Diane rutter notts consortium presentation 30 june 2010 v2

386 views

Published on

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
386
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Merger Costs These fell into two categories: opportunity costs and real costs.   Opportunity costs are the amount of time that was spent managing/working on the merger by staff. I have no way of costing this in any scientific way. I know that I was effectively full time (in my part time role) on this for 6 months, which is a cost of £12,000. Allowing an estimate for the other three Chief Officers at about the same amount, plus the odd bit of other time, I think it is save to say that the cost of lost time would easily be £25,000.   In terms of real costs the main cost was the legal and financial advice. Overall this came in at around £25,000 (this includes HR, TUPE, and pension advice along with the legal work and financial due diligence). Other costs incurred were the board facilitator £1,500, recruitment for the CE £5,000, meetings/refreshments/room hire etc £1,000. There were some other costs charged to the merger as well and I think the total costs incurred were £35,000.    
  • Savings A tricky area to explain. At a level it is fair to say that we are yet to identify and realize efficiencies arising from the merger – for example we will not save rental costs as we continued with all existing properties. (However the Board has agreed to close one of the offices which will save £12,000pa in rental costs).   You could also argue that the consolidated budget for the non-merged organisations showed a £70,000 deficit whilst the consolidated budget for the merged organisation is breakeven. At this level there has been a benefit of £70,000 from the merger – which was effectively realized through the staff redeployment exercise where we reduced the number of staff by 4 posts, which was around 2.8ftes.
  • If doing it again then what would we advise – safeguards etc?
  • Diane rutter notts consortium presentation 30 june 2010 v2

    1. 1. Taking Collaboration Further The story of Community Impact Bucks Diane Rutter
    2. 2. Community Impact Bucks Promoting excellence in voluntary and community services
    3. 3. <ul><ul><li>Launched 3 months ago on 1st April 2010 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Volunteer Centre, Council for Voluntary Service and Rural Community Council for Buckinghamshire </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Integrated, countywide </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>In many ways a culmination of the ChangeUp programme in Bucks </li></ul></ul>Community Impact Bucks Promoting excellence in voluntary and community services
    4. 4. How and why did we get here? <ul><li>2005 – 4 districts – 3 CVS and a gap. 3 Volunteer Centres. Countywide RCC. Loose partnership for networking. Countywide strategic plan. </li></ul><ul><li>2005/6 – Stakeholder group – user surveys – agreed principles for providing support services, plus the priority needs </li></ul><ul><li>2006 - CVS and Volunteer Centre Consortium formed, bid for and won countywide infrastructure contract. Sub-contracted some work to the RCC </li></ul>
    5. 5. How and why contin…. <ul><li>2007-9 Delivering the contract. Additional countywide projects established. </li></ul><ul><li>2008-9 considered our own strategic development, options and positioning for the future. </li></ul><ul><li>2009 – trustees agreed to merge, due diligence etc. </li></ul><ul><li>2010 – merger and launch. </li></ul>
    6. 7. Trustees reasons for merger <ul><li>Central to the Trustees recommendation was a conclusion that merger was the best way to achieve three key outcomes. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Improving the sustainability and viability of the projects and services provided within the Voluntary Impact Bucks organisations. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Retaining local links and enhancing the capability to serve all local communities. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Enabling new, effective and innovative approaches to service delivery. </li></ul></ul>
    7. 8. How partners were chosen <ul><li>Early Voluntary Impact Bucks membership determined by the service spec in the contract – eg Youth CVS remained separate. </li></ul><ul><li>Opted in or out </li></ul><ul><li>Element of competition </li></ul><ul><li>What did each organisation have to offer </li></ul><ul><li>Who could get organised in time </li></ul>
    8. 9. Managing the transition <ul><li>Trustee steering group </li></ul><ul><li>Chief Officers management group with a nominated merger project lead </li></ul><ul><li>Due diligence (internal followed by external) </li></ul><ul><li>Stakeholder consultation, press releases, bulletin updates </li></ul><ul><li>Shadow board, with consultancy support </li></ul><ul><li>Name, vision, values, aims, organisational chart, budgets, job descriptions </li></ul><ul><li>Tupe, consultations, alternative employment </li></ul>
    9. 10. Securing support of all stakeholders <ul><li>Internally - Have been talking about it for years. </li></ul><ul><li>Externally - One to one meetings with key players, (CEOs etc) </li></ul><ul><li>- e-bulletins, updates at forums etc </li></ul><ul><li>Overall - Constantly presenting the positives </li></ul>
    10. 12. Key challenges / issues <ul><li>Pre merger </li></ul><ul><li>Getting buy in from all trustees </li></ul><ul><li>Pension deficit liability </li></ul><ul><li>Achieving a balanced budget </li></ul><ul><li>Selection process for new board </li></ul><ul><li>Managing staff and volunteer expectations and minimising anxiety and disruption </li></ul>
    11. 13. Key challenges / issues <ul><li>Post merger </li></ul><ul><li>Incompatible IT systems </li></ul><ul><li>Managing dispersed teams across dispersed locations </li></ul><ul><li>Website and suite of communication materials </li></ul><ul><li>Bringing together different cultures </li></ul>
    12. 14. Costs and savings
    13. 15. Merger Costs <ul><li>Opportunity costs </li></ul><ul><li>6 months p/t project lead £12,000 </li></ul><ul><li>6 months other CO’s £12,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Cost of lost time = £25,000 </li></ul><ul><li>TOTAL COST = £60,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Real costs </li></ul><ul><li>Financial & legal advice £25,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Trustee board facilitator £1,500 </li></ul><ul><li>CEO recruitment £5,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Meetings £1,000 </li></ul><ul><li>+ other incidentals </li></ul><ul><li>Real cost = £35,000 </li></ul>
    14. 16. Financing the merger <ul><li>Modernisation fund £20,000 </li></ul><ul><li>ACRE £2,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Reserves £38,000 (£9,500 each) </li></ul><ul><li>Total £ 60,000 </li></ul>
    15. 17. Savings <ul><li>Hoped for efficiencies - Premises £12,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Budget moved from deficit to break-even £70,000 Reduced staff posts by 4, ie 2.8 fte </li></ul><ul><li>BUT – lots more costs coming up on IT, databases, website, marketing materials, extra travel…. </li></ul>
    16. 18. Savings? <ul><li>“ Merger’s don’t necessarily lead to savings, but they can lead to efficiencies.” </li></ul><ul><li>Cora Carvey CEO </li></ul>
    17. 19. What has been learnt <ul><li>Step by step approach – we built towards this over years. </li></ul><ul><li>Take external legal and financial advice to protect all parties. </li></ul><ul><li>Once the decision is made, set a realistic timetable and keep to it. </li></ul><ul><li>There is a honeymoon period – capitalise on this </li></ul><ul><li>Keep your differences internal – maintain a positive voice externally </li></ul><ul><li>Be positive </li></ul><ul><li>Get on with it! </li></ul>
    18. 20. <ul><li>“ If the key staff and trustees want to merge, are sold on the benefits and work well together , it WILL happen. </li></ul><ul><li>If one or more of these isn't demonstrably in place then it would be very hard” </li></ul><ul><li>Mike Coote, Chair </li></ul>
    19. 21. Thank you for listening ! Any questions?

    ×