VSF Conference Supporting Decommissioned Groups and VSF Members

VSF conference supporting decommissioned groups and VSF members July 19th 11:00 – 16:00

Introductory session – issues

Attendees were asked in advance of the conference to think about 3 questions:

 How are groups responding to funding cuts?  Are groups working together to continue to deliver services?  Does anyone have experience of accessing funding from sub- regional groups of boroughs?

Global Action Plan  Has traditionally worked with the private and public sectors  Looking to increase sponsorship and turning back to the private sector  Very much aware of the need to work together and looking for potential opportunities  What does engagement with the private sector mean?  Moving towards a social enterprise model

Disablement Association in Barking and Dagenham have been approaching LAs directly but having problems knowing who to contact – LAs don’t know our projects.

Katrina Ffrench LB Richmond – concerns about sustainability and how to roll out contracts – there is a Voluntary Sector Liaison unit in each LA.

Denise Hubble – MOSAC  MOSAC lost LA funding from Greenwich at the same time as losing London Councils money  LA said that other boroughs might want to continue to fund the service

Malcolm John from LB Harrow LAs are not easy to contact – make as many contacts as possible Identify someone at LA and build a relationship.

Rahana, ROTA  Working in partnership and doing work with pan equalities organisations  Using our reach to benefit other orgs – private and public sectors – selling that knowledge

1  Cutting costs – natural wastage recently rather than as yet redundancy  Cutting down on photocopying  Formulating some partnerships

Mike Danso, Volunteer Reading Help  Improved PR and has a new director of fundraising and communications  Use volunteers and have increased numbers recently  Teamed up with Evening Standard – get London ready for literacy and raised £200k through that  5 year plan

Tim Brogden, LVSC LVSC has responded to cuts by:

 Moving premises and moving in with another organisation, Outsourcing our finance, IT and training functions  We have restructured 2 or 3 times in the last 2 years  Selling our HR advice service

Good practice VCS stories session– how groups have attracted funding and or developed innovative ways to continue delivering vital services.

Case study 1: Gillian Morris, My Voice London

Gillian is Chief Executive, My Voice London which works to improve the life chances of children. http://www.myvoicelondon.org.uk/

Case study 2: Stewart Lucas, Interactive

Stewart is Chief Executive, Interactive, which is a strategic development agency for sport and physical activity for disabled people in London. http://www.interactive.uk.net/

Gillian was unable to attend but sent her presentation. My Voice London used to be Kingston and Merton Education Business Partnership. Its funding was rooted in the public sector. The organisations faced huge funding cuts and had little fundraising experience. My Voice London hired a consultant fundraiser and adopted a whole organisation approach to fundraising. The organisation managed to attract substantial funds.

2 The presentation has been circulated. The contact details for the consultant fundraiser My Voice London used are at the end of this document.

Stewart Lucas, Interactive

 What we’ve done is much like what you’ve all done  Going out to LAs to replace lost LC money  Ensured we made good contacts at each LA and used CEO, staff, Board and friends  Didn’t go to any LAs ‘dry’  Found an alternative way in to VCS route – in our case leisure – and we found it better to navigate our way from the inside  Sell our service as value for money i.e. you were buying this service at £X now you can get this at £Y – 19 out of 33 boroughs are continuing to fund us at £2k each

(This is exactly one of the reasons why the LBGS was set up in the first place…to make one central body to which VCSOs bid – resource heavy to have to bid to 33 different authorities – for smaller groups this is impossible)

 Go to funders and ask – if you don’t ask you’ll never know – we would like to continue to delver this service – how much would you be willing to pay for it  Use contacts and speak to friends  When you approach potential funders – find the first name of the person you want to speak to  Question of fundraising consultants – Association of Fundraising – details of registered consultants  Don’t’ go with ‘no fee no win’ type consultants – the Association of Fundraising doesn’t recognise consultants who go by commission

Questions John Swan, Anglo-Caribbean Society – does the organisation need money upfront to employ a consultant fundraiser?

Yes – you use a professional fundraiser - you pay

Bruce Wood, London Rebuilding Society – you are replacing LC funding with selling services – any tips about grants?

Stewart – these were commissions so nearer to selling services

3 Mei Hui, Social Enterprise London – is there any threshold beyond or beneath which you can’t go? Can any staff member do the negotiations with LA or does it have to be CEO led?

Stewart – CEO led adds credence – 1st question – what is the amount that will make you say yes – be aware of what you can work at.

Denise Hubble, MOSAC – the beauty of London Councils commissioning was being under an umbrella – the notion of having to negotiate with 20 or 30 different LAs fills me with horror – 20 different monitoring forms for example.

At MOSAC we have lost 50% of our staff – now only 2 p/t- we are now almost too small to be working with LAs.

Stewart – this has forced us to focus

Denise – we can’t afford to do it your way - we have a more per client unit cost

John Reacroft – it is not worth us applying for such small amounts of money (because of the resources expended applying)

Workshop 1: Mergers/partnerships and collaborative working – Wesley Harcourt, Advice UK

Wesley Harcourt is London Manager at Advice UK which is the lead organisation for the BME Advice Network (BAN) of 43 BMER advice agencies of which 18 are funded by London Councils. Wesley is also Councillor at LB Hammersmith and Fulham where he holds the portfolio for Shadow Cabinet Member for Environment Services.

AdviceUK has been restructuring too and everything is changing – the sector has the ability to adapt itself to change – VCS is very good at that.

It transpired that about 25% of attendees are working in formal partnerships.

Why form partnerships or work collaboratively?

Rahana, ROTA – we have policy angle and our partners often have practical implementation skills

There are many different types of partnership – policy/2nd tier to frontline – policy to policy etc etc

4 Gurpreet, Women and Girls Network – we partner with other agencies of the same ethos

John Swan – avoiding duplication and cutting costs

Clare Whiting, Global Action Plan – working with grass roots orgs

Wesley – why set up a partnership – Slide 2

 Inner vs. Outer London issue – accessing LC funding (cross borough_ by forming partnerships  Lottery only accepts partnership bids  Gaps in service delivery – VCS supports people

partnership spectrum ranges from interaction with other organisations to sharing without merging to mergers.

types of partnerships

 Geographical: Borough wide, Sub regional, Pan London  Sector: single sector, cross sectoral involving private, public or statutory sectors  Purpose: service delivery, strategic, created for funding, single issue or a number of projects

partnerships with the statutory sector

 NHS  Regeneration  Social services – e.g. service delivery partnerships  Children’s services – e.g. multi agency partnerships to deal with gang violence  Big society – libraries, community interests

Think about what type of partnership you are setting up

What do we want to get out of partnerships?

 Sharing expertise  More accountability? An agreement with another organisation means more rigorous oversight of what is being delivered  Purchasing side – cutting better deals with suppliers  More links with LAs and other contacts – services to private sector e.g. Victim Support work with insurance companies  Eliminates some duplication

5  Groups coming together to provide cohesive pan-London service delivery (funding)  Lose ‘preciousness’ about ‘this is my organisation’  5 organisations chasing £100k across 7 boroughs – efficiency of delivery  Trust - and deliver as an organisation  Sharing values  Once you’ve done it initially – the fear of doing it lessens  Develops organisations  More strategic power with a group of agencies coming together with a collective voice  Collaboration rather than competition  Managing existing resources  Encouraging innovation

Problems to be aware of

 Styles and ways of working don’t match  Fine on paper – the issue of who delivers what  Falling out – draw up clear parameters  Managing the partnership  Lack of co-ordination of working practices  LB Richmond has found that VCSOs have been reluctant to change constitutions for example  Fear that people in the partnership won’t do what’s expected of them  Fear of being black-listed or risk to reputation as a result of things not working out  Fear of getting the blame  Partnerships take time  Changes involved in the move from asking for a grant and getting a contract  Development of partnership  Co-ordination of activities  Unanimity of purpose  Clear decision-making and TOR  Losing sight of the end user  Lots of people form partnerships in order to chase money – should be asking can we deliver this? And is it better that we deliver this with x other organisations?  Modus operandi – how is this going to work?

John Reacroft – we are being encouraged to compete rather than collaborate

6 BME Advice Network (BAN) case study http://www.adviceuk.org.uk/projects-and- resources/resources/collaborativeresources/casestudies/ban

 1st problem – only 18 of the 43 agencies that came together for a common purpose were funded by London Councils forming a 2 tier partnership and conflict between the funded and non-funded groups  Consistency of monitoring – took a long while to develop a standardised method  Key – ensure that monitoring system is understood and in place before starting work  The administration of the partnership requires resources and in this case a lot of time, energy and money was involved – the lead partner has to take on a lot of work  Sanctions for those not pulling their weight – is this something to agree before starting work?  Exit strategy and the future  BAN was categorised C before the JR and became A* and so is in principal funded until September 2012  Elizabeth Henry, CEO ROTA has recently said to us whatever happens don’t lose this network of BAMER advice agencies  Advice UK have chose incorporation for the future of the network and do not want to lose this partnership

Questions Bruce Wood – who paid for the extra administration work – you were funded you say for ½ day per week but ended up putting in 2 ½ days

Wesley – it came from unrestricted funds – making a loss in one area and made a profit in another

When it came to membership and problems with membership – how was that worked out?

London Councils told us that it was up to us to choose who could and could not be part of the bid

What happens to the repatriated money?

Cllr McGlone, Lambeth responded – the term ‘repatriation’ is unhelpful – how can you ‘repatriate’ money that is already LA money - put the case to boroughs re: continued funding and exploit the contacts that you have – we want London Councils to take a brokerage role between those groups whose funding is ending and

7 boroughs that may want to continue to fund services – many members including myself want this to happen

Tim Brogden, LVSC – it is not happening – there are concerns that LC has said all along that they will facilitate and broker contact between groups whose funding is being terminated early and LAs – they talked about sub-regional groupings – as far as we can see this is not happening – they have washed their hands of those groups – as you can see there is no London councils’ contribution to this event – no one is here – Mark Brangwyn was here but he has now gone – it is a shame he is not here to address this issue

Rahana, ROTA – there is an equalities issue here – if you have connections and can sell yourself in terms of equality need to have a process a mechanism for this

Denise, MOSAC – LAs have their own grants schemes and practices and are cutting at the same time as LC is cutting

Cllr McGlone – in Lambeth we have a good relationship with our VCS and our cuts have not been too bad

Denise – Greenwich said they would help us to approach other LAs for continued funding – but they haven’t

LAs have a tight turn around for funding applications – see Bexley’s earlier this year

John Phelps - part of LC Grants officers’ role was o work with LAs to understand what is available – impossible for us to brokerage role like this

Point made about the need for London councils to assess and understand what London needs from a pan-London scheme and what can be delivered – Tim Brogden reminded people that this is a statutory obligation that hasn’t received as much focus in this process as might have been expected

Cllr McGlone – key role for London Councils is brokerage, facilitation and co-ordination – he assured the conference he would take this back to members and officers

8 Afternoon sessions Workshop 2: Ready for Change? John Griffiths, Rocket Science

John Griffiths, Director Rocket Science, which supports organisations and communities across the UK in their drive to improve their own effectiveness and performance.

John’s specialisms are regeneration and community engagement, corporate social responsibility, public policy trends and citizen participation. He was instrumental in the setting up of London Civic Forum.

The free Rocket Science Ready for Change tool will help you better consider your strengths and weaknesses at a time when many, particularly smaller organisations, are having to adapt to a very challenging environment. http://www.rocketsciencelab.co.uk/what_we_do/toolkits/ready_for_ change_tool/

 We are not in a wholly new situation now but it is critical  Resilience of the sector  Adapt to how funders are speaking  Part of a game  Shift in terminology and lexicon  New Labour – interventionist and target driven  Coalition – payment by results – more risks attached to funding  Normally time-limited grant funding  Think about exit and sustainability early in a project  Far tighter funding situation – real issues of shared outcome ownership – opportunities for dialogue between funders and deliverers  Ready for change tool – based around 4 key areas of development  This will be a practical session focussing on business development using this Rocket Science tool  Refer to slides and tool  Other Rocket Science tools include the cash flow tool

Questions

Tim Brogden - Would you advise using this tool in a whole organisation strategy day type exercise or top down, carried out by one person?

9 John - It depends on the culture of the organisation – it works most effectively with the whole staff – maybe linked to a development day – you could get a 3rd party to do the day and report back to you

Denise – does this tool lead to a quality mark – it looks very useful

Malcolm John – is it pitched at small groups?

John – small to medium groups and as yet no quality mark attached

John mentioned Rocket Science work with LVSC re: Team London – Mayor’s small grants programme to promote volunteering http://www.london.gov.uk/teamlondon

Workshop 3: Working with Local Authorities- Steven Forbes

Steven Forbes is Chair of Age UK Lambeth and has worked in social care in the statutory and voluntary sector for many years – he has worked in commissioning roles and adult social care roles

The principles are the same for working with other statutory agencies

Why work with LAs? For Age UK Lambeth we have faced a huge cut in funding

The language of LAs is one of effectiveness, efficiency and value for money – there are great pressures on the public purse

Think about what drives VCS commissioning?

Be clear about what you bring to the table  Skills  Expertise  Contacts  Knowledge  Trust of service users  Understanding  Quality  Value for money

What you want to be doing is influencing LA policy and how they spend their money

10 This is all about relationship building and requires investment and time – getting to know people at LA and the agendas of those people – where their interests lie etc – BUT London Councils has a statutory obligation to assess the needs of Londoners and respond – that is what should be driving the scheme

Being adversarial doesn’t work – you don’t understand – creating an us and them situation

 Be flexible and adapt  What are we known for?  How do people perceive us?  What is this organisation/service/project about?  Where do you fit in?

This all influences how they see you

Think through carefully the relationship, its dynamics and what you want from it

Give constructive feedback and provide solutions

Questions 1) There is an equalities dimension to this – this process that Steven has described which to some extent relies on individual relationships and agendas seems less accountable and less accessible – may reflect a desire on the part of LA commissioners only to focus on popular beneficiaries of services – where would this leave refugees, LGBT people, BAMER people etc? 2) The reality is less idealistic than is being described here – the LAs we are trying to work with are demoralised and dysfunctional 3) Sometimes you are forced to be adversarial because you are not being listened to or heard and because LAs have already decided behind the scenes what they are going to do and consultation is a farce. Sometimes as an organisation you want to lay down a marker or set out a position for example VSF pointing out in the early stages of London Councils’ consultation period the requirement to assess equalities impacts of changes to the scheme and the possible unlawfulness of not doing so – this was relied on in court during the JR – so was valuable

11 Funders panel: What are funders looking for?

Sam Mauger, Chair VSF, chaired the session

Gaynor Humphreys, Director, London Funders

London Funders Is a network of all kinds of funders of London’s VCS – public sector (e.g. London boroughs), foundations, Lottery distributors, and corporates. Get to know each other and each others’ ways of funding (grants programmes, commissioned services, loans, etc), share information, learn about new issues together and develop good practice. All with the intention of strengthening the VCS, being smart and effective in their use of their funding, and understanding how London is different.

Hope this short presentation will encourage the groups here to think about their funding strategy in part through getting under the skin of funders and understanding their motivation and constraints. www.londonfunders.org.uk

The broad funding context  Funders’ worlds have been changing enormously – cuts in the resources of local government, changes to regional structures, recession and its aftermath affecting foundations’ endowment and income.  Economic and social recession and the impact of policy and funding change on communities, e.g. London being beset by debt  Organisations not only looking to new sources of funding because of public funding cuts but also because policy change is increasing the demand for their services  Most funders seeing an increase in applications though for some this has built up slowly over the last year or so. Big Lottery Fund now reports twice as many applications as before  There is a lot of interest in new types of investment – social impact bonds, social investment and lending – and some experimentation but there is still more talk than action. Straightforward grants remain the preferred mechanism for many funders.

Current issues influencing funding

 Coalition government’s changed policies and values – localism, deregulation, outsourcing, health services reform, Big Society

12  Changes that were already under way – personalisation, interest in preventative approaches/early intervention, holistic budgeting  Cuts affecting public sector funders: different ways of applying these – fast/slower; front-loaded or not; collaborative approaches or not; fresh thinking about commissioning in some places, e.g. how to weight criteria to local knowledge and experience  A London factor in central government’s rejection of regionalism, and apparent bias against London

What are funders looking for?

 Value for money - effectiveness  Carefully explained intended outcomes and impact  Evidence of impact: what you can count and also the stories you can tell; consequences of what is being delivered  Why your service should be supported – your local/sectoral knowledge and track record  Why you and not them?  What differentiates you?  Good governance/management especially financial management – manage finances through cash flow analysis as well as budgets  How good is your Board and do they use their contacts, skills and knowledge?  Most funders do not want to be the main funder of an organisation  Assessment is getting tougher, not only because there is more competition but because funders do not want to risk investing in an organisation that might not survive even with their support  Funders are looking harder than ever at how robust the applicant is  Most funders will not replace lost public sector funding (remember the practical point that foundations contribute only a small proportion of the sector’s income – no more than 10%)  Some foundations have been reviewing their practice (e.g. asking whether to make fewer, larger grants or more, smaller ones; shorter or longer term grants; supporting only organisations they have already invested or making room for new ideas) – so keep up to date with criteria even of funders you know well  There may be some new opportunities: there is interest among some funders in capitalising the sector, e.g. through

13 helping with acquisition of property as a source of security and income, or supporting efficiencies in operating costs.

Additional tips

 Plan a funding strategy early – keeping ahead  Ensure a funding mix  Get involved in the commissioning cycle as early as you can – be seen as a knowledgeable informant on your bit of the sector  Keep yourself in the public eye  Show funders your resilience by explaining any positive outcomes of adapting to these tough times - be specific about how resourceful you are e.g. how you’ve saved on back office costs, or what collaboration you are involved in or any effort at finding new income streams  Be aware of your carbon footprint and make sure funders know how you are taking steps to reduce it (some funders will ask but it will save you money too)  Learn and use the language of commissioners and of the coalition government

Jenny Field, Deputy Chief Grants Officer, City Bridge Trust (CBT)

CBT works with Londoners – see funding guidelines http://www.citybridgetrust.org.uk/CBT/Grants/ProgrammeGuideline s/

Some tips on what CBT is currently looking for

 Most of this is common sense and is focussed on getting your message across  Many applications that don’t get through the process haven’t understood that CBT won’t be the only funder of a project or organisation  We expect an organisation to have at least one set of accounts under their belt - we don’t fund new groups  Allow time to process the application  Answer all the questions  Avoid jargon and acronyms  Describe clear outcomes  Look at our monitoring requirements and tell us how you will meet them  Have good governance in place  Make your application stand out but doesn’t have to be slick  We can smell a professional fundraiser at 20 paces

14  Use your voce and passion throughout the application

Challenges faced by CBT in the current climate

 Our grants budget will remain the same - £15m p.a. with the same priorities  We won’t replace cut statutory funding  Come to us for existing posts  We are trying to make out money work hardest in the current environment  Interested in new forms of finance  East London investment bond  We fund Charities Evaluation Service, Ethical Property Foundation, Cranfield and Cass for example to support services  Eco audits programme  CBT shares what we’ve learned from our grant making for example through ‘The Knowledge’ publication – learning from London – recent edition on why the arts are invaluable to London well-being

Cllr Ruth Dombey, LB Sutton and London Councils’ Grants committee member

Smarter Services Sutton – transforming services without cutting and we are achieving 25% reduction in costs whilst sharing services with other boroughs

We are active in our sub-regional grouping and working together with other South London boroughs – based around the London Councils Strategic Monitoring Zone

Decision-making, budgets and power have been devolved to local people

I am extremely disappointed to see that there is no London Councils rep here and in Sutton we are appalled and disgusted by what is and has been happening at London Councils.

We have opposed what is happening from the beginning

It was flawed and has been carried out with worrying haste – there was no assessment of the impacts prior to the JR – our Leaders have had a discussion that seems to show there are only 2 options on the table – to get rid of the scheme completely or to have a voluntary opt-in scheme – there is a 3rd option, to have an even more reduced scheme in the future

15 Bromley has gone round with a begging bowl to support London Youth Games

It is short sighted to cut and to increase the uncertainty

Sutton consultation with partners – what shall we do with repatriated money? Is this the right way to go forward and how should the money be divided?

Sutton has  Extended the small grants fund  Set up social enterprise loan fund  Set up a sub-regional grants programme based on the SMZ and including Kingston, Richmond, Sutton and Merton  SMZ is meeting next week to decide on the pot of money  Sutton benefitted least from the LBGS

 You need to identify and approach the key players  You need to understand what is being delivered in each borough  Contact CVSs to get them to champion your work  You need to contact boroughs to tell them what you are doing and provide evidence – I contacted 25 organisations that said they were delivering in Sutton because I hadn’t heard of them – only 5 bothered to write back  Localism is not about pulling up the drawbridge – we need to be working collaboratively across London with VCS

Questions Ellen, WRC – how can we best influence other sub-regional groupings – WRC already works well sub-regionally

Ruth Dombey – you need to identify the clusters or boroughs and establish whether or not they are working effectively

There are questions about how these potential sub-regional schemes are administered

Ask VSF to feed back to London Councils about their non appearance here

Question to CBT from Mike Danso, Volunteer Reading Help – we are a national body with local branches – you have a threshold

16 for qualification – you look at the income of the national body and disqualify our bid and so deprive local areas of quality services

Jenny – CBT – we have to look at the accountable body and give 1 grant per charity number – we will look at up to 13 applications from local branches of a national body

Actions for VSF from evaluation forms and from the conference

 Convey to London Councils conference attendees anger and disappointment at non-cooperation and no contribution to this event  VSF might want to look at putting on training on positive influencing  More work on sub-regional funding and facilitating contacts with sub-regional groupings of boroughs  Produce a list of reliable LA VCS contacts  There was a lot of support for VSF to put on funders forum type events  Keep up the good work – updates/events/bulletins and lobbying  Provide signposts to good consultant fundraisers and fundraising resources – maybe think about a database of recommended consultant fundraisers  Work with London Councils and Boroughs on brokerage and contact facilitation role  More work on the value/impact of pan-London grants scheme  More support for vulnerable agencies  Assess the impact of loss of services/organisations and recognise the loss and what the long-term impact will be  Circulate notes, presentations and resources

The consultant fundraiser that My Voice London used was Kate Delaney 0773 421 1634, [email protected]

Any feedback on this document or the conference or if you require further information please contact:

Tim Brogden Policy & Networks Development Officer - Voluntary Sector Forum and Equalities

London Voluntary Service Council (LVSC) 200a Pentonville Road London N1 9JP DD: 020 7832 5813 E: [email protected] www.lvsc.org.uk