Inside an innovation - birth of individual budgets

455 views

Published on

Talk given to the Social Policy Research Unit in York on the birth of individual budgets and the development and transformation of the innovation - with particular reference to role of research in social innovation

Published in: News & Politics, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
455
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
39
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Inside an innovation - birth of individual budgets

    1. 1. Inside an Innovationthe development of individual budgets Dr Simon Duffy ■ The Centre for Welfare Reform ■ SPRU Event at University of York ■ 7th February 2012
    2. 2. Questions• What is a social innovation?• How do innovations spread?• How are innovations resisted?• What does this mean for research?
    3. 3. Focus: Individual Budgets• A particular solution to the reform of the welfare system, especially as it relates to disabled people.• Development by In Control, then became part of government research programme, and then changed to Personal Budgets.• Long-term prospects uncertain, still highly contested, but has arguably helped to bring about some useful changes in perspective.
    4. 4. Social Innovation = a new way of doing things,to improve our shared world Innovations, usually, precede policies; and policies, usually, end innovations
    5. 5. insider’s perspective1988 visited Leighton Lodge1990 seconded to Southwark Consortium1996 started Inclusion Glasgow1999 tested SDS in North Lanarkshire2003 started In Control2009 started The Centre for Welfare Reform
    6. 6. part of a bigger picture
    7. 7. What is the innovation?1.Self-directed support2.Individual budgets3.Resource Allocation System (RAS)4.Support planning5.Outcome-focused review6.Personalised support7.Community brokerage
    8. 8. IB = IF + ‘budget-first’
    9. 9. personal motivation Why NOT citizenship entitlement neo-liberalism creativity americanism universal - radical professionalism transparent (?) cost-cuttingbut intention doesn’t fix meaning...
    10. 10. Diffusion of InnovationsDiffusion of Innovations Curve - Everett Rogers (amended by Duffy)
    11. 11. 1. At the Margins• Long-standing issue within advocates of Individualised Funding - how to define budget?• Early work in Southwark, Glasgow and North Lanarkshire failed to get traction.• In Control happened at the right time and the right place.• In Control was designed to maximise possibility of increased take-up.• A Trojan horse strategy to transform a broken system from the inside...
    12. 12. NOTE: goal was citizenship
    13. 13. success factors• experience and 10+ years intellectual property• branding, values and communication• social justice - empowerment, without privatisation• luck - retiring senior managers• luck - Ladyman visit to Wigan• luck - Life Chances of Disabled People• luck - VPST’s problems, CEO opportunity
    14. 14. 2. Policy Wars• In Control was highly controversial and challenged on: data, cost, ethics, legality, feasibility, policy...• Split between official Individual Budget Pilot Programme and In Control’s second phase and total transformation programmes.• War ended in 2007 - Putting People First changed the language to ‘Personal Budgets’ and defined future policy.
    15. 15. NOTE: use of DH goals
    16. 16. success factors• membership programme - over 100+ LAs• problem-solving and open source approach• temporary dependence of DH on In Control• difficulties inherent to the IBPP• luck - Ivan Lewis• luck - Charlie Leadbeater• luck - lack of money
    17. 17. 3. Implementation• Shift to a centrally driven, funded (£0.5 billion) and defined government policy - paradoxically focusing on ‘making local government do it’• In Control’s outsider role becomes problematic.• No focus on underlying problems of entitlement and the complexities that will inevitably emerge at the health-social care boundary - instead ‘Personal Health Budgets’.
    18. 18. running out of luck...• too much money - funded the competition - inside and outside government• Ivan Lewis’ departure and collapse of the ‘social care funding debate’• DH needing to assert ‘leadership’• Civil service desire to make it an implementation issue - despite inherent flaws in legal framework• In Control has made it all seem ‘too easy’• In Control seen as ‘too challenging’
    19. 19. 4. Success/Failure• Nominal success by 2013 high likely.• Value of success will be reduced by the inefficiency of the delivery and by the poor definition of the goal.• Not a transformation; but nevertheless a positive shift in perspective.
    20. 20. Failure brings...• opportunity to revisit the health-social care divide• chance to build wider alliances and new public understanding of the issues• build better supports for social innovators and critics of the current system• think deeper, think longer - do better next time
    21. 21. Resistance to Innovation
    22. 22. Diffusion driven by1.Belief...2.Status...3.Usefulness...4.Necessity... motivation evolves with success, and success is not inevitable
    23. 23. Systems Resist Innovation1.Keep innovators at the margins2.Question evidence of success3.Make innovation adapt to current norms4.Make innovation optional this is not irrational, it reflects: differences in rationale and differences in belief
    24. 24. Innovation harder when:• Copyright has no value• Innovation has no commercial value• Permission, not forgiveness, is required• Innovation threatens politically powerful economic interests• Mass testing, rather than incremental experimentation is necessary• Key values or assumptions are threatened i.e. social innovation is very hard indeed
    25. 25. Impact on researchers1. Pilot instead of develop2. Redefine or weaken the definition of the innovation3. Undermine the implementation process4. Undermine the research process5. ...and many others... dangers to integrity
    26. 26. What is the link between design and research?Protecting research integrity
    27. 27. Collaboration?• Do we know the purpose that the innovation is trying to achieve?• Do we understand how an innovation really works and are we able to ‘take it apart’?• Can we find methodologies that enable us to explore why an innovation works?• How can we increase the cycle of improvement and development? i.e. social innovation
    28. 28. For more information go towww.centreforwelfarereform.org These slides are © Simon Duffy 2012 ■ Publisher is The Centre for Welfare Reform ■ Slides can be distributed subject to conditions set out at www.centreforwelfarereform.org ■

    ×