Policy makers lack the vision of third sector organisations

Whatever the motivation behind the 'big society' agenda – a genuine desire for more community action or an attempt to soften the blow of the recently announced public sector spending cuts – it is clear that the prime minister has a vision that involves more third sector organisations delivering public services. But patchy commissioning and a lack of understanding at a national level of innovation in the third sector may be a barrier to this vision. In Sheffield over the past two years, local third sector organisations have been developing new business structures that would help to deliver the prime minister's vision. One example is Youth Consortium Sheffield (YCS) which brings together over 45 social enterprises, charities and community organisations delivering youth services across the city. The rationale is that by working together in a consortium, local, small-scale organisations can maximise their shared skills and muscle when bidding for contracts against larger, often national competitors. At a local level it is working. YCS has a contract with the local authority worth £813,000 over two years to deliver positive activities for 8-13 year olds in the city. Members of the consortium, some of whom rely heavily on volunteers, would not have been able to compete for this contract on their own. Business development YCS has a strategic group elected from its membership which steers the direction of the consortium. Zest, a local community development trust, is the lead organisation responsible for the operational management of the consortium including business development and contracts and funding management. The benefit of this kind of consortium to public sector commissioners is that it offers access to a large range of providers of services through a single contract, presenting efficiency savings in terms of administration costs. Also, through projects focused on driving up service quality it is able to develop the third sector supplier base in the city. However, despite backing for this consortium model from the Social Investment Business, at a national level a narrow view of what a third sector consortium should look like seems to be a barrier to YCS securing national funding or contracts. Recent funding specifications, if they favour consortia at all, appear to be designed for consortia or partnerships consisting of a small number of organisations where the lead is also a key delivery partner. A third sector supply chain A recent example is the Big Lottery Fund's (BLF) Youth in Focus fund. This fund encourages 'partnership bids' and has a clear emphasis on projects that can increase co-ordination across services. The consortium's model offered precisely this; a lead body which, while not the lead delivery organisation, could coordinate, develop and manage the project across a third sector supply chain. However when YCS ran this model by the policy team at BLF it was discouraged from applying because Zest (the lead organisation) would not be a key delivery partner. In fact, Zest not being a key delivery partner could have offered two significant advantages to the project development and delivery process. Firstly, without a vested interest in securing a significant proportion of the funding for itself, Zest would have been able to ensure that only those organisations that could deliver real change for the particular target groups would have been part of the bid. Funding specifications that favour partnerships or consortia led by a key delivery organisation tend to result in more organisation-led rather than needs-led projects; particularly in the current climate where funding bids can turn into a bun fight because organisations are fighting for their survival. They also tend to favour the larger organisations that have the capacity to develop bids. Secondly, through the consortium's model, Zest would have been able to manage objectively the performance of delivery, ensuring that the client groups received a good quality service. This experience wasn't a one off; the consortium had real difficulties with previous rounds of the Youth Sector Development Fund. This consortium model is more relevant than ever as a mechanism for supporting third sector organisations to deliver the prime minister's vision of a "big society". Commissioners and those responsible for funding policy need to take a broader view of all types of third sector consortia and the benefits they can deliver. If they do not, local, small-scale organisations will struggle to deliver more public services. Isobel Thomas is consortium manager, Youth Consortium Sheffield and Zest