on the part of third sector
providers to provide clear evidence of the value of many interventions, especially innovative ones: the quality of both
credible evaluation and strong evidence of effectiveness has often been lacking, a fact recognised in some of the responses
to the recent Welsh government consultation Continuity and Change- Refreshing the Relationship between Welsh
Government and the Third Sector. However it has also been suggested that the lack of evidence underpinning policy
proposals is not limited to the third sector and is true for a number of public sector policy proposals.
These contradictions are perhaps most clearly seen when examining the key principles in the Third Dimension, the
Welsh Government’s strategy for the third sector. The five main themes all command strong support across the sector but
the supporting strategies (which of course in most cases need to be “cross cutting” across Government) required to make
them a reality are often lacking from both voluntary and public sectors. In particular there are deficiencies in two areas: the
wider sector is lacking the skills and appropriate attitudes to risk to engage in enterprising or entrepreneurial activities; and
despite some isolated examples of innovation neither party is currently able to systematically undertake the type of
dialogue that will accommodate citizen voice fundamentally influencing public services. To address the former is going to
require both different approaches to governance and leadership and either access to new forms of finance which will
accommodate risk or a greater willingness to accept risk from traditional funders. The latter requires a greater willingness
to trust service users on the part of service providers and a recognition within the voluntary sector that bringing genuine
user voices to the fore (and not those of professional staff) is a core priority.
Linked to changing public services is of course scrutiny of public policy, one of the fundamental roles
of the sector where it impacts on the key goals of third sector organisations. This is even more
important in a political environment like that of Wales where there is widespread consensus on
many of the issues of higher principle. The record of the sector on scrutiny is mixed ranging from
excellent to weak depending variously on lobbying skills, staff time, available evidence and
dependencies caused by funding relationships iv. The relatively new Welsh legislative process also
offers further opportunities for influence on policy and law making but throws up challenges in
terms of expertise.
In one area of changing public service delivery the sector has however engaged more strongly, if
initially reluctantly. That is in tendering for and supplying public services. For the public sector this is
beneficial in expanding the pool of ready suppliers but for the third sector it raises wider challenges as it risks blurring the
differences between third and private sectors. If third sector suppliers end up acting very similarly to private contractors,
especially on a consistent basis, the added value they provide becomes eroded and the whole principle of distinct values
becomes less and less meaningful. In this context the principle justification for engaging in service delivery becomes the
generation of profits to fund wider charitable activities rather than the value provided through the service itself. From a
professional voluntary sector management perspective this may seem logical but both commissioners and public service
users are likely to expect a different type of service from a third sector organisation and challenges of reputational risk are
becoming more pronounced for this reason.
The other major substantial challenge is how the sector reacts to deepening poverty in Wales. Not
only are a significant number of Welsh third sector organisations explicitly focused on relieving
poverty but may others find their work deeply affected by rising poverty. At a time of austerity and
substantial competition for scarce resources and controversial public debates around poverty this
pushes many third sector organisations into the heart of political debates.
Simultaneously the Welsh Government’s “flagship anti poverty programme” Communities First has
changed in focus significantly over the last couple of years moving sharply away from a community
development centred approach to more locally tailored service delivery. This has lessened the ability
4

5. of small local organisations to engage in development work in their own localities and the
opportunities to develop the voice of people from Wales’ poorer communities have been reduced.
The Changing Nature of Public Services – Opportunity and Threat
We are now at a critical juncture in terms of public service design and delivery which will have huge
impacts not only for the sector but more importantly for many of the people it works with and
advocates on behalf of. The scale of public sector cuts and the lack of improvements in many key
outcomes are likely to either force the Co-Production principles enunciated, but rarely practiced
since 2006, much more to the fore, or see an increasingly decimated set of public services pared
back to the bone. The latter would leave interests and issues pursued by the third sector such as
public participation in service design and delivery and preventative work marginalised v. There are
already signs of clear divergence in this choice between different public service providers between
those recognising a need for radical change which involves far greater public involvement to cope
with a new reality of limited resources and those who are looking at a massively reduced version of
the status quo
There is some reason to be optimistic that the direction of Welsh Government policies on tackling
poverty and on sustainability (in all senses) as encapsulated in the Future Generations Bill should
provide space for the third sector’s voice and priorities to be heard and to be impactful. However for
that to be the case the sector needs to raise its game in a number of key areas. We need our
organisations to be better informed and using evidence more effectively to influence how policy is
made and delivery planned; we need to be consistently involving the people on whose behalf we
claim to speak to advocate on their own behalf, we need to broaden our funding base to make
innovation easier and we need to take a different attitude to risk and enterprise.
It also needs to be a central part of the sector’s approach to co-production to recognise that in this
approach the public sector needs co-producers. For different services these co-producers will take
very different forms (contrast Community Policing and services for people with physical disabilities
for a very stark example) but in all cases the service user voice needs space and quite possibly
support to be heard and effective. The case therefore for capacity building is fairly fundamental to
this agenda and needs to be both articulated and evidenced.
One of the striking contributions to the discussions on the role of the sector that came from the
preceding paper to this one was the focus on the apparent lack of skills within the sector, especially
around leadership, and the quality of governance. The latter is an issue that the housing sector is
now grappling with very seriously but large parts of the rest of the sector suffer from a desire to
continue “business as usual” as far as possible, and a limited understanding of what collaboration
and learning means across the sector. This would seem unsustainable as resources are likely to
shrink further and radical changes to third sector ways of working will be required.
Where do we go from here?
5

6. The starting point for what we want to see needs to be a clear understanding of where we want to
get to, recognising that, as a core principle, the end benefits must be for our wider communities not
for the sector.
The key goals are
1. Maximising the strength of voluntary activity in Wales to provide valued local activities,
services and community support; to build participation and social capital. This involves an
investment in the processes and methods of community development, and other capacity
building approaches.
2. Ensuring that the voices and experiences of service users and communities, especially those
from marginalised backgrounds and areas considered deprived, are captured and clearly
articulated in order to influence service delivery, both in terms of design and where relevant
what they receive. This involves a recognition that the role of the sector is not just to deliver
services but also to capture and represent what is needed and what difference services are
making.
3. Ensuring that the voices of third sector organisations are heard in relevant policy debates.
4. Providing routes for citizens, working collectively to influence wider decisions that affect
them individually, their families and communities
5. An expansion in not for profit enterprise, to deliver services not accessible through the
market or to fund wider charitable activities.
How are we going to change how we work to make this happen?
This is a very challenging agenda for the sector and calls for very different and more honest ways of
working. In particular it requires us to work more closely together in a number of ways. These
include.
Better influencing of decision making
Being clear and honest about what our evidence is telling us; the sector runs a wide range of
interventions with very mixed effectiveness. What is lacking is consistent or transparent evaluation
which makes learning from our work very difficult. There is very little shared learning undertaken
which means that both successful programmes are rarely disseminated and unsuccessful ones are
not properly recognised. Given that programme evidence is much more compelling when it is
comparing similar interventions often involving different bodies this requires organisations to share
evidence and practice in a way which currently seems unlikely. Dialogue with the key funders is one
way of stimulating more of this collaboration as it is often competition for funds that drives
unilateral actions.
6

7. Doing this could equip the sector much better to engage strongly with the agenda on early
intervention which is critical to both affordable public services and social justice. It may also allow
the sector to speak with more authority in challenging what have often become quite debilitating
commissioning practicesvi for many public services.
Would this be strengthened by stronger links to academic institutions?
Is something akin to Evaluation Scotland required in Wales? (Evaluation Support Scotland works to
strengthen learning practices within organisations; it doesn’t provide a “knowledge bank” or
encourage sharing at present)
Should capacity be created to share evidence and promote knowledge use within WCVA as
suggested in the recent Welsh Government consultation?
Being more structured and collaborative about taking messages to policy makers. The Third Sector
has an erratic record on collaboration on advocacy and the formal liaison with Ministers works at
best patchily. Some of that is inevitable and indeed appropriate because organisations have different
goals, sometimes competing ones; there is however potential for improved collaboration where
organisations genuinely do have similar goals – and in these cases a shared message is likely to be
more effective than a range of different but essentially similar ones. WCVA has already suggested
some improvements in both collaboration and strategy in areas where the sector has a range of
common interests as part of its 2016 Manifesto development and ensuring that this process covers
as wide a span of sector activity as feasible will maximise its effectiveness. Similarly the need to
refresh the workings of the formal Third Sector Scheme have been endorsed both by WCVA’s
research on the topic and that underpinning this paper.
Involvement and Legitimacy – in a small country with a relatively small third sector, it is easy for a
small number of organisations to dominate public debate. If the third sector is to be respected for
listening, involving and representing their service users and communities, it needs to demonstrate
effective practice. Too often lobbying is about organisational priorities and interests. Third sector
organisations need to be at the cutting edge of involvement and participation and actively develop
coproductive approaches. It needs to be better at supporting people and communities to represent
themselves rather than act on their behalf. We need to be much more evidence based, clear,
objective and open about their processes of involvement and decision making if their contribution to
public debate is to be valued.
Furthermore the Future Generations Bill which will provide a framework for public sector decision
making, also offers clear longer term opportunities to identify a policy agenda around which we can
develop longer term engagement with Government. The focus on long term thinking, collaboration,
citizen centred services, integration and prevention is highly promising for many of the issues the
sector prioritises and ideally offers a coherent framework for decision making and setting long term
goals
Creating a Better environment for engaging with Policy Makers
7

8. There is however a more challenging aspect to influencing policy and that is ensuring that the right
for the sector to speak out is recognised and respected. In that sense work to ensure that the
building blocks of the different strands of the Third Dimension (or its successor) are entrenched in
policy making is critical and more ambitious than work on specific policy goals. They would create an
environment that clearly facilitates third sector input into policy making and makes it more difficult
for public sector funders to use that funding relationship as a way of silencing third sector critics
which is a trend that has sadly grown in recent years.
Coproduction, Involvement and Volunteering
Promoting the right conditions for volunteering and reducing the gap between the voluntary and
professional arms of the sector. Volunteering is obviously at the centre of the sector’s ethos and
the vast majority of third sector organisations are run solely by and in many ways the strength and
legitimacy of the sector comes from the work and indeed existence of voluntary run bodies. Many,
though far from all volunteer run bodies, do however have contact to some degree of professionally
run umbrella body. This means that strengthening volunteer run bodies requires inputs from the
infrastructure bodies whose job it is to support volunteering, sectoral umbrella bodies (which range
from WI to Red Cross, to the Carers’ Association to the WRU and Churches) and funders.
One particular group of volunteers are likely to have a growing role to play as public sector cuts hit
deeper and that is those who are already involved in some degree of public service delivery. These
may include people playing a greater role in social care of different kinds, volunteers assisting with
supporting or even leading on non-statutory services and those helping public sector staff plan more
citizen centred services. This co-production role is already recognised as vital at a level of high policy
and now needs translating into practical supports. Many of these volunteer led services are the new
and emerging community and social enterprise of the future.
There needs to be a wider debate on how in Wales we better support people to help others by
ensuring volunteers are supported and valued, whether informal carers and neighbours or more
formal volunteers with organisations. Formal volunteering needs to be better recognised as a
potential route to developing people’s confidence, skills and wellbeing.
Key roles will be for:
Civil Society - there are large mass membership organisations including the Women’s Institute, the
Mother’s Union, the University of the Third Age, Churches, Scouts and many more, etc. that have a
huge local network who are only too willing to get involved, but need help to connect to others.
County Voluntary Councils should develop excellent relationships and knowledge of grass roots
community organisations, and provide accessible information an contacts. who they are, what they
provide and where, and how to get in touch. They need to help develop local opportunities for
groups to get together, get to know each other and work together.
Infrastructure organisations - CVCs need to support larger organisations, such as Housing
Associations, work with smaller community organisations to develop community services such as
self-help groups and support volunteer run services, such as food banks. This means County
8

9. Voluntary Councils locally and WCVA nationally need to be able to deliver an effective role as a
broker and act as a catalyst to make things happen.
Public Sector – this involves a new role for public sector leaders and professionals. People will want
to volunteer and get involved where they will be supported and valued and gain from the experience
personally. The current relationship between the public and the public sector is often a poor one
based on scepticism around cuts in public services. However, where people are treated with
equality and respect, the relationship between the public sector and the community can be mutually
beneficial and rewarding. This requires leadership, a willingness to listen and a genuine attempt at
working with individuals, communities and organisations on an equal footing based on mutual
respect. There is a role for Welsh Government and the WLGA, assisted where appropriate by key
organisations in the third sector to support the public sector move toward delivering services with
people rather than for people building on some of the current good practice.
Resourcing
Broadening the Funding Base
Charitable Trusts and Foundations frequently say that they get few applications from Wales, and
that the applications they get are not relevant or good enough. There is a group of fifteen or more
foundations currently meeting to discuss what can be done to help developments in the Welsh
voluntary sector. A key feature is that many Welsh organisations are simply not used to using
funding to broaden their work, try new approaches or improve the quality of what they do. They are
not used to doing the research to identify needs (both consulting and involving the people they aim
to work with, and looking at existing data to underpin their plans). They are also not really used to
thinking clearly about how to use grant funding (which is not suitable for funding an ongoing
service). There is real interest in working in Wales but charitable foundations will not be interested
in ‘back-filling’ to replace public sector funding and there is a need to think strategically about how
time limited grant funding can be used to take work forward.
What do we need funding to prioritise?
In particular we have an opportunity, currently being almost entirely missed, to promote Wales as a
place where innovation and good practice are developed and trialled. The combination of a small
well networked country, an innovative policy agenda that often falls short on delivery and well
recognised social need should provide a fruitful location for levering in resources. However this will
require more extensive collaboration between organisations with similar goals in developing
innovative programmes: in most areas of our work there are a number of organisations working at
strategic and community level to engage with key social challenges. Yet the picture of collaboration
seen in advocacy and lobbying work is rarely copied when it comes to practical work. This inevitably
means that we don’t reap the benefits of sharing our learning and producing the best possible
interventions. A more collaborative approach could generate better quality programming that is in
turn more fundable and easier to disseminate.
9

10. The other critical new area for prioritisation is the supporting of new forms of service delivery. These
will range from greater citizen involvement in service design to co-delivery to third sector delivery
but funding for skills development, capacity building and business development are likely to be
necessary.
How might we promote this kind of shared innovation? How can we make existing networks more
effective? Do we have any exemplars to build upon?
The other, very difficult but essential issue that is going to have to be addressed is that of merging
organisations. The sector in Wales is shrinking. Almost all organisations that go are those with
professional staff requiring substantial resources to run them. This is hardly surprising and in many
cases valuable services are disappearing with them. Simultaneously organisations running similar
services are struggling to survive. Too often a reluctance to consider merging is driven by
organisational needs or even ego rather than fundamental mission. Organisations which provide
very similar services to others should be encouraged and supported to look at merger as an option
when it could safeguard services and deliver savings. This issue could be brought into Governance
training and support, the offer from infrastructure organisations and potentially even from some
funders.
Skills Development
There is strong consensus that we need to raise the level of skills of people working in the sector.
Key areas identified included leadership and senior management skills, communications and
monitoring and evaluation. However issues around governance and helping develop a more robust
attitude towards managing (rather than avoiding) risk have been identified as key priorities
especially among organisations with any aspirations of enterprising behaviour. Some funders have
also expressed concerns about standards of governance.
Some areas of skills development are answered within quite competitive markets, others by
specialist provision without competition and others provided through governing bodies. There is no
easy solution to making training more accessible and appropriate but some clear steps could be
taken. These include better marketing of Academi Wales courses to the sector; clear work on
strengthening governance towards certain priority organisations (those in receipt of European
funding and those taking a more pronounced role in public service delivery have been identified as
high priorities) and clear were liaison and coordination between publicly funded support
organisations, providing what has been called “Intelligent support” which addresses much more
clearly the needs of the recipient rather than what sits in the comfort zone of the provider: this
requires both partnership working and stronger diagnostics.
Regional and Local Learning Hubs - there needs to be space and opportunity for small and medium
sized organisations to access support and mentoring to develop their skills base. Very few people
within the sector start their job with all the knowledge they require to be successful, and few have
the opportunity to develop their required skills and knowledge once they are in the job. Few people
from the Sector access sector skills courses and few take a longer-term approach to their
10

11. professional development. This is particularly true of community and social enterprise, where there
is often an organisational deficit in terms of enterprise skills. There needs to be a place where
people can learn together and share best practice, and have access to a range of tools, resources
and knowledge.
Looking Outwards
Better Communications
Such approaches will be easier if we are able to communicate about the sector’s work more
effectively. At present the work of the sector in Wales remains largely unknown outside Wales,
effective work within Wales is often little understood outside the ranks of immediate beneficiaries
or partners and the huge amount of work done by volunteers is underreported.
A stronger communications strategy, led by infrastructure organisations with some work done on
capacity building of local groups should be put in place to address this. This should include
conscious targeted efforts to inform key stakeholders outside Wales of work done here.
Communications to build stronger networks where relevant and a concerted effort to raise the
profile of the work of volunteers as the most powerful embodiment of the work done by people in
Wales for people in Wales as a priority.
Are there particular approaches that need to be used to make this happen?
Which UK bodies should we try to ensure are better informed about Wales?
Relations with the Business Sector
The sector and its work will undoubtedly be enhanced by a stronger partnership with the business
sector (as opposed to private sector providers of public services). Many businesses are looking for
better ways of connecting to the communities they sell to and employ from. Many also have strong
expertise in many areas of management, , marketing and communication, enterprise and
governance that the sector can benefit from (as well as obviously funding in some cases). At present
the sector’s links with businesses are limited compared to in other parts of the UK and the benefits
accordingly unrealised. A clear approach to stronger private sector engagement should be a priority
for the sector.
What good practice can we currently build on?
Which organisations can lead in this area?
We have to accept that progressing any of these priorities means overcoming a number of quite
significant barriers.
These include
Barriers to cooperation in the sector, especially on programme work, which include competition for
funding, the capacity to cooperate (which includes time, skills and structures)
11

12. The uncertainty affecting work and structures at local level following the Williams Report (and longer
term what might happen following the Scottish referendum)
The current gaps between professional and voluntary run organisations
Political disengagement which inhibits people from engaging in issues or discussions which do
beyond the very immediate
The “thin skinned” nature of debate within the sector and between the sector and the public sector
which inhibits robust and open debate.
12

13. i http://www.bevanfoundation.org/publications/the-future-of-the-voluntary-sector/
ii A Charity Commission report (Stand and Deliver: the future for charities delivering public services. 2007) found that charities that
deliver public services were significantly less likely to agree that their charitable activities were driven by their mission, rather than
funding activities, that they were free to make decisions without pressure to conform to funders, or that they involved their
trustees in decisions about what projects or activities to undertake.
iii In the course of discussions leading to this paper we were given an extraordinary example of a Health Trust ending
funding for an outpatient support service and then asking the charity concerned how they could sign post patients to
this now no longer funded service!
iv http://ukchangingunion.org.uk/en/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Chapter_10.pdf
v http://opinion.publicfinance.co.uk/2014/04/dont-ignore-voluntary-sector-voice/
vi http://www.clickonwales.org/2014/04/how-public-procurement-can-boost-the-economy/
This paper has been authored by Chris Johnes and Sarah Lloyd Jones with comments and contributions from Sarah
Stone, Simon Harris, Rhian Connick, Barbara Castle, Peter Davies, Simon James, Jenny O’Hara, Anna Nicholl and Sioned
Hughes