11. Specific activities for 2008-11

  Comment on this chapter

Objective: To improve the quality of infrastructure support for VCOs

Area-based consortia

Q4b Do you agree with the specific activities detailed for 2008 to 2011? Comment

Activity: Develop and begin to roll out a system of peer review for funded consortia on key issues, for example diversity and making the case for support for infrastructure
By: April 2008
Progress: Greater awareness of the issues and evidence of positive changes in practice

Activity: Review the progress in ChangeUp consortia in ensuring that all socially excluded interests are fully integrated in investment plans for the future
By: May 2009
Progress: Opportunity to assess whether targeted programmes can close in 2011 in favour of extending funding through mainstream programmes only

Activity: Publish guidance on the funding policy for support for consortia for 2011–14
By: February 2010
 
Activity: Make funding decisions for consortia for the period 2011–14
By: November 2010
Progress: Consortia start to be able to point to the positive difference they have made in leveraging in extra resources/helping reconfigure infrastructure, with diversity, etc

National support services

Q4b Do you agree with the specific activities detailed for 2008 to 2011? Comment

Activity: Launch new national support services through main contractors
By: April 2008
Progress: Achievement of the launch of new national services as planned

Activity: Review of national support services and the role of the main contractors with a view to recommissioning
By: May/June 2010

Activity: Recommissioning of the main contractors for delivery of national support services
By: September/October 2010

Activity: Agree contracts with the main contractors and business plans for 2011–14
By: November/December 2010

Learning and innovation

Q4b Do you agree with the specific activities detailed for 2008 to 2011? Comment

Activity: Undertake a programme of work refining/developing/testing quality standards for infrastructure/outcome measurement approaches
By: March 2009
Progress:  Agreement to dissemination of a particular range of tools and approaches

Activity: Launch a ‘take-up’ campaign for quality standards and infrastructure/outcome measurement, comprising training and marketing and publicity work
By: April 2009
Progress: Greater awareness of the relevant tools and approaches

Activity: Initial review of peer support programme
By: April 2009
Progress:  Greater awareness of peer review and pro bono support and its benefits among infrastructure organisations

Activity: Disseminate learning from this work through a publication and a seminar
By: October 2009
 
Activity: Initial review of pro bono schemes
By: May 2009
 
Activity: Disseminate learning from this work through a publication and a seminar
By: September 2009

Activity: Initial review of the work developing infrastructure support for sub-sectors in two particular geographical areas
By: May 2008
Progress: A positive improvement in the level/quality of support offered to VCOs working in the particular sub-sectors identified in these geographical areas

Activity: Decision about the development of the work (including possible extension to other geographical areas)
By: June 2008
Progress: Learning about how generic and sub-sectoral infrastructures work together and the relative responsibilities of each

Objective: To encourage extra investment in infrastructure by demonstrating its benefits

Learning and innovation

Q4b Do you agree with the specific activities detailed for 2008 to 2011? Comment

Activity: Prepare guidance material and deliver training for funded consortia/organisations on how to assess the outcomes of their work
By: April 2008
Progress:  Greater awareness among consortia/funded organisations about how to assess the outcomes of their work

Activity: Conduct research examining the different models of infrastructure provision in different regions and sub-regions and what models appear to work best in what circumstances
By: July 2008
Progress: A stronger evidence base about different models of provision

Activity:Examination of the costs of different models and their current funding sources to develop
indicative levels of investment
By: September 2008
Progress: Benchmark costings for different levels of infrastructure provision

Objective: To improve the reach of infrastructure services

Equalities and diversity

Q4b Do you agree with the specific activities detailed for 2008 to 2011? Comment

Activity: Develop guidance and peer review schemes as appropriate for funded projects
By: April 2008
Progress: Funded projects start to demonstrate improved practice on diversity and equalities

Activity: Launch of new, expanded Improving Reach programme – to include all infrastructure organisations working with socially excluded groups
By: April 2008
Progress: Inclusive programme launched successfully

Activity: Further review of equalities and diversity recommendations and action to assess progress
By: January 2009
Progress: Assessment of the degree to which national support services and ChangeUp consortia have absorbed recommendations and have changed practice

Objective: To develop capacity building funding sources

Influence and joint working

Do you agree with the specific activities detailed for 2008 to 2011? Comment

Activity: Manage and administer capacity building funds on behalf of at least one other government department
By: April 2008 
Progress: Capacitybuilders working with other funders in the management of their programmes

Activity: Gather information about local public spending bodies’ support for capacity building the third sector and disseminate the results of collaborations between Capacitybuilders and local authorities
By: September 2008 
Progress: Better intelligence about local authorities and capacity building

Activity: Identify opportunities for collaboration between charitable foundations and Capacitybuilders in launching matched funding schemes
By: May 2008
Progress: Following changes made in 2007 to Capacitybuilders’ legal form, initiating the first joint assessments with charitable foundations

Activity: Identify opportunities for private sector investment in capacity building programmes
By: June 2008
Progress:  Following changes made in 2007 to Capacitybuilders’ legal form, initiating the first joint assessments with private sector companies

Activity: Launch the first joint Capacitybuilders/charitable foundation fund
By: January 2009
Progress: Achievement of the launch of a joint fund for infrastructure support at the local level

Activity: Launch the first joint Capacitybuilders/private sector capacity building programmes
By: February 2009
Progress:  Achievement of the launch of a joint fund for infrastructure support with private sector companies

Activity: Development of a joint strategy/strategies for developing third sector capacity with one or two other key players building on previous initiatives
By: April 2009
Progress:  Effective collaborative working arrangements

Comments

[stephen woollett]

8. Activities and Processes
8.1 We think the work plan element of Destination 2014 may be overly-ambitious. We would prefer CB to concentrate, certainly in 2008-2011, on ensuring its core roles and programmes are delivered efficiently and effectively.

8.2 We have collected the views and experiences of some key people involved in the ChangeUp programme in the South West and published these in a recent issue of our quarterly Forum Focus. (Copy enclosed and also downloadable from http://www.southwestforum.org.uk.) The following selection of comments reflect commonly held views amongst those involved with ChangeUp in the South West and we think provide important messages for CapacityBuilders in relation to both its strategic priorities and how it operates.

• "The lack of continuity in strategy and funding has been a real problem.”

• "We expect our funders to understand the need for three year service level agreements in line with the Compact yet the ChangeUp programme expects us to make long term plans and commitments with very short term funding and no promises for the future."

• "I'd like to see better resources for local infrastructure support; I don’t think the balance is right yet between work funded at national, regional and local level."

• "Adequate core funding for infrastructure organisations supporting local work still doesn’t exist."

• "Without doubt developing relationships with work at national level has been difficult."

• "We would like CapacityBuilders to develop a more flexible model that enables infrastructure organisations to respond to local circumstances instead of trying to fit into an imposed structure."

• "We need to develop coherent links between national, regional and local levels. There needs to be increased clarity and clear delineation of what is appropriate for each level."

• "I'd like to see a really clear framework around the money from CapacityBuilders so that we can really trace the money through to the outcomes."

• "I'd like to see more strategic alignment and coherence of timeframes and processes - so that we are not constructing really similar bids to similar funds at the same time."

• "I'm concerned that local government funding will decline under the cover of ChangeUp - there's definitely a risk of a "perverse" funding effect, where funding from central government reduces funding at local government level."