Fascinating report of an ADASS roundtable in the south west on commissioning. Worth reading for an insight into the challenges commissioners face and some of the ways they're thinking of addressing these challenges.

1. AN ACTION LEARNING WORKSHOP TO SUPPORT “THINK LOCAL, ACT
PERSONAL” : MAY 2012
South West Forum and ADASS organised a workshop for senior commissioners and procurement
teams to enable an action learning exercise with senior leaders from the social purpose sector. The
aim of the event was to empower commissioners to do things differently by identifying where there is
the power to influence and busting some of the myths that exist.
The event helped to develop a clearer understanding of the constraints and barriers to
commissioning across both the public sector and social purpose sector, as well as providing an
opportunity to network and share good practice and to challenge poor or restrictive practice.
The workshop highlighted both challenges and opportunities around social value and personalisation
and the following document aims to summarise the main points. We hope that it will be useful to
both statutory sector and social purpose organisations as a basis for ongoing discussion and debate.
Top Tips on Commissioning for Social Value
 Focus on relationship building to establish a co-productive approach. Understand
each other’s priorities for development and create opportunities for commissioners
and social purpose organisations1 to come together and share ideas.
 Understand what the local market wants and what people need now and in the
future. Track how people use their Personal Budget. Consider commissioning social
purpose organisations to find out what local communities want and improve co-
design and co-production of services.
 Engage elected members on commissioning for social value.
 The Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012 encourages incorporating social value in
procurement but service specifications need to improve, with a better
understanding of “outcomes”. We need to work together to design processes for
evaluating social value outcomes and build them into procurement processes.
 Be honest and decommission services if they are not working. This applies as much
to the social purpose sector as to any other provider.
 Social purpose organisations need to market themselves more to promote their
“offer” both to councils but also to individuals.
 Think carefully about the current pressure on partnership working. More time and
a co-productive approach to design of the specification might avoid the need for
such prescription.
1
The term “social purpose organisation” refers to organisations and businesses with social and community
objectives which do not distribute profits and includes social enterprises and voluntary and community groups
1

2. The following is a summary of the key themes that emerged from the workshop :
Theme 1 - How to Challenge Political Leadership?
There was general agreement on the need to help politicians understand the value of services. This
could be done through highlighting evidence of the impact of policies and flagging up when people’s
views are ignored and evidence is not used. Local Commissioners/Authorities are constrained by
national policy and social purpose organisations need to make more use of national and regional social
purpose infrastructure organisations to inform national politicians. There is a need to be clear on the
difference between co-design and consultation and politicians need to be involved from the start.
Suggestions included training for elected members/councillors on commissioning policies and a
proposal that equality impact assessments should be done by an outside body.
Theme 2 : How to support the social purpose sector to be What does social value mean?
more secure?
There was no one definition but the
We should NOT focus on making organisations secure but on following are some of the group’s
making services secure; regardless of who provides them. ideas:
Commissioners and politicians need to think longer term User-led, user-designed services
(multi-year funding) and develop frameworks to help this. Care driven not cash driven
The more communication there is about future Building resilient communities and
commissioning intentions, the more secure providers will individuals
feel.
Promoting reciprocity and self-help
A focus on outcomes allows for flexibility in outputs over a
Inclusion, belonging and communities
longer time period.
Enabling people to live as they want
Commissioners need to better understand the social purpose
sector so that commissioning avoids unintended Better use of resources to support
consequences. people
The social purpose sector needs to remember its mission and Looking at strengths as well as need
not be led by public sector agendas and contracts
2

3. “THE CURRENCY SHOULD
BE CARE AND NOT CASH”
(QUOTE FROM THE DAY)
Theme 3 : How do we manage bureaucracy?
Certain elements of bureaucracy are essential Theme 4 : How do we gain improved shared
and they primarily concern finance, equality and understanding?
audit. Bureaucracy is not a bad thing in itself
and can help to avert problems. Networking opportunities are really important
and we need to create space to share views.
However, bureaucracy can be a barrier. There also needs to be space for one to one
Technology has, in many cases, made things conversations.
worse.
Potential providers need to be proactive –
There needs to be greater efforts to streamline engaging in local/community opportunities.
and make processes proportionate to the value
of the contract. Ideas include: standardising Commissioners need to publish commissioning
forms; sharing best practice within intentions in good time, providing consistent
organisations e.g. between local authority information in the same way/place.
departments; and using grants.
We need to use IT better – a Twitter account for
Commissioners also need to take risks – small organisations e.g. ‘Supply Bristol’
informed by local networks and relationships. (http://twitter.com/supply_bristol) Blogs can
help share information.
Providers need to be better able to challenge.
Theme 5 : How do we capture/build on
innovation?
Sharing We need a different system to cultivate
Understanding
innovation.
Effective innovation is something that
Improving achieves outcomes and greater freedom
Engaging
Services needs to be given to providers around how,
including building on existing work.
We need to recognise the flexibility in
procurement legislation and look more
creatively at co-production and shared
Innovating Challenging research and development.
Payment by results and social impact bonds
can potentially support innovation but their
structure is not sufficiently understood by
either side.
3

4. Theme 6 : How do we improve the co-design of services?
Quotes from the
We need more research on whether there is a correlation between time on
Day
co-production and the impact on the service over the longer term.
Co-design is positive but there are questions around how to get the right
“We need to people involved and understanding the tipping point from co-design to legal
process.
give and take”
Consultation should be on outcomes – not how to get there. Commissioning
should start with the need.
“Pleased that
the VCS A co design portal (NESTA model) could improve skills on all sides. But this
would need to be resourced correctly especially in terms of time.
acknowledged
http://www.nesta.org.uk/areas_of_work/public_services_lab/coproduction
as an
excellent
provider”
What are current social value
priorities?
Theme 7 : How do we improve focus on resource
management NOT financial management? Individuals feel respected and made
to feel part of their community.
There are clear benefits to measuring impact in non-financial
as well as financial terms and focussing on best value and not People need to be given information
just value for money. to enable them to make choices
about their lifestyles.
There is a challenge in putting a financial value on social
outcomes and a need for a shared understanding of the There are lots of skills in the
“added value” of the social purpose sector. community and these need to be
harnessed.
We need a better knowledge and understanding of what
‘Social value’ should not just be
provision is already being delivered.
equated with saving money and
The cost of monitoring needs to be factored into the ‘getting more for less’.
tender/cost of the service;
There needs to be greater
consistency around jargon and a
We need to look at setting up pilots for innovation (outside
shared understanding of what is
the funding frameworks); setting up forums to consider
meant by ‘outcomes’ and ‘measuring
results/ best practice; and establishing mechanisms to enable
social purpose organisations engage with commissioners (e.g. social value’.
online groups/providers sharing services and resources). Any new processes for monitoring
and evaluation need to be
proportionate and ensure value for
money.
4

5. Key similarities and differences
Theme 8 : What is the effect of between statutory and social purpose organisations
measuring social value?
There needs to be an appreciation of Shared concern that commissioning Different cultures
“total value” and a move away from is a technical process and a shared
decisions based solely on costs. frustration at systems and processes
getting in the way of good
However, seeking to measure social
commissioning
value does bring some risks:
There is a concern about the focus Different attitudes to
 It could deter engagement of on best value and efficiency risk
social purpose organisations if
the process is too exacting and There is a desire for a common Different
the definition of what to approach to measuring social value understanding of what
measure becomes restrictive. It is meant by social value
will be important to keep it
simple. There is a shared commitment to Different constraints
personalisation but shared concerns around action
 There are different local about the impact of this in practice
definitions of social value which
A shared desire to get rid of waste Different commercial
presents challenges.
and duplication realities
 There is a danger that social A common desire to achieve the Neither sector is
value activity is not same outcomes and an underlying unified
commissioned elsewhere and is set of shared values
seen as a ‘free’ good which may
make it unsustainable for social Complicit in retaining services which
purpose organisations. are “popular”
Both parties have an interest in
shaping the market
For more information about the event and a copy of the detailed group discussions please contact Deborah Fisher:
Deborah@southwestforum.org.uk
The event was supported and facilitated by Virginia McCririck: www.peoplelogical.com
South West Forum, The Innovation Centre, University of Exeter, Rennes Drive, Exeter EX4 4RN
T. 01392 247901 E. admin@southwestforum.org.uk www.southwestforum.org.uk
Registered Charity 1102082. Company Limited by Guarantee Registered in England Company No 4978095
Registered Office as above.
5