CHNI FARESHARE food sharing network
An evaluation produced for Council for the Homeless NI (CHNI) and SROI REPORT FareShare IOI, by Gauge NI, with support from The Food Standards Agency NI and The Public Health august 2014 Agency NI. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report is a Social Return on Investment evaluation of Council for Homeless NI (CHNI) FareShare, a progressive project with its origins stemming from CHNI FareShare UK. Council for the Homeless NI is the franchisee partner of FareShare in Northern Ireland. The project helps people experiencing food poverty in Northern Ireland by redistributing quality surplus food from the food industry to a growing network of 68 community organisations (Community Food Members) that support homeless and other disadvantaged people. CHNI FareShare has been established for 3 years and within that time has provided 627,619 meals using quality surplus food donated by food producers, supermarkets, food processors and fruit and vegetable growers. The aim is to improve access to good quality healthy food for low-income, vulnerable individuals while also supporting the food industry to reduce the environmental impact of food waste.
The level of child poverty is recorded at 120,000 children living in households with an income below the poverty line1. It is well documented that living in poverty puts people at risk of poor dietary intake and increased health inequalities. The NHS suggests that around one in three people admitted to hospital or care homes in the UK are found to be malnourished or at risk of malnourishment2. CHNI FareShare’s unique mission helps to fight hunger and promote a balanced diet by redistributing surplus food from suppliers to Community Food Members 3 across Northern Ireland. By ensuring good food is not wasted, CHNI FareShare helps provide a variety of foods for inclusion in hot meals for vulnerable people daily.
The Social Return on Investment (SROI) model adopted in this study uses monetary value to represent the social outcomes of the programme. Gauge utilised the SROI principles and methodology to develop the evaluation report of the work of CHNI FareShare, covering a study period of April 2012 - March 2013. Both quantitative and qualitative research methods were used to collate relevant information to carry out the evaluation with stakeholder engagement at the centre. The study’s results were projected over 5 years to reflect the longer term impact and change experienced by stakeholders. This study identified CHNI FareShare’s main inputs, outputs and outcomes, as they relate to the identified stakeholders, and are further outlined in the Input/Output model in Figure 1 below:
. Inputs (What stakeholders invested in CHNI FareShare over the period of the analysis) . Activities (What was delivered by CHNI FareShare) . Outputs (What was achieved through these activities) . Outcomes (The impact of CHNI FareShare on the stakeholders and the change that they experienced; this includes changes that are positive, negative, intended and unintended)
INPUT ACTIVITY OUTPUT OUTCOME IMPACT
Figure 1: Input / Output Model
1 NERI - Quarterly Economic Facts -2013 www.nerinstitute.net/download/pdf/qef_spring_2013_part_5.pdf 2 NHS Your health, your choices – Malnutrition: www.nhs.uk/conditions/Malnutrition/Pages/Introduction.aspx 3 Community Food Member - Charitable organisations which work with vulnerable/disadvantaged groups throughout NI while also holding memberships of CHNI FareShare Community Food Network.
Those material stakeholders involved in this study included service users as well as Community Food Members, Food Industry Partners (suppliers) and Volunteers. Service users stated that the CHNI FareShare Community Food Network offers healthy meal options daily using a wide variety of healthy produce which in turn impacts positively on mental health and physical wellbeing. The outcomes were identified and a financial value was placed on those outcomes in the impact map which can be found in Appendix one.
The SROI ratio for CHNI FareShare was found to be £1:£7.53. So, for every £1 invested between 1 April 2012 and 31 March 2013 approximately £8 of social and economic value was returned.
The £216,343 invested in the period generated £1,628,927 (£879,580.28 in the last year 2012/2013) of social value over 5 years equating to a Social Return on Investment ratio of approximately £1: £8
The table below offers a breakdown of how this social value is accrued by each stakeholder group in the last year 2012/2013. It illustrates that the most significant group of stakeholders are the service users that ultimately access the food distributed from CHNI FareShare. Impact Value of Outcomes for Year Stakeholders 2012/2013 % of Total Impact CHNI FareShare Service Users £493,815.45 56% CHNI FareShare Volunteers £273,245.59 31% Community Food Members £90,361.19 10% Suppliers £17,627.10 2% Environmental Awareness £4,530.96 1% Total £879,580.28 100%
Table 1: Impact value per stakeholder group for Year 2012/2013
.
3
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ...... 5 1.1 Overview of CHNI FareShare ...... 5 1.2 Aims & Achievements of the Project ...... 6 1.3 Context ...... 8 2. Methodology ...... 10 2.1 Social Return on Investment ...... 10 2.2 Stakeholders ...... 11 3. Results ...... 14 3.1 Overall Results ...... 14 3.2 Impact on CFM Service Users ...... 15 3.3 Impact on CHNI FareShare Volunteers ...... 18 3.4 Impact on Community Food Members ...... 20 3.5 Impact on Food Industry Partners ...... 23 3.6 Impact on Environment ...... 24 4. Calculating Impact ...... 25 4.1 Project Inputs ...... 25 4.3 Discount Rates ...... 29 4.4 CHNI FareShare SROI Calculations ...... 31 4.5 Sensitivity Analysis ...... 32 4.6 Limitations ...... 34 5. Conclusions & Recommendations ...... 35 5.1 Conclusions...... 35 5.2 Recommendations ...... 36 6.0 Appendices ...... 38 Appendix One: Impact Map ...... 38 Appendix Two: List of Community Food Members ...... 44 Appendix Three: SROI Principles and Guidelines ...... 47 Appendix Four: List of Tables & Figures...... 49
4
1. Introduction
1.1 Overview of CHNI FareShare
CHNI FareShare tackles food poverty in Northern Ireland by collecting surplus food from industry retailers and producers, and redistributing it to charities that are providing meals to vulnerable and disadvantaged groups including low income families, senior citizens, people with disabilities, victims of domestic violence, at risk children, young people and homeless people.
The United Kingdom’s homeless charity Crisis first established Crisis FareShare in 1994 with its first depot in London. Over the next 20 years CHNI FareShare developed as an independent charity opening 17 depots across the UK, using a social franchise model. In 2010, FareShare won ‘Britain’s Most Admired Charity’ and, in partnership with Sainsbury’s, ran the UK’s biggest food drive – the Million Meal Appeal. FareShare NI was started by the Council for the Homeless NI and supported by Food Standards Agency in Northern Ireland, the Public Health Agency, the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation and WRAP Rethink Waste.
Since 2011, the CHNI FareShare Belfast depot has been operating successfully and currently is diverting approximately 2.6 tonnes of food from waste every week. CHNI FareShare offers food producers a safe, transparent, environmentally friendly and ethical route for the management of surplus food. There are weekly deliveries by CHNI FareShare to 68 charitable projects that provide for the most vulnerable within our society across Northern Ireland including Belfast, Derry, Antrim, Ballymena, Armagh and Cookstown, which are outlined on the map, Figure 2 below:
Figure 2: Map of CHNI FareShare Community Food Member locations
CHNI FareShare follows a defined structure, allowing charities referred to as Community Food Members (CFMs) access to meals delivered through diverting fit for purpose food from landfill. This structure is represented in Figure 3 “Chain of Events”, overleaf. The figure outlines the steps implemented by the CHNI FareShare project team to ensure a worthwhile and effective undertaking for all beneficiaries. 5
Recruit Volunteers Collect food from "Food Develop FS strategic plan Industry Supplier " Deliver Inductions Source funding Sort & manage food to Arrange Training in Food legal, FS & food donor Initial recruitment of food Hygiene and Health & Safety suppliers specific requirements
Develop FS operating Allocate stock to CFMs standards Recruit Community Food Monitor CFMs operating Members (CFMs) Establish legal & secure practice and standards systems for delivery of Sign CFM Agreements Provide ongoing customer quality surplus food support to CFMs
Define geographic delivery Select Staff , Warehouse area Location, Fit Out Office Meet regulatory Arrange Chill Compliant requirements Transport
Figure 3: CHNI FareShare Chain of Events
1.2 Aims & Achievements of the Project
Funded by the Food Standards Agency in Northern Ireland, the Public Health Agency, the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation and the WRAP Rethink Waste Revenue fund, the aims of CHNI FareShare include:
. Improve the dietary choices of vulnerable groups through the provision of a wide range of fit- for-purpose surplus food . Work with Community Food Members to ensure the most vulnerable people have access to food . Partner with the food industry to source a wide range of surplus for redistribution, while also creating a positive environmental impact . Ensure “No Good Food Should be Wasted' amongst the general public . Engage CHNI FareShare volunteers in the storage and distribution of surplus, ‘fit for purpose’ food
Figure 4 overleaf highlights the goals achieved during the three years of CHNI FareShare’s operations between April 2011 – 2014.
6
Year 1 2011 / 2012
- CHNI established CHNI FareShare to help reduce food poverty by distributing surplus, 'fit for purpose' food - Funding sourced from Public Health Agency - Additional funding from Esmée Fairbairn Sodexo, FSA, and Tesco - Belfast Depot opens in 2011 following fit out and acquisition of refrigerated transport - Recruited 2 full time operational staff - Initial assessment/enrolment of 34 CFMs (Community Food Members) growing by 35% during 2011 - 76% growth in service users engaged - Enlisted and trained 26 volunteers with 65% completing 100 volunteer hours per week - Survey completed with CFMs responding favourability to progress in Year 1
Year 2 2012 / 2013
- CFM enrollment expanded by 27% during 2012 / 2013 - Increase of 104% in the number of average meals supplied to CFM for service users - Food diverted from landfill totalled 85 tonnes: an increase of 48% on 2011 /2012 - 61 CFMs inspected and compliant with CHNI FareShare operating procedures
- 50 volunteers registered with 50% volunteering weekly - Winner of the Green Initiative Award in January 2013 - Successful funding application to Dept. of Environment under "Rethink Waste" programme
Year 3 2013 /2014
- CFM enrollment increased by a further 12.7 % during 2013/2014 with 62 receiving weekly deliveries - Average number of meals supplied increased by 64% to 328,095 - Estimated food diverted from landfill totalled 138 tonnes: an increase of approx 59% on 2012 /2013 - Arranged 5 corporate volunteer days with approx. 40 volunteers from Asda, Tesco, Sodexo, Elanco and Gems - Total of 15 volunteers trained across forklift drving and Health and Safety policies - Successful funding applications to Ardbarron Charitable Trust and Garfield Weston Foundation - Continued funding support from PHA, DOE and FSA
- Approximately average 579.6 tonnes of CO2 emissions prevented
Figure 4: Project Achievements 2011-2013
7
1.3 Context
UK Government figures show that around 13 million people are in poverty in the UK4. The report "Monitoring Poverty and Social Exclusion in Northern Ireland 2014”5 outlines that just over one in five of the population of Northern Ireland (21%) was experiencing poverty in 2011. A household is counted as having a low income ('poverty') if its income is less than 60% of the median UK household income for the year in question. Additional social factors which contribute to malnutrition include: living alone, being socially isolated, limited knowledge about nutrition or cooking, reduced mobility and alcohol or drug dependency.6 Living in poverty means that they are more likely to be also in food poverty. According to the Food Ethics Council, at least 4 million of those living in poverty suffer from food poverty. The Food Ethics Council7 states that food poverty means that an individual or household isn’t able to obtain healthy, nutritious food – they have to eat what they can afford, not what they choose. In 2009, Healthy Food for All (HFfA), an all-island initiative reported low income households are twice as likely as the whole population to experience food poverty, and almost 50% of lone parent households and 36% of unemployed people experience some sort of food deprivation. After 2009, poverty rates amongst working-age non-parents (WANPs) increased dramatically, indicating a substantial fall in the real household incomes of WANPs in the low-income population. This data suggests that WANPs in Northern Ireland were hit harder by the effects of the recession than their counterparts in the rest of the UK.8 This is illustrated by the following:
. Between 2009 and 2011, 34% of working-age adults in Northern Ireland were not in paid work . In 2011, 38% of working-age women were workless compared with 28% of working-age men. . Across all households where at least one adult was in paid work, the number of people in poverty rose from 135,000 to 165,000 . In Northern Ireland, 7% of working-age people are out of work due to long-term sickness or disability, compared with 4% in Great Britain . After inflation, incomes for the poorest fifth of families fell by 16% (£39 a week lower) - compared to 5% in the rest of the UK on average – between 2006/07 and 2011/12. . Average households saw their incomes fall by 9% over the same period A number of reports covering the period 2006 to 2012 supported and informed decisions about how the Food Standards Agency (FSA) could strengthen partnerships with key stakeholders in supporting, encouraging and developing effective policy responses to tackling food poverty. This included how to best engage and work with people who are living daily in food poverty, including the homeless. These reports included:
. Research into Food Poverty and Homelessness in Northern Ireland 9 . Food poverty in rural Northern Ireland 10
4 Walking the breadline the scandal of food poverty in 21st century Britain, May 2013: www.church-poverty.org.uk/foodfuelfinance 5 Monitoring Poverty and Social Exclusion in Northern Ireland 2014 - Joseph Rowntree Foundation: www.jrf.org.uk/sites/files/jrf/northern- ireland-poverty-summary.pdf 6 NHS Direct Wales Encyclopaedia - www.nhsdirect.wales.nhs.uk/encyclopaedia/m/article/malnutrition 7 The Food Ethics Council: www.foodethicscouncil.org/topic/Food%20poverty 8 Child and Working-Age Poverty in Northern Ireland from 2010 to 2020, The Institute for Fiscal Studies: www.ifs.org.uk 9 Food Standards Agency - Research Into Food Poverty And Homelessness In Northern Ireland 2006: http://tna.europarchive.org/20120102091535/http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/homelessnifood.pdf 10 Food poverty in rural Northern Ireland - Fact-book for the pre-test community survey for the ‘Decent Food for All (DFfA)’ Programme: http://www.publichealth.ie/healthinequalities/foodpoverty 8
. Tackling Food Poverty - Lessons from the Decent Food for All (DFfA) Intervention”11 . Measuring Food Poverty In Ireland - The Indicator And Its Implications12 . A Fitter Future for All: Framework for Preventing and Addressing Overeating and Obesity in Northern Ireland 2012-2022 In 2013, the Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP) reported that 3.9 million tonnes of food is wasted every year in the supply chain in the UK.13 In Northern Ireland WRAP aims to achieve 76,000 tonnes less carbon dioxide equivalent emitted a year, and 51,000 tonnes less waste going to landfill a year, up to 201514. CHNI FareShare is working today with 40 food industry organisations to support the reduction in waste going to landfill therefore helping support these targets, reduce CO2 emissions, support volunteering opportunities, increase public awareness and provide social and economic benefits for disadvantaged groups. The Department of Environment in Northern Ireland fund CHNI FareShare under the “Rethink Waste Revenue Fund”15 to encourage the prevention of waste, the reuse of materials and higher rates of recycling, thereby achieving diversion from landfill. CHNI FareShare works with the local food industry, sourcing fit-for-purpose surplus food that would otherwise become part of the waste stream and redirect it to organisations which are working to alleviate food poverty. Over the last number of years, certain community groups and third sector organisations have been focused on ensuring access to healthy foods due to social, economic, and health issues facing disadvantage groups. As concerns are growing over constraints in healthcare such as growing obesity and diabetes challenges, government and public agencies are working with not-for-profit organisations such as CHNI FareShare to address food-related issues. In the case of CHNI FareShare, they are working to reduce food poverty by providing healthy nutritious food through redirecting food waste from landfill. This endeavour is supporting government agencies with a number of goals including reducing food poverty, improving health and wellbeing, and reducing environmental impact. “No Good Food Should Be Wasted” is the central mission statement and ethos of CHNI FareShare. For funders it is a common sense, logical and winning strategy to engage with CHNI FareShare to ensure:
. Fit for purpose food is redistributed to the most vulnerable individuals and groups helping to provide nourishment, sustenance and ongoing food aid. . Charitable groups can spend budget savings on other important resources while simultaneously preventing quality food from becoming food waste. . Reductions in carbon emissions and the impacts of food wastage from an environmental perspective including on climate, water, land and biodiversity.
11 “Safefood - Tackling Food Poverty - Lessons from the Decent Food for All (DFfA) Intervention” November 2008: www.safefood.eu/Publications/Research-reports 12 Measuring Food Poverty In Ireland - The Indicator And Its Implications - Safefood Ireland www.safefood.eu/SafeFood/media/SafeFoodLibrary/Documents/Publications/Research%20Reports/Final- G6056_Safefood_Report_FoodPovertyIreland_V21.pdf
13 Estimates of waste in the food and drink supply chain, WRAP, September 2013 14 WRAP http://www.wrapni.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/WRAP_NI_Delivery_Plan.pdf 15Department of the Environment , Waste Prevention Programme 18 September 2013 - http://www.doeni.gov.uk/draft_waste_prevention_programme_for_northern_ireland.pdf
9
2. Methodology
Gauge utilised the Social Return on Investment (SROI) principles and methodology to develop the evaluation report of CHNI FareShare Northern Ireland. This study is retrospective in approach, covering a study period of 1st April 2012 to 31st March 2013 with results extrapolated over a five year period; 2011-2016.
2.1 Social Return on Investment
SROI is an approach to understanding and managing the value based on a set of principles that are applied within a framework. Further details about the SROI principles, stages and calculating impact are included in Appendix 3. SROI seeks to include the values of people that are often excluded from markets in the same terms as are used in markets; i.e. money, in order to give people a voice in resource allocation decisions. SROI is a framework designed to structure thinking and understanding. It’s a story, not a number. It is about understanding stakeholders’ journeys to measure the impact and value for money of the CHNI FareShare services. This study identified CHNI FareShare’s main inputs, outputs and outcomes, as they relate to the identified stakeholder, and are further described below and outlined in the Input/Output model in Figure 5 below:
. Inputs (What stakeholders invested in CHNI FareShare over the period of the analysis) . Activities (What was delivered by CHNI FareShare) . Outputs (What was achieved through these activities) . Outcomes (The impact of CHNI FareShare on the stakeholder and the change that they experienced; this includes changes that are positive, negative, intended and unintended)
INPUT ACTIVITY OUTPUT OUTCOME IMPACT
Figure 5: Input / Output Model
Both quantitative and qualitative research methods were used to collate all relevant information. . Quantitative Data. Quantitative data was provided by the CHNI FareShare team collated from quarterly statistics relating to food supplied to CFMs. Questionnaires were also completed and compiled from the different stakeholder groups.
. Qualitative Data. Consultations with stakeholders provided qualitative information, helping to build a complete and full picture of what actually changed for stakeholders as a result of the CHNI FareShare Project. A series of five focus groups at CFM locations and two telephone interviews with key stakeholders were completed in addition to surveys with the four main stakeholder groups – CFMs, Volunteers, Service Users and Food Industry Providers.
10
Social Return on Investment is based on a Theory of Change. The Theory of Change can be depicted as a map or journey, linking the activities of the project, to the short-term, medium-term and long- term outcomes experienced by service users, and other stakeholders. Figure 6 below provides an overview of the journey of change for a range of CHNI FareShare project stakeholders. The journey incorporates outcomes around mental health, physical health, work experience, food usage, and environmental change across stakeholder groups including servicer users, community food members, volunteers, food suppliers and funders all of whom engage with CHNI CHNI FareShare. This is demonstrated through the range of activities, actions and the changes as a result of stakeholder engagement. From the overall theory, many direct financial outcomes are generated and the wide ranging social changes experienced by beneficiaries linked to the project are highlighted.
- Life events resulting in - Choice of nutritious food - Increased access to food inadequate access to - Access to quality food throughout the day food choices required for After Before - Food preparation training - Improved variety and healthy living choice of food - Certified training (e.g - Difficulties accessing a - Improved food quality variety of good quality Forklift driving & Food Hygiene) matching everyday affordable food due to low consumer purchasing or no income - Personal development - Increased social - Food was not a route to - Learning Customer interaction, social skills building & maintaining service skills and confidence relationships, social - Cost reductions interaction & celebration - Increased volunteer CHNI FareShare Programme FareShare CHNI - Volunteering opportunites and - Limited or no skills and no community engagement interest in food - Environmental impact preparation - Work experience / skills - Reduced food waste and "Green House Gas" - Limited access to positive - Confidence building emissions work experience and skill building opportunities - Increasing collaboration - Growth in skills, abilities and work opportunities - Food waste entering - Sharing of knowledge landfill with and resources - Improved mental health & environmental impacts physical wellbeing - Vulnerable mental and physical wellbeing -
Figure 6: Theory of Change
2.2 Stakeholders
Once material stakeholders were identified by CHNI FareShare, engagement with each stakeholder group was then completed to gain a better understanding of the outcomes. It is important when considering the sample group accessed and the number of respondents that throughout the evaluation process, the core principles of SROI have been strictly applied and that the core questions that affect the quality and relevance of the data gathered were answered: . Who changes as a result of CHNI FareShare services? . How did they change? . How do we know it has changed? . Which changes are most valued? . Is the change all down to CHNI FareShare?
11
Table 2 identifies those groups included in the study and provides a rationale for their inclusion:
Stakeholder Group Reason for Inclusion Engagement Medium Numbers Involved
CHNI FareShare Change in attitudes and insights regarding Questionnaires & focus 24 completed Volunteers the impact of CHNI FareShare on food groups questionnaires (48% poverty through training, networking, and response rate). employment opportunities. 7 volunteers attended a focus group at the CHNI FareShare deport CHNI FareShare Team Staff team are learning about the delivery of Questionnaires & focus Ongoing service to a hard to reach group and can groups. communication share this learning to effect further change. including three meetings and regular telephone/electronic interviews. Community Food Provide the locations and facilities to cook Questionnaires, 14 represented at four Members healthy food options to disadvantaged interviews & focus focus groups and groups, while also reducing food budget groups. additional 13 survey required to offer healthy food responses from the 69 sent to organisations 22 respondents in total due to some cross over at focus groups also providing questionnaires (32%) CFM Service Users Core beneficiary group in terms of size and Focus groups, one-to- 13 completed project impact. one meetings and questionnaires (sent questionnaires. to 69 organisations) coupled with 16 attending three focus groups (29 in total) Food Industry Supplier of food for distribution to Questionnaires and Four completed Suppliers Community Food Members and their service telephone interviews. questionnaires (30% of users, reduced carbon emission, community weekly suppliers food drives and volunteer days. returned) with two additional telephone interviews with Tesco and Sodexo – both identified as unique participants Table 2: Stakeholder Engagement - Rationale for inclusion / exclusion of stakeholders
According to the SROI Network16, a common goal of survey research is to collect data representative of a population. Determining adequate sample size in research is ultimately a matter of judgment and experience in evaluating the quality of the information collected against the uses to which it will be put, the particular research method and purposeful sampling strategy employed, and the research product intended.17 Whilst there is no hard and fast rule here to the number of clients involved, it that should be a representative sample of the wider group.
16 SROI Network, “Supplementary Guidance on Stakeholder Engagement” Accessed October 1, 2014 at www.thesroinetwork.org/.../368-supplementary-guidance-on-stakeholder 17 Sandelowski, M. (2007) Research in Nursing & Health. Volume 18, Issue 2, pages 179–183, April 1995
12
The sample should to be representative (of the outcomes experienced by the rest of the group) and the more variance there is in the group the higher the number in the sample should be. The 29 service users included in this study were a representative sample of the wider population that engage with FareShare through the CFMs in terms of geography, socio-economic background and range of complex needs. For this report the findings from the service users, which were a random representative sample were reiterated and confirmed not only with FareShare but also with the 22 CFMs. The researcher used information gathered from the survey and focus groups to generalize findings from a drawn sample back to a population, within the limits of random error.
Saturation Sampling – the researcher sampled in order to try and ensure that the sample ‘probably’ provides information from which we can generalise (probability sampling). Absolute, rather than relative, sample size is what increases the probability that our generalisation is valid. Our approach was to start with a small sample and then ask the questions. As we heard different things we increased our sample until we reached the point that we were no longer hearing anything differently- we had become saturated. This enabled us to develop our understanding of change.18
18 SROI Network, “Supplementary Guidance on Stakeholder Engagement” Accessed October 1, 2014 at www.thesroinetwork.org/.../368-supplementary-guidance-on-stakeholder 13
3. Results
3.1 Overall Results
CHNI FareShare has exceeded its targets over the first three years of service. Table 3 below highlights the original 3 year target and what CHNI FareShare has actually achieved within the period illustrating the extent to which targets have been surpassed.
Targets (over 3 years) Actual achieved An average of 57 Community Food Member 68 Community Food Member organisations Organisations from across Northern Ireland, receiving registered with 62 receiving food from the CHNI food on a quarterly basis (measured over the life of FareShare depot on a weekly basis. project). Food redistributed to provide 440,918 meals Food redistributed to provide 629,619 meals according to FSA guidelines. according to Food Standards Agency (FSA) guidelines. 66 Community Food Member organisations compliant All Community Food Members enrolled in the project with CFMs operating procedures and have completed have being inspected during the membership any required training. enrolment process and thereafter annually. To maintain and train a pool of 25 volunteers for the Currently 50 volunteers registered. This figure Community Food Network. includes a pool of 25 volunteers who volunteer regularly each week. Conduct customer satisfaction survey and monitor As part of the SROI evaluation, CFMs gave feedback the impact of the CHNI FareShare Community Food on the CHNI FareShare programme. CFM’s reported Network for the Community Food Members. an overall 89% rating in service with customer service scoring 95.7% and ease of use scoring 93% (Compiled March 2014). An average of 3,467 people, per year, benefitting As of March 2014, Improved dietary choices across all from improved dietary choices through the CHNI food groups for all an average of 3,719 service users FareShare Community Food Network. engage through the CHNI FareShare Community Food Network. Table 3: Project Targets 2011-2013
CHNI FareShare continues to meet and exceed agreed targets through effective programme management, use of a bespoke computerised system and the important input from volunteers. On a project basis, CHNI FareShare had a successful 2012/2013 year, and experienced quarter on quarter growth in terms of the amount of food collected and distributed as per Figure 7, culminating in 86707.84kgs (or 86.7 tons) of food waste being diverted and a resultant reduction of 364 ton of CO2:
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2012/13
• 16779.78 • 17597.81 • 24401.81 • 26929.10 • 86707.84 KGs KGs KGs KGs KGs • 86.7 ton • 364 ton of CO2
Figure 7: Quarterly Food Collection & Distribution data 2012-2013
14
3.2 Impact on CFM Service Users
CHNI FareShare’s main beneficiaries are the service users supported through a range of Community Food Members (CFMs) outlined in Appendix 2 and include people experiencing homelessness, people coping with alcohol and substance misuse, children from disadvantaged communities, people with disabilities, older people and people on low or no income, including ethnic groups.
Service users supported by CHNI FareShare Community Food Members required various forms of intervention due to a range of complex needs. By definition, the most socially excluded groups are the hardest to reach. These groups of people tend to have an array of complex needs, including substance abuse and mental health problems alongside periods of homelessness and regular brushes with prison and the probation system.19 Change generally commences with a service user’s physical and mental wellbeing resulting from a healthy nutritious diet and food choices.
Focus groups and questionnaires were completed by service users facilitated by the Community Food Members. Service users were invited to attend Focus Group sessions but mainly provided feedback to staff attending from CFMs. This was due to the challenges facing access to service users to attend meetings, literacy and numeracy concerns and age profile including 100 young children aged 0-4 who were best represented by team leaders at focus groups. The greatest impact reported by the service users as a result of the work of CHNI FareShare was in the following categories in Figure 8 below:
Access to healthy and nutritious foods
Affordability Mental Health
Physical Health
Figure 8: Service Users Outcomes
Outcomes included: • 56% of service users reported increased levels of energy, confidence and optimism • 53% of service users reported feeling physically healthier • 97 children availing of hot meals daily which include dairy, fruit and vegetables • 69% of service users can now access a meal every second day • 54% of service users have not missed a meal in the last two weeks due to lack of money • 23% reported increased use of communication skills causing increased sense of belonging and social interaction. • 74% reported having better mental health
19 Hardest to Reach – The politics of multiple needs and exclusions - http://gulbenkian.org.uk/files/13-12-10-FP2%20Hardest-to-Reach.pdf 15
• 88% have improved their diet to better reflect “The eatwell plate”20
The outcomes above are a summary of the findings from the service user engagement through both questionnaires and focus groups as well as confirmed by information obtained from FareShare and the Community Food Members. These translate to 6 outcomes that have values placed against them in the impact map for the purposes of SROI. Service users rank highest in terms of impact at a value of £493,815.45 or 56% of the total overall impact of CHNI FareShare for the year 2012/2013. A further breakdown of project data recorded on service users for the year 2012/2013 is illustrated in Table 4 below (full impact map included in Appendix 1):
Outcome Indicator and Proposed Value Up skilled through an increase in Knowledge about healthy eating learned in preparing food accrued as dexterity gained in food prep. £10,500.00 or 1%. Mental health benefits Through accessing a variety and choice of nutritious quality foods as part of balanced diet accrued as £195,465.60 or 22.5% of the total impact Physical health benefits Due to accessing food provided through CHNI FareShare accrued as £91,228.80 or 10.5% Not missing a meal due to lack of Accrued as £63,421.05 or 7% of the calculated total impact money Additional use of communication An increased sense of belonging and social interaction has an accrued skills benefit of £121,560.00 or 14% of the total impact. Early childhood intervention Resulting from a wider variety and range of foods supplied through benefits CHNI FareShare accrued as £11,640.00 or 1%. Table 4: Service User benefits
The Eatwell Plate was addressed during the engagement with stakeholders. The following question was asked: “As a result of your engagement with the FareShare Community Food Network please indicate on the scale you’re improved consumption of “The Eatwell Plate” where 1 is no improvement and 5 is daily improvement?” The findings illustrate that across the group of 29 service users engaged, there were significant improvements to diet based on ‘The Eatwell Plate’. The following answers were given:
Average Improved consumption of the ‘Eatwell Plate’ improvement Fruit and vegetables 91% Bread, cereals and potatoes 96% Meat, fish and alternatives 84% Foods with fat and/or sugar 81% Milk and milk products 90% Average 88% Table 5: Improved consumption of 'Eatwell Plate'
20 The eatwell plate highlights the different types of food that make up our diet, and shows the proportions we should eat them in to have a well-balanced and healthy diet http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Goodfood/Pages/eatwell-plate.aspx 16
The question of food poverty was also addressed during interviews and focus group meetings. Feedback was offered from individuals attending outlining their experiences. This included the effects of missing a meal as a result of having insufficient money, homelessness, substance abuse, family challenges or a combination of all these factors. The data below, in Figure 9 illustrates that 61.5% of service users surveyed experienced at least one of the three indicators of Food Poverty. CHNI FareShare can therefore reasonably assume that it is impacting on food
poverty by offering this group access to Figure 9: Food Poverty Indicators a hot meal.
Below, Figure 10 illustrates the journey of two of CHNI FareShare’s service users. This is only a sample of the difference the project makes as each service users’ story is unique whilst Figure 11 highlights a range of comments from other service users.
Service User Stories – st 1 Story - Matthew is homeless and lives on basic benefits. Living in temporary accommodation he is uncertain of the future and of his day to day safety and wellbeing. He continues to experience significant food poverty, unable to afford to eat well. Accessing support through Friendship House and FareShare he has access to fresh, hot meals that make a significant difference in his life;
“In my daily life I feel that FareShare in beneficial as I am not going hungry every day, the breakfast I receive from the food from FareShare and Friendship House means that I have somewhere to go, somewhere to talk to people and somewhere to have a hot meal at least once a week.” “It benefits me as it can be the only hot meal that I get that day deepening on how far my benefits stretch. FareShare benefits me and it also helps me feel more positive when I know I have a hot meal coming.”
That being said, Matthew continues to experience hardship and complex needs that FareShare partners in the form of Community Food Partnerships can support with; “Food from FareShare helps me with some areas of life but there are things that can’t be fixed with food.
17
nd 2 Story - My name is Vicki and I have accessed food services on average twice weekly over a period of 2 years. I would pick up a sandwich as the food is so fresh and cheap; more filling than other outlets locally. The service is excellent and I am conscious of the variety of health options.
Access to food through the CHNI FareShare Community Network has a positive effect on weekly budgets for food. If I eat at the centre I would get a fuller meal for less money and I wouldn’t need to eat as much at home.
If I am at the centre I can turn down my heating which saves money. The centre also provides me with a great deal of social activity which adds much enjoyment to my life. Through using the centre, I have also grown to appreciate the circumstances of women in the area and believe the work the centre provides is priceless for this community.
Figure 10: Service User’s Stories
Additional comments made by service users speak to the positive benefits accrued as a result of accessing a hot meal, they include:
“We are offered a large variety of home cooked healthy meals – I even eat breakfast now “ “Great – it is something less for me to think about, and company” “Could not cook for myself or afford good food when living on my own” “It’s a great help knowing I’ve more money in my pocket and healthy food for me and my son to eat” “As a single parent I think CHNI FareShare is a great help to people living on a budget” “Everything is healthy food, good nourishment for us old folks” “It gives you enjoyment and look forward to at least one hot and fresh meal daily”
Figure 11: Service Users’ Comments about the CHNI FareShare programme
3.3 Impact on CHNI FareShare Volunteers
Volunteers are essential to the operation of the CHNI FareShare Community Food Network. Volunteers serve in a number of capacities and contribute time, energy and talents which help fulfil the project’s mission by helping vulnerable groups in food poverty by distributing surplus, 'fit for purpose' food.
CHNI FareShare volunteers generate enthusiasm and interest amongst service users and suppliers encountered during the course of their working day. On the whole, volunteers feel extremely positive about the project and get involved because they want to help make a difference and reach some of the most vulnerable. They help to create and maintain a positive image of the project within the community in which it operates. Volunteers support the work of paid staff by focusing on food pickup, food storage and on time delivery of surplus food to Community Food Members.
18
Volunteers undertake ongoing training including food hygiene and health and safety training to ensure all processes and procedures are maintained.
The outcomes achieve as a result include: • 50 volunteers gained valuable skills learned through work experience and training in areas such as food hygiene, forklift driving and health and safety • Five volunteers have progressed to paid employment as a result of volunteering with CHNI FareShare in Belfast • 87% of volunteers gained skills for use in future employment • 54% were highly interested in exploring new roles • 91% of volunteers reported new friendships • 54% gaining knowledge on healthy balanced diets
The volunteer workforce is positively impacted through their commitment to the project and this can be demonstrated through an overall impact of £273,245.59 or 31% of the complete benefit accrued. This is outlined in Figure 12 below that illustrates the proposed social value for each outcome and Figure 13 highlights some comments from volunteers:
CHNI FareShare Value of Benefits on Volunteers
£96,968 £82,686
£33,617.49 £23,626 £29,868 £6,480
Work Skills Motivation Relationships Knowledge Use of Skills Employment of Eatwell and Abilities Outcomes Plate
Figure 12: Values of Volunteer Benefits
“I feel more involved in the community“ “Socially it has developed my skills for future jobs” “It has made me aware of how many people are in need” “It has made me more confident around other people” “Increased awareness of the vast amounts of food waste” “It is an excellent way of distributing excess food to those who need it” “I feel more engaged with the local community and those less fortunate than myself” “It’s a good feeling knowing I am giving back and helping those in need”
Figure 13: Volunteer Comments about the CHNI FareShare programme 19
3.4 Impact on Community Food Members
CHNI FareShare redistributes food to 68 Community Food Members working across Northern Ireland who delivered 627,619 healthy meals over 3 years. During this evaluation 16 Community Food Members (32% of all members) participated by attending focus group meetings and speaking about the service users they represented. In total, the 16 organisations supporting 578 vulnerable service users acknowledge the positive effects of CHNI FareShare in supplying food for thousands of meals weekly.
Homeless people, or those at risk of homelessness, are substantially represented among the groups of vulnerable people supported by CHNI FareShare’s Community Food Network Members. However CHNI FareShare’s work supports a diverse range of organisations with a wide range of service users including children, young adults, disadvantage women, older people, families and service users with disabilities (including learning disabilities and mental health concerns). Service users are directed to Community Food Members from a range of avenues, as listed in Table 6 below:
Service User Referral Routes Self-Referral Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety Family Referral Police Service of Northern Ireland
Hospitals The Housing Executive
Table 6: Referral Sources
Focus groups offered the opportunity to gain further data from CFM team members including feedback on service users and how they benefit from CHNI FareShare services. 32% of CFMs attended focus groups or supplied a completed questionnaire. Questionnaires were issued to all 68 members and follow up calls completed. Guidance was offered to all to ensure they understood the questionnaire and the reasons for the evaluation.
The questionnaires for service users were issued via CFMs as no database was available and CHNI FareShare did not have access to personal details. CHNI FareShare do not provide services directly to service users therefore the Community Food Member Organisations were utilised to engage with this stakeholder group. It should be recognised how important the CFMs were in engaging service users and providing valuable feedback on user outcomes and benefits.
Table 7 below offers a breakdown of the organisations attending focus groups; the numbers of service users represented by those attending focus group meetings was recorded at 578 or an average of 36 servicer users per organisation.
20
Derry/Londonderry Belfast The Methodist Mission Footprints
Damian House Princes Trust
Praxis (FYPP) Salvation Army
Foyle Valley House Village Surestart DePaul Ireland Welcome Centre Apex Housing (Head Office) Stella Maris Apex Housing (House of Wells Hostel) The Link Centre Northlands Centre Extern
Table 7: Organisations attending Focus Group Meetings
The respondent CFMs were a good representation of the group as they included diversity in regards to their:
. geographic location including Derry/Londonderry and Belfast . size, nature of work from large well established to smaller and younger organisations . type of clients engaged with from homelessness, women, unemployment, young people, substance abuse . services offered . level of engagement with CHNI FareShare (with some taking small quantities of food and others taking larger quantities on a more regular basis)
CHNI FareShare works in partnership with Community Food Members (CFMs) to ensure the food supplied contributes to nutritious meals for those most vulnerable in the community. The food encourages disadvantaged people to visit an environment where they can receive appropriate support, and enables recipient organisations to reinvest funds into improving services such as improved housing services, kitchen equipment, additional advice and guidance services and food preparation training, which helps people to rebuild their lives. The impact of CHNI FareShare on CFMs is estimated at £90,361.19 or 10% of the overall project impacted.
Outcomes included: • The estimated total number of meals provided was 203,333 over the year 2012/2013 (627, 619 in total since 2011) • 85% of organisations reported a positive impact on their budget through efficiency savings
Comments from Community Food Members are highlighted in Figure 14 below:
21
“We are able to offer a more varied balanced diet and some luxury items that are not usually available to our clients“ “It is an excellent way of distributing excess food to those who need it” “Saved £1000 in 14 months allowing replacement of equipment” “Major saving in staples such as tea, coffee, butter and sugar” “Allowed us to provide extra meals outside of food budget” “Can offer a wide range of snacks throughout the day & night” “Reduce the number of visits from the fresh fruit & veg. provider from 3 to 1 per week” “The quality of the produce is excellent and the CHNI FareShare staff is excellent” “Service users skills and knowledge of preparing a variety of foods has increased. Service users are being encouraged to make simple meals, with the goal of increasing independence and develop qualifications in OCN”
Figure 14: Community Food Member Comments
Each CFM organisation contributes an average of £10.40 21per week to the cost of food delivered. This contribution has been taken into consideration when calculating the overall project impact.
During the evaluation, unintended outcomes were also identified. These included service users taking part in social and fundraising events centred on food, themed food evenings, DVD and games nights. These events and themed nights helped service users experience social life in a cordial, friendly environment free of life’s distractions, including alcohol and other addictive substances.
A number of Community Food Members reported the ability to provide meals that match the ethnic and cultural diversity of service users as a result of having food supplied through CHNI FareShare. One Community Food Member reported the ability to provide on average 12 service users per month that represented an ethnic minority group with an appropriate meal. This variation in service encourages individuals from diverse ethnic origins to attend services and build a rapport with staff and other service users therefore reducing the effects of isolation.
An unintended negative concern relates to the dependency and expectation of service users to continually access quality foods provided through CHNI FareShare. CFMs indicated that if CHNI FareShare was to cease deliveries, service users would have reduced choice in weekly meals and limited or no options for nutritious snacks outside normal meal times.
This would result in stress and anxiety for service users potentially influencing negative behaviours. CFM staff members keep service users informed about the source of food and how CHNI FareShare operates. This keeps the emphasis on the service and reduces a “take for granted attitude”.
21 £10.40 is the average contributions made by 55 CFM’s during 52 weeks in 2012/13 22
3.5 Impact on Food Industry Partners
40 food suppliers worked with CHNI FareShare during the year 2012/2013. Those food suppliers represent wholesalers, retailers, catering suppliers and manufacturers. Good quality food is diverted to CHNI FareShare from the suppliers for any number of reasons including printing mistakes, end of promotions or end of lines, oversupply, damaged packaging or short life foods. By diverting food, industry partners not only help reduce food poverty but also minimise food waste and save money on waste disposal costs. The estimated direct impact is valued at £17,627 (2%) per year arising from the value of the outcomes below.
The outcomes for Food Industry Partners include:
• Partners reduced C02 emission by 360 tonnes through diverting food • 86 tonnes of food waste diverted from landfill • The surplus food provided an estimated 203,333 meals for an average of 4,407 service users • 100% of food suppliers surveyed reported a positive impact on staff morale • 5 food drives completed with 640 volunteer’s hours
The Food Industry Suppliers also provide volunteer hours. Food Industry Suppliers benefited from reduced food waste, reduced greenhouse gas emissions resulting from this and from allowing staff to volunteer. Table 8 below outlines what the Food Industry Suppliers achieved in Year 2012/2013:
Stakeholder Group Performance 86 tonnes of food waste diverted from Landfill during 2012/2013
360 tonnes of Green House Gas Emissions during 2012/2013 Food Industry Suppliers
640 average volunteer hours provided by Food Industry Suppliers during 2012/2013
Table 8: Food Industry Suppliers data
Comments from Food Industry Suppliers are highlighted in Figure 15 below:
“We do not want to waste anything and especially good food which is edible” - James McBennett, Avondale Food
“Our involvement has made our staff and we hope, consumers, more aware of the need to help alleviate food poverty. Our engagement with the media has increased as a result of our work with community food networks” - Jeni Meade, Meade Potato Company
“Staff morale has increased due to involvement and understanding of the FareShare project” - Tesco
“The quality of the produce is excellent and the CHNI FareShare staff are excellent”
“We are able to help the fight against food poverty and it aids in our role as industry advocates for Waste Prevention”
23 Figure 15: Food Industry Partner Comments
3.6 Impact on Environment
Reducing the amount of food wasted has significant economic, social and environmental benefits. CHNI FareShare works with 40 Food Industry Partners to reduce the negative impacts related to the disposal of food waste by diverting a total of: . 86 tonnes of food waste . 360 tonnes of carbon emissions
This includes reduced methane levels emitted through landfill. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas with 21 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide and a 12 year life. The European Commission cites that the EU food and drink value chain is responsible for 17% of direct greenhouse gas emissions22.
By engaging with Food Industry Partners, CHNI FareShare is building relationships over the longer term to actively reduce the effects of food waste through one of the most preferred options as outlined in Figure 16 the “Food Recovery Hierarchy” 23i.e. Feed Hungry People. For the year 2012/2013 the environmental impact was calculated at £4,518.37 based on the cost of carbon emissions with additional benefits including reduced food mileage and administration costs in the reverse supply chain (no need to return oversupplied food stocks). Further work is required by CHNI FareShare in partnership with food industry suppliers to determine and record the additional material benefits gained by diverting surplus from landfill to people that need it. Figure 16: Food Recovery Hierarchy
22 EU Fusion - www.eu-fusions.org/about-food-waste 23 EPA – Putting Surplus Food to Good Use - www.epa.gov/waste/conserve/pubs/food-guide.pdf 24
4. Calculating Impact
4.1 Project Inputs
Total funding for CHNI FareShare to date (2011-14) has been £489,920.62 sourced from the organisations outlined below in Table 9. The input value of £216,342.76 in the last year 2012/2013 is utilised as the basis for the SROI calculation.
2011 2012 Funders 2012 / 2013 Funders 2013 / 2014 Funders Wrap balance Wrap DOE Safe Food FSA FSA Devenish Devenish PHA Sodexo Sodexo (UR) Wrap FSA PHA Esmée Fairbairn Esmée Fairbairn Esmée Fairbairn Hendersons Tesco Tesco Garfield Weston PHA Belfast City Award (UR) Ardbarron Hendersons Thompson Trust Community Food Members Lloyds TSB DOE Rethink Waste Community Food Members DOE Belfast Airport (UR) Community Food Members Wrap Table 9: Sources of Funding
4.2 The Impact Map
Constructing an Impact Map is fundamental to the SROI analysis. It details how the activities being analysed use resources (inputs) to deliver activities (measured as outputs) which result in outcomes for stakeholders.
The inputs refer to the contributions made by the stakeholders to make the CHNI FareShare activities possible and the cost of delivering the project. In this case the total financial input is made by contributions from a range funders and funds are used in the operation of CHNI FareShare and the fees contributed from CFMs. The input and output figures cover a period of 12 months from April 2012 to March 2013 (the input figure for the SROI calculation was £216,342.76).
Using the information from the Impact Map, it is possible to identify change indicators which can illustrate that an outcome has happened (e.g. by tracking the key project milestones, or observing the change at the end). This is a justifiable and logical method of collecting information to confirm the project’s overall impact.
Table 10 breaks down all the outcomes per stakeholder group and identifies a financial proxy, a source and puts a monetary amount on the outcome. This in turn is added up to calculate the overall project value.
25
Table 10: CHNI FareShare Impact Map Stakeholder Outcome Number Financial Proxy Proxy value Explanation Year 1 Value Improved work skills through 87.5% survey respondents additional on the job training, reported developing a range of
formal training and attending new skills. An increase in 50 volunteers of which Added value of having certified external training. £2,546.78 vocational skills, increased 1.1 87% gain skills for future at least Level 2 (e.g. £33,617.50 earning potential from work at employment (44). NVQ) qualification. NI average weekly wage of £439.10 + 16% increase over period of 5 years. Volunteers are motivated 50 volunteers of which Cost of each volunteer (27) Motivational session through their work with CHNI 54% were highly attending a 1 to 1 half day 1.2 once per year as part of £750.00 £6,480.00 FareShare to consider exploring interested in exploring motivational session as part of team building exercise. new roles. new roles (27). team building session.
Increased opportunity to The value of increased The value of increased engage with colleagues and frequency of interaction with 50 volunteers with 91% frequency of £10,540.00 new friends resulting in friends, relatives, and 1.3 reporting new friendships interaction with friends, £96,968.00 improved relationships. neighbours is recorded as
Volunteers (46). relatives, and £15,500 x 68% to adjust for neighbours. frequency of social interaction. Greater knowledge about a NHS Average unit cost Reduced need for and cost 50 volunteers with 54% balanced diet and the benefits per 11 night required (£2,365) of average 11 night gaining knowledge on £2,365.00 1.4 of eating regularly including stay for an individual stay in hospital x 27 volunteers £23,626.35 healthy balanced diets CHNI FareShare CHNI "the eatwell plate". with diet/food related reporting improved knowledge. (27). illness Increased in the use of skills, 50 volunteers 75% of Average volunteers hrs. x Average number of abilities, feeling part of a team whom noted the positive minimum wage salary for volunteer hours worked £6.31 1.5 to achieve worthwhile project effects of team work equivalent time (14 hours x 24 £82,686.24 at minimum wage goals. during (17,472) hours of volunteers x £6.31 per hour). salary volunteering. Increased income as a result of Median gross weekly full-time earnings from employment. wage in NI for 2012 published £23,894 1.6 5 external full -time paid Average earnings paid in the Labour Market Annual £29,867.50 employment positions. by employers (actual). Survey of Hours and Earning (4.6 years represents the average stay in one job).
Stakeholder Outcome Number Financial Proxy Proxy value Explanation Year 1 Value 30 CHNI FareShare Increased knowledge about Malnutrition costs the NHS service users up skilling food/ diet learned through approximately £1000 per patient 2.1 Up skilled through an increase in through preparation of the project. £1,000.00 over 6 months including GP visits £10,500.00 dexterity gained in food prep. healthy nutritional meals and hospital stays x 30 SU. for themselves and others. Service Users reported an "Average patient costs for Cost to the NHS for addressing 56% of respondents increased level of energy, NHS counselling in making mental concerns similar to those reported being positively confidence and optimism, decisions, coping with outlined by SU has improved due 2.2 affected by having access £264 £195,465.60 interested in new things, feeling crises, working through to access to food. (2468 x £264). to healthy food daily relaxed, and leading to improved conflict, or improving (4407 SU x 56% = 2468). mental health. relationships with others.
53% of respondents Cost of £51 per person for Cost to the NHS of offering ONS Consumption of fruits and reported feeling one month’s supply of oral to offset the effects of poor diet vegetables, grain and meals has physically healthier due nutrition support (ONS) or malnutrition. 2.3 improved physical health /energy to accessing food (2236 x £51.00 x 2 months £102.00 £91,228.80
Service User levels/ability to plan for the days provided through CHNI to increase weigh by 2KG).
ahead. FareShare (4407x53% = 2236). 54% of survey Average cost of GP visit to Average number of GP visits in NI respondents had not address food related is 3.8 per year. A person suffering Lack of money is no longer a 2.4 missed a meal in the last illness. £157 with malnutrition visits 65% more £63,421.05 CHNI FareShare barrier to eating a hot meal. 2 weeks (4407 x 54% = with a NHS GP visit costing £25 2380). per visit. (2380 SU x £157). Increased use of Average cost of access to a Cost of (1013) people accessing 23% of respondents communication skills programme while helps befriending schemes including reported feeling 2.5 causing increased sense of prevent loneliness and quality of life improvements £121,560.00 substantially closer to belonging and social social isolation. resulting in a reduction in people (1013). £300 interaction. depression. Early intervention with an Estimating lifetime costs / Early intervention increases additional range of food items effects of obesity. children’s knowledge about food 2.6 which include dairy, fruit and 97% of 0 - 4 year old £400.00 choices and has positive impact £11,640.00 vegetables and specific diet children. on choice in later years therefore requirements. (Cultural and reducing the cost related to food health benefits as well as choice). related health concerns.
27
Stakeholder Outcome Number Financial Proxy Proxy Explanation Year 1 Value value
37% of organisations Office for National Statistics - Average expenditure on meals by a Living Costs & Food Survey 2010 - single person is £21.30 per week (3 Reduced or equal spending on responded with 85% Average weekly household exp. £1.01 meals per day x 7 days) The cost organisational food budget reporting a positive £90,361.19 3.1 during a period of food inflation impact on budget due to on food/drinks (non-alcoholic). per meal is £1.01. in NI. the ability to provide
Community Food Members 203,333 meals.
40 Food industry partners Approx. 40 food partners University of York Food Waste The researched cost of Food Waste diverted food from landfill (suppliers) diverted Strategy and nibusinessinfo.co.uk. Disposal per tonne @£133.00. 4.1 £133.00 £7,549.08 helping address food poverty in surplus food to CHNI
NI. FareShare. 31% responded with Safe and Sound - outdoor team Cost for up to 130 people @£75 pp Staff view the organisations 100% of reporting staff build days priced from £75.00 per to build staff morale at a yearly engagement with FS as a positive 4.2 morale has been person. £750.00 team building event (10 team £5,362.50 social outcome for local positively impacted. members x 13 suppliers = 130 communities. people @ £75 per hour. 100% of respondents Annual Survey of Hours and Wage rate per hour of 8 volunteers
Food IndustryFood Partners Organisations report additional reported staff morale has Earnings, 2012 Provisional working 16 hrs. per food event x 5 4.3 levels of staff volunteering with been positively impacted Results. events during 2013 = 640 hours. £4,715.52 CHNI FareShare including food (5 food drives with 640 drives and work at Depot. volunteer’s hours). £12.28 Reduce level of carbon / Investor Responsibility Research (85.4 tonnes x 4.2 Carbon emission methane emissions "Greenhouse Centre - The cost of Carbon rate supplied by FS = 359 tonnes) Supplier reduced C02 Gases". emission by diverting emissions estimated for 2012 £17.98 359 X £17.98 over 12 year period - £4,531 5.1 food to FS CFM. @$28.24 per tonne converted to Lifetime in Atmosphere value of GBP at £17.98 Rate (0.6378) methane (Note the - Lifetime in (14/03/2012) Sources Forbes - Atmosphere value of greenhouse Calculating The True Cost Of gas including methane maybe need Carbon & Us EPA. to be researched further to offer a Environment higher value). Total for Year One £879.580.28 Total Present Value £1,628,989.78 Net Present Value £1,412,647.02 Social Return £7.53 per £1
28
4.3 Discount Rates
It is necessary to “discount” the values generated by each of the financial proxies in order to reduce the risk of over claiming and to ensure credibility. The following methods are most commonly used with the SROI model:
Deadweight: An assessment of how much of each of the outcomes would have happened anyway, without CHNI FareShare i.e. that the service user or volunteer would have taken action to alter behaviour.
Displacement: An assessment of how much of each of the outcomes displaced other activities or outcomes that would otherwise have occurred.
Attribution: An assessment of how much of each of the outcomes was generated by the contributions of other organisations or people e.g. referral sources, family members etc.
Drop-off: In forthcoming years, beyond the delivery timeframe of the current scope of CHNI FareShare, the amount of each outcome that can be directly attributed to the project will be greatly reduced as it becomes more influenced by other factors. Due to the immediacy of the direct outcomes and impact from CHNI FareShare a significant level of drop-off is estimated.
Table 11 below shows the discount rates per outcome on the impact map. The discount rate is high for service users to reflect the perceived low response rate and ensure that the social value is not over claimed or exaggerated:
Stakeholders The outcomes Deadweight Displacement Attribution Drop Off
Improved work skills through additional on the job 1.1 training, formal training and attending certified 25% 25% 20% 20% external training
Volunteers are motivated through their work with 1.2 25% 10% 33% 20% CHNI FareShare to consider exploring new roles
Increased opportunity to engage with colleagues and
Volunteers 1.3 20% 10% 50% 20% new friends resulting in improved relationships
Greater knowledge about a balance diet and the 1.4 benefits on eating regularly including "the eat well 25% 5% 33% 20% plate" CHNI FareShareCHNI Increase in the use of skills, abilities, feeling part of a 1.5 10% 5% 10% 15% team to achieve worthwhile project goals Increased income as result of earnings from 1.6 35% 20% 20% 0% employment Up skilled through an increase in dexterity gained in 2.1 25% 20% 20% 33% food prep
The Service Users reported an increased level of energy, confidence and optimism. They were relaxed, 2.2 30% 20% 20% 20% interested in new things thinking clearly and closer to people leading to an improvement in mental health
Consumption of fruits and vegetables, grain and 2.3 meals has improved physical health including energy 30% 15% 15% 25% levels and ability to plan for the days ahead
Service Service Users Lack of money is no longer a barrier to eating a hot 2.4 30% 20% 33% 20% meal Increased use of communication skills causing 2.5 30% 10% 20% 15% increased sense of belonging and social interaction Early intervention with an additional range of food items which include dairy, fruit and vegetables and 2.6 35% 25% 10% 20% specific diet requirement. (Cultural and health benefits as well as choice)
3.1 Reduced or equal spending on organisational food 35% 11% 10% 20%
Food budget during a period of food inflation in NI Members Community
Approx. 40 organisations diverted food from landfill 4.1 9% 10% 15% 20% helping address food poverty in NI
Staff view the organisations engagement with FS as a 4.2 10% 10% 25% 20% positive social outcome for local communities
Organisations report additional levels of staff 4.3 volunteering with CHNI FareShare including 5 food 10% 10% 20% 20% FoodIndustry Partners drivers and additional endeavours at supplier Depot
Reduce level of carbon / methane emissions 5.1 10% 10% 10% 0% "Greenhouse Gases" Environment
Table 11: Discount Rates
30
4.4 CHNI FareShare SROI Calculations
The SROI ratio is calculated over 5 years to reflect the longer term impacts that the service has on stakeholders. A discount value of 3.5% was applied over the five-year period. This is in line with the Government’s Green Book, which requires that public money be discounted at a rate of 3.5% per annum.
Total Present Value (PV) £1,628,989.78
Net Present Value £1,412,647.02 (PV minus Investment)
Social Return £7.53 per £1
Range £6.14 - £7.90
This is calculated by dividing the proposed social value (total present value) by the level of investment made;
£216,432.76 / £1,628,989.78 = £8:£1
Service users benefitted most from the work of CHNI FareShare with the total outcomes value representing 56% of the overall impact of the project. Table 12, shows the breakdown of impact for year 2012/2013 alone while Table 13 and Figure 17 below illustrates the breakdown of the overall impacts per each stakeholder group for the five years.
Stakeholders Impact Value of Outcomes % of Total Impact CHNI FareShare Volunteers £273,245.59 31% CHNI FareShare Service Users £493,815.45 56% Community Food Members £90,361.19 10% Suppliers £17,627.10 2% Environmental Awareness £4,530.96 1% Total £879,580.28 100%
Table 12: Impact value per stakeholder group for Year 2012/2013
Stakeholders Impact Value of Outcomes % of Total Impact CHNI FareShare Service Users £912,234.28 56% CHNI FareShare Volunteers £504,986.83 31% Community Food Members £162,898.98 10% Suppliers £32,579.79 2% Environmental Awareness £16,289.90 1% Total £1,628,989.78 100%
Table 13: Impact value per stakeholder group over 5 years
31
2% 1% Stakeholder Impact Breakdown
10% FareShare Volunteers 31% FareShare Service Users
Community Food Members
Food Industry Partner 56% Environmental Awareness
Figure 17: Impact value per stakeholder group
4.5 Sensitivity Analysis
Given that the SROI analysis contains estimations and assumptions, it is reasonable to review where these decisions have had a significant effect on the overall SROI calculation and to consider, therefore, the assurance that can be placed on such figures.
However, as an evaluative analysis, the study contains confirmed data including numbers of volunteers, Community Food Members, and Food Industry Partners. As such, research makes extrapolated assumptions on the numbers affected based on the focus groups and questionnaires completed by stakeholders. For example, the most significant outcome accounts for over 22% of the total value and relates to “feeling relaxed, interested in new things, thinking clearly and closer to people leading to an improvement in mental health”.
The sensitivity analysis explores the impact on the SROI ratio of changing some of the study’s key assumptions. Discount rates thought to be significant were amended to clarify the impact of changing attribution, deadweight or displacement. Outcome values (financial proxies) generated from research methods were adjusted to determine the impact of changing particular values, given that questionnaire results were extrapolated over the full stakeholder group.
The most crucial or sensitive areas of this SROI analysis encompasses: . Service Users - an increased level of energy, confidence and optimism. Feeling relaxed, interested in new things, thinking clearly and feeling closer to people leading to an improvement in mental health: (22%) . Service Users - Increase in communication skills (14%) . Volunteers - Increased opportunity to engage with colleagues and new friends resulting in improved relationships: (11%) . Community Food Members – Reduced or equal spending on food budgets: (10%)
32
Taken together, the three outcomes outlined above accounts for 57% of the indicated value of social impact. Table 14 shows by either amending the financial proxy used to measure the outcome, increasing the discount factors to reduce the proposed effect of the services or finally, by amending the number of service users affected by the outcome. This shows what making amends will do to the final overall impact figure.
Table 14: Sensitivity Analysis - Range Stakeholder Outcome Factor chosen Changed to Ratio An increased level of energy, Financial Proxy 50% of proposed proxy (originally £7.31 Service User confidence and optimism. SU 100% of total) were relaxed, interested in £132 new things, thinking clearly Deadweight 40% (from 30%) £6.60 and closer to people leading Displacement 30% (from 20%) £6.60 to an improvement in mental Attribution 30% (from 20%) £6.60 health. Number of 28% of service users affected (from £6.14 proposed 56%) – half of the proposed number service users
Stakeholder Outcome Factor chosen Changed to Ratio Increased use of Financial Proxy 50% of proposed proxy (originally £7.26 Service User communication skills 1013 service users reduced to 507) causing increased sense of Deadweight 50% (from 30%) £7.26 belonging and social Displacement 25% (from 10%) £7.33 interaction. Attribution 50% (from 20%) £7.12 Number of 12% of service users affected (from £7.27 proposed service 23%) – half of the proposed users number
Stakeholder Outcome Factor chosen Changed to Ratio Increased opportunity to Financial Proxy 50% of proposed proxy £7.31 Volunteer engage with colleagues value used and new friends Deadweight 35% (from 20%) £7.20 resulting in improved Displacement 25% (from 10%) £7.20 relationships. Attribution 33% (from 50%) £7.90
Stakeholder Outcome Factor chosen Changed to Ratio Reduced or equal spending Financial Proxy No change £7.53 Community on organisational food Food Members budget during a period of Deadweight 50% (from 33%) £7.39 food inflation in NI. Displacement No change £7.53 Attribution 25% (from 10%) £7.39
The sensitivity analysis related to CHNI FareShare produces a range of ratios from £1:6.14 to £1:£7.90. This short range illustrates that the outcomes are not overly sensitive to change, that CHNI FareShare can be deemed responsible for much of the change and illustrates that the financial proxies chosen and sensitivity analysis are robust in not over claiming for outcomes.
Even by significantly reducing the number of service users benefiting from FareShare within the CFMs, the level of social impact remains sizeable at, in the worst instance, £6.14 for every £1 invested.
33
4.6 Limitations Some of the CFM service users were not able to answer questions and/or there were sensitivities, for example people with mental health issues and very young children. In this situation it is necessary to identify other people who can talk on their behalf. For this report we confirmed the findings from the service users not only with FareShare but also with the CFM’s who provided a representative view with feedback supporting the evidence gathered directly from service users.
In general, with the service users representing some of the most vulnerable in this SROI study there were limitations around the availability of respondents but focus groups helped the research team understand the value of CHNI FareShare services. As such the study relied on information provided by the CFMs to facilitate the access to service users.
34
5. Conclusions & Recommendations
5.1 Conclusions
This section summarises the key conclusions and messages from the evaluation and sets out recommendations to support the future development of the services provided by CHNI FareShare. These are drawn from the findings & analysis presented in previous sections of the report
. The social value created as a result of this programme is considerable with a value of £4,026,337.53 equating to a Social Return on Investment of approximately £1:£7.53 (£1:£8)
. Stakeholders engaged with CHNI FareShare Community Food Network, over the study period, benefited significantly from:
. Improved mental wellbeing . Enhanced physical health . Increased food access, variety and choice . Improved communication & social interaction . New vocational skills . Improved levels of confidence, clarity of mind and optimism . Greater access to employment opportunities Figure 18: Social Impact Tag Cloud . Increased volunteering and community engagement . Reduced food waste . Lower greenhouse gas emissions
. The importance of working in partnership with stakeholders is acknowledged in this study. All stakeholders engaged with CHNI FareShare are important to the success of the project. They link together through regular meetings and keep well informed on the operational requirements for members . CHNI FareShare’s operational systems allow them to deliver an effective service that creates value and will help in terms of ongoing development and growth (economies of scale) . It is also noted that information is shared through informal and natural interactions e.g. volunteers and Community Food Member staff meet on delivery days, discuss and offer feedback on food quality and service which is communicated to CHNI FareShare on return to the depot, therefore allowing any required change to occur in real time . The model of volunteer engagement is highly effective for the project and valuable for the individual’s development . Community Food Membership’s proactive approach of engaging with and supporting hard to reach groups
35
. Clear and transparent operational systems in managing food collection, storage and delivery ensure quality in service delivery . Relationship building, networking and information sharing are essential in maintaining and further developing partnerships . CHNI FareShare offers a unique combination of services which are delivered professionally in a real work environment which focuses on the needs of service users. The project is built on the trust and belief that change will occur which will improve lives over the longer term
SROI analyses often deliver positive returns beyond pure equity i.e. greater than 1. The return delivered by this project has been arrived at through a clear, consistent and transparent use of financial proxies, yet it is difficult to benchmark or make comparisons with other social projects providing similar services. As with other types of evaluation, it is difficult to compare SROI results between organisations as outcomes will vary greatly depending on a number of key factors such as number and profile of users, sector engaged in, the organisations or projects stage of development, the level of investment and input provided and type of service and methodology. CHNI FareShare offers a unique combination of services which are delivered professionally in a real work environment which focuses on the needs of service users. The project is built on the trust and belief that change will occur which will improve lives over the longer term.
5.2 Recommendations
The aim with this report has been to review the programme of services delivered by CHNI FareShare. From this, CHNI FareShare proposes to be able to see where successes have been made and where to improve to sustain a good level of social return. The recommendations proposed as a result are:
. The CHNI FareShare team continues to engage with food industry partners to support the collection of data and recording of activities to inform a clear corporate social responsibility statement, objectives and targets based diverting surplus food to help reduce food poverty lower greenhouse gas emissions. . CHNI FareShare, with support from stakeholders could develop and co-ordinate an agreed system to gather and record essential client data including actual numbers of service users, breakdown of client groups and tracks progress with baseline and follow up data capture. . The CHNI FareShare team explore the perception amongst volunteers that paid employment with CHNI FareShare is a real opportunity whilst exploring where employment opportunities might exist, including those within Food Industry Partners. . CHNI FareShare reviews the customer order systems to address how stocks of available food can be rotated amongst Community Food Members weekly. . CHNI FareShare to explore partnerships for continuing to increase education in regards to benefits of healthy eating on a budget. . CHNI FareShare to explore the potential to partner with current and new organisations on delivering service user food preparation skills training for personal use or for catering-based roles within local communities – tap into local infrastructure already established.
36
. Continue to utilise SROI and refine it to ensure it captures the outcomes of stakeholders and continue to explore with stakeholders the benefits. Due to rapid pace of change in this area it is important to stay in touch with the needs of stakeholders. . CHNI FareShare to explore with Community Food Members additional benefits from involvement with the programme e.g. it may save employees time, variety to cover for different needs (including specialist and ethnic diets), increased level of recycling and environmental awareness and improved learning for service users. . CHNI FareShare to consider establishing a depot in Derry/Londonderry where there is also a wealth of food producers and critical mass of potential Community Food Members.
37
6.0 Appendices
Appendix One: Impact Map
38
Social Return on Investment - Impact Map
Organisation Council for the Homeless NI FareShare Name John McEntee
Objectives To feed vulnerable people who are in food poverty/at risk of food poverty; improve the dietary options available to disadvantaged service users; and achieve increased diversion of food waste from landfill through prevention, re-use & recycling Date Mar-14
FareShare rescues fit-for-purpose, surplus food from landfill and diverts it to those people in food Scope Activity poverty. Objective of activity Evaluation of FareShare food Time period April 2012 - March 2013 Contract/Funding/Part of organisation Food Standards Agency, Northern Ireland distribution project Forecast or Evaluation Evaluative
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stakeholders Intended/unintended changes Inputs Outputs The outcomes The outcomes (what changes) Description Value £ Description Indicator Source Quantity Duration Financial proxy Value £ Source Who do we have an effect on? Where did you get How much What is the What do you think will change for them? What do they Summary of activity (quantify) How long does What proxy would you use to Where did you get the Who has an effect on us? What do they invest? How would you describe the change? How would you measure it? the information change is value of the invest? it last? (years) value the change? information from? from? there? change?
50 volunteers of which 87.5% survey Improved skills leading to increased chances Added value of having at least Improved work skills through additional on the job training, formal respondents are developing a range of Number of qualifications Questionnaire & FareShare Volunteers Time of progression to education, training and 44 1 Level 2 (e.g. NVQ) £2,546.78 training and attending certified external training new skills including health and safety, achieved interviews NI Average wage of £439.10 employment qualification food hygiene, customer service, forklift pw + 16% over period of 5 driving & recording goods in / good out years rather than 45 year etc (44 Volunteers) working life due to transient nature of work
Think Training & Development 50 volunteers of which 54% of survey Attending a staff motivation Volunteers are motivation through their work Ltd UK offer a half day Increased levels of motivation - interest & desire in exploring new respondents were highly interested in Increased level of motivation Questionnaire & session / speaker once per year FareShare Volunteers Time with FareShare to consider exploring new 27 1 £750.00 coaching session in staff employment roles exploring new roles as a result of their to explore new roles interviews as part of team building roles motivation including one to one experience (27 volunteers) coaching sessions
Putting a Price Tag on Friends, Relatives, and Neighbours 50 volunteers supported in the (Institute of Education, Increased opportunity to engage with The value of increased frequency Increased number of friends & friendships including community programme of which 91% of Increased sense of belonging, Questionnaire & focus University of London April FareShare Volunteers Time colleagues and new friends resulting in 46 1 of interaction with friends, £10,540.00 engagement respondents reported new friendships purpose and ability to cope group 2007) £15,500 is the estimated improved relationships relatives, and neighbours (46 volunteers) cost x 68% of respondents scoring new friends as extremely important
Reduced risk of serious 50 volunteers supported in the Greater knowledge about a balance diet and diseases such as diabetes and programme 54% of respondents Questionnaire & focus FareShare Volunteers Improved awareness and knowledge of a healthy balanced diet Time the benefits on eating regularly including "the related heart disease, kidney 27 1 NHS Average unit cost per 11 £2,365.00 reported greater knowledge of a group eatwell plate" disease, stroke and limb night stay for a individual with healthy balanced diet (27 volunteers) amputation diabetes and/or related heart Silent Assassin Report disease, stroke, amputations, Diabetes UK - Health charity for kidney failure and blindness people with diabetes October emergency admission 2008
Average hrs worked (14 hrs 75% of respondents rated the work per wk x 52 wk) experience Average volunteers hrs x experience highly and express Increase in the use of skills, abilities, feeling Minimum Wage rate of £6.31 Increased sense of accomplishment in achieving goals as a team gained through volunteering Collected data & minimum wage salary for FareShare Volunteers Time positively the effects of team work part of a team to achieve worthwhile project 17472 1 £6.31 per hour via member with FareShare (based on questionnaire equivalent time (14 hours x 24 achieving project goals and general goals www.nidirect.gov.uk survey responses from 48% of Vol x £6.31 per hour) sense of accomplishment all volunteers)
Based on the median gross Increase in average yearly 5 volunteers entered external full -time Volunteers increased their level of personal weekly full-time wage in NI for paid as a result of a receiving Collected data & Average earnings paid by FareShare Volunteers Increased income as result of earnings from employment Time paid employment as a result of income as a result of gaining paid 5 4.4 £23,894 2012 published in the Labour a weekly salary paid by an questionnaire employers (actual) volunteering with FareShare employment Market Annual Survey of Hours employers and Earning Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stakeholders Intended/unintended changes Inputs Outputs The outcomes The outcomes (what changes) Description Value £ Description Indicator Source Quantity Duration Financial proxy Value £ Source Who do we have an effect on? Where did you get How much What is the What do you think will change for them? What do they Summary of activity (quantify) How long does What proxy would you use to Where did you get the Who has an effect on us? What do they invest? How would you describe the change? How would you measure it? the information change as value of the invest? it last? value the change? information from? from? there? change?
Reduce risk of ill health and Offers benefits at all stages of life including Malnutrition cost the NHS 30 FareShare Service Users Increased ability to prepared, Focus Groups and /or malnutrition due to FareShare Service Users Up skilled through a increase in dexterity gained in food prep Time growth and development, mental health and 30 1 £1,000.00 approximately £1000 per cook and serve healthy food. Services Users increase knowledge access accessing up skilling on prep of employment patient over a 6 month healthy nutritional meals for to knowledge about food including GP visits and themselves and others hospital stays
Average patient costs for NHS The Service Users reported an increased 56% of respondents reported being counselling in making decisions, Unit Costs of Health and Social level of energy, confidence and optimistic. positively affected by having access to Advancement in mental Questionnaire & coping with crises, working Care 2010 @ £44 per hr x FareShare Service Users Increased levels of positive mental wellbeing Time They were relaxed, interested in new things 2468 6 £264 healthy food daily (4407 SU x 56% = wellbeing interviews through conflict, or improving average 6 hr per person in a thinking clearly and closer to people leading 3248) relationships with others. (3248 community care setting to an improvement in mental health people x £264)
Cost of £51 per person for one 53% of responded reported feeling Consumption of fruits and vegetables, grain Access to a variety of hot NHS - London Procurement months supply of oral nutrition physically healthier due to accessing and meals has improved physical health meals and snacks with questionnaire & Programme FareShare Service Users Increased levels of positive physical wellbeing Time 2236 1 support (2236 x £51.00 x 2 £102.00 food provide through FareShare (4407 including energy levels and ability to plan for including a vegetarian interviews Clinical Oral Nutrition Support months to increase weigh by 53% = 2236) the days ahead equivalent every second day Project 2KG)
The average number of GP visits ESRI Research Programme on in NI is 3.8 per year. A person Health Service 2006 (GP visits) 54% of survey respondents had not Lack of money is no longer a barrier to eating Servicer Users confirming Collected data & suffering with malnutrition will The British Dietetic Association. FareShare Service Users Increased access to a hot nutritious meal Time missed a meal in the last 2 weeks 2380 1 £157 a hot meal eating a hot meal questionnaire visit the GP 65% more with a May 2011. Review May 2014 (4407 x 54% = 2380) NHS GP visit costing £25 per (65% GP visits) NHS cost per visit. (2380 SU x £157) GP visit
Increased use of Attending for meals including 23% of respondents reported feeling communication skills breakfast dinner, tea and Cost of (1013) people accessing FareShare Service Users Reduced risk of social isolation Time substantial closer to people (4407 causing increased sense of snacks / themed 1013 1 a befriending schemes including 23% = 1013 belonging and social events/garden groups all in a Focus Group / quality of life Social Care Institute for interaction group setting Interviews / Survey improvements resulting in a Excellence Preventing responses reduction in depression £300 loneliness and social isolation:
Early intervention while at Estimating lifetime costs and Early intervention with an additional range of Children eating a variety of crèche/day care introduces effects of obesity Will Lower the risk of childhood health problems including type 2 food items which include dairy, fruit and Focus Group FareShare Service Users Time 97, 0 - 4 year old children health meals twice daily x 5 97 5 healthy food, increased £400.00 Hollingsworth diabetes and obesity vegetables and specific diet requirement. Interviews days per week. knowledge about food choices School of Social & Community (cultural and health benefits as well as choice) and has positive impact on Medicine University of Bristol choice in later years Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stakeholders Intended/unintended changes Inputs Outputs The outcomes The outcomes (what changes) Description Value £ Description Indicator Source Quantity Duration Financial proxy Value £ Source Who do we have an effect on? Where did you get How much What is the What do you think will change for them? What do they Summary of activity (quantify) How long does What proxy would you use to Where did you get the Who has an effect on us? What do they invest? How would you describe the change? How would you measure it? the information change as value of the invest? it last? value the change? information from? from? there? change? Community Food Members Average expenditure of £21.30 / ONSR on the Living Costs and 37% of organisations responded with Reduced or equal spending on organisational Project Data Focus 21 meals per person x 52 weeks Saving on food budgets due to Food Survey 2010 - Average Budget saving on food bill 85% reporting a positive impact on food budget during a period of food inflation in Group Interviews / 203333 1 on food/meals by a single person £1.01 FS supplying of 203333 meals weekly household exp on budget NI Survey (£1.01 per meal) (203333 meals food/drinks (non alcoholic) / Purchase of foodstuffs from x £1.01) FareShare £29,162.36 Food Industry Partners Approx 40 supplier over a 3 year The researched cost of Food University of York Food Waste Time period diverted food waste to Approx 40 organisations diverted food from Number of 000 KG (tonnes of Project Data / Waste Disposal per tonne £133.00 Strategy and Food waste diverted to FareShare FareShare I landfill helping address food poverty in NI food) diverted to FareShare Interviews 86 12 @£133.00 nibusinessinfo.co.uk Food Industry Partners
Safe and Sound - outdoor Cost for up to 130 people @£75 team build days price from Time 31% of weekly food suppliers pp to build staff moral at a yearly £750.00 £75.00 per person responded with 100% of respondents Staff view the organisations engagement with team building event (10 team reporting staff morale has been FS as a positive social outcome for local Saving on annual team build Questionnaires and members x 13 suppliers = 130 Feeling of engagement in worthwhile community project positively impacted communities day to increase staff moral Interviews 13 1 people @ £75 per hour
31% of weekly food suppliers Wage rate per hour of 8 Organisations report additional levels of staff Annual Survey of Hours and responded with 100% of respondents volunteers working 16 hrs per Greater understanding of real community issues Time volunteering with FareShare including food Staff time & expertise 640 Earnings, 2012 Provisional reporting increased community Questionnaires food event x 5 events during drives and work at Depot Results engagement Interviews and Desk 2013 = 640 hours Food Industry Partners Research 1 £12.28
Investor Responsibility Research Centre - The cost of Time Carbon emissions estimated for (85.4 tonnes x 4.2 Carbon 2012 @$28.24 per ton Desk Research based emission rate supplied by FS = converted to GBP at £17.98 Improved environmental on data supplied by 359 tons) 359 X £17.98 over 12 Rate (0.6378) (14/03/2012) Supplier reduced C02 emission by Reduce level of carbon / methane emissions conditions with less carbon in Fareshare for 2012 / year period - Lifetime in Forbes - Calculating The True Food Industry Partners Reduced environmental impact diverting food to FS CFM "GreenHouse Gases" land system carbon 2013 360 12 Atmosphere value of methane £17.98 Cost Of Carbon & Us EPA
85.4 tonnes of food waste diverted from Landfill during 2012 / 2013
61 organisations supported to reduce or maintain food budgets during a period FareShare IOI funding providers FSA of food inflation Development of a unique regional Food Sharing network helping , Safe Food, Esmée Fairburn, those experience food poverty in local community on a daily Funding and Grant Aid 187180.40 Improved Health and Wellbeing for Service users WRAP CFM, PHA, DOE, Private 203333 meals provided to people form disadvantaged community across basis. Sector Organisations Northern Ireland from 2012 - 2013
Supplier reduced C02 emission by diverting food to FS CFM by over 1 year 2012/2013
Total £216,342.76 Social Return on Investment - Impact Map (continued from previous page) Stage 1 duplicate Stage 2 duplicate Stage 4 Stage 5 Stakeholders The outcomes Deadweight Displacement Attribution Drop Off Impact Calculating Social Return Description % % % % Discount rate (%) 3.50% Who do we have an Quantity times financial Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 effect on? What would have Who else Does the outcome What activity did proxy, less deadweight, Who has an effect How would you describe the change? Value happened without contributed to drop off in future you displace? displacement and on us? the activity? the change? years? attribution Improved work skills through additional on the 1.1 £112,058.32 25% 25% 20% 20% £33,617.50 £33,617.50 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 job training, formal training and attending 3.82% certified external training
Volunteers are motivation through their work 1.2 £20,250.00 25% 10% 33% 20% £6,480.00 £6,480.00 £5,184.00 £4,147.20 £3,317.76 £2,654.21 with FareShare to consider exploring new roles
0.74% Increased opportunity to engage with colleagues 1.3 and new friends resulting in improved £484,840.00 20% 10% 50% 20% £96,968.00 £96,968.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 relationships 11.02%
FareShare Volunteers Greater knowledge about a balance diet and the 1.4 £63,855.00 25% 5% 33% 20% £23,626.35 £23,626.35 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 benefits on eating regularly including "the 2.69% Increaseeatwell plate" in the use of skills, abilities, feeling 1.5 £110,248.32 10% 5% 10% 15% £82,686.24 £82,686.24 £70,283.30 £59,740.81 £50,779.69 £43,162.73 part of a team to achieve worthwhile project 9.40% Increasedgoals income as result of earnings from 1.6 £119,470.00 35% 20% 20% 0% £29,867.50 £29,867.50 £29,867.50 £29,867.50 £29,867.50 £29,867.50 employment 3.40% Up skilled through a increase in dexterity gained 2.1 £30,000.00 25% 20% 20% 33% £10,500.00 £10,500.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 in food prep 1.19% The Service Users reported an increased level of energy, confidence and optimistic. They were 2.2 relaxed, interested in new things thinking clearly £651,552.00 30% 20% 20% 20% £195,465.60 £195,465.60 £156,372.48 £125,097.98 £100,078.39 £80,062.71 and closer to people leading to an improvement in mental health 22.22% Consumption of fruits and vegetables, grain and 2.3 meals has improved physical health including £228,072.00 30% 15% 15% 25% £91,228.80 £91,228.80 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 energy levels and ability to plan for the days 10.37% ahead
Service Users Lack of money is no longer a barrier to eating a 2.4 £373,065.00 30% 20% 33% 20% £63,421.05 £63,421.05 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 hot meal 7.21% Increased use of 2.5 £303,900.00 30% 10% 20% 15% £121,560.00 £121,560.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 communication skills 13.82% causing increased sense of Early intervention with an additional range of food items which include dairy, fruit and 2.6 £38,800.00 35% 25% 10% 20% £11,640.00 £11,640.00 £9,312.00 £7,449.60 £5,959.68 £4,767.74 vegetables and specific diet requirement. (cultural and health benefits as well as choice) 1.32% 3.1 Reduced or equal spending on organisational Food Food food budget during a period of food inflation in £205,366.33 35% 11% 10% 20% £90,361.19 £90,361.19 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 Members
Community NI 10.27%
Approx 40 organisations diverted food from 4.1 £11,438.00 9% 10% 15% 20% £7,549.08 £7,549.08 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 landfill helping address food poverty in NI 0.86% Staff view the organisations engagement with 4.2 FS as a positive social outcome for local £9,750.00 10% 10% 25% 20% £5,362.50 £5,362.50 £4,290.00 £3,432.00 £2,745.60 £2,196.48 communities 0.61% Organisations report additional levels of staff Food Industry Food Partners 4.3 volunteering with FareShare including food £7,859.20 10% 10% 20% 20% £4,715.52 £4,715.52 £3,772.42 £3,017.93 £2,414.35 £1,931.48 drives and work at Depot 0.54%
Reduce level of carbon / methane emissions 5.1 £6,472.80 10% 10% 10% 10% £4,530.96 £4,530.96 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 "GreenHouse Gases"
Environment 0.52% Achievement of programme aims 99.48% Total £2,776,996.97 £879,580.28 £879,580.28 £279,081.70 £232,753.03 £195,162.96 £164,642.85 % after discounting 32% Present Value £879,580.28 £279,081.70 £232,753.03 £195,162.96 £164,642.85 Total Present Value £1,628,989.78 Net Present Value £1,412,647.02 Social Return £ per £ £7.53 per £1 Per annum 8.131358602 2.579995744 6.53 NPV 1% 2% Stakeholder Impact Breakdown
10% FareShare Volunteers Stakeholders Impact value Impact % FareShare Volunteers £273,245.59 31% 31% FareShare Service Users FareShare Service Users £493,815.45 56% Community Food Members £90,361.19 10% Food Industry Partner £17,627.10 2% Community Food Environmental Awareness £4,530.96 1% Members £879,580.28 100% Food Industry Partner
56% Environmental Awareness Appendix Two: List of Community Food Members
Name of CFM Town/City Description/Main Client Group Welcome Day centre for rough sleepers, ex-offenders & people with alcohol Organisation Belfast problems Single homeless men with support Morning Star Belfast needs around alcohol, drugs or mental health Belfast Activity Provides personal and social development programmes for Centre Belfast disadvantaged young people Social outreach project of the Presbyterian Church, assists senior citizens, toddlers, young people, Friendship House Belfast homeless people East Belfast Mission Belfast Assists homeless people, unemployed people and older people Oasis - Caring in Action Belfast Supports unemployed people Belfast Central Mission - Kirk House Belfast Homeless & disadvantaged people Link Family & young people (Project23), adults struggling with addiction & housing Community issues (MARC), senior citizens (Lunch Club & Drop-In), parents and Centre Newtownards babies (Tots Time), foreign nationals Assists people with mental health problems, people with learning Mindwise Carrick Carrickfergus difficulties Mindwise assists people with mental health problems, people with learning Fortwilliam Belfast difficulties Assists people with mental health problems, people with learning Mindwise Antrim Antrim difficulties Single homeless men, including ex-offenders and people with drug Lighthouse Hostel Ballymena or alcohol addictions Regina Coeli House Belfast Single homeless women Cross community family support centre for disadvantaged and low Quaker Cottage Belfast income families Ligoniel Community Centre Belfast Ormeau Centre (Extern) Belfast Single homeless people with complex, high support needs Daily drop-in centre for destitute foreign nationals & nightly street Homeplus Belfast outreach for rough sleepers
YMCA Lisburn Lisburn Disadvantaged young people
Hosford House Belfast Single homeless people Assists people with mental health problems Rehability Antrim Antrim Saol Ur Surestart Springfield Belfast Supports families, children
Surestart Village Belfast Supports families, children
44
Description/ Name of CFM Town/City Main Client Grp Adults & children with a learning Praxis (Parklands) Lisburn disability, mental ill health, acquired brain injury & for older people Whiterock Children's Centre Belfast Child care, family learning centre
Family Caring Centre Antrim Children and unemployed support people bereaved of a spouse as a result of violence in NI, Wave Trauma Belfast Run cross community youth project Extern Recycle Provides work experience and training opportunities for homeless Mallusk Belfast people Mountainview Disadvantaged and vulnerable people in the community including ST Vincent de Paul Belfast low income families Atlas Women's Centre Lisburn Childcare, educational opportunities for woman Newingtown Day Centre Belfast Supports senior citizens
The Well Project Belfast Women and mental health Secret Garden Assists people with mental health problems, people with learning (Praxis) Hillsborough difficulties Newhill Family Disadvantaged, low income families, Support Belfast day care
Action on Disability Belfast People with disabilities Innis Centre (Extern) Belfast Stella Maris (DePaul People with a history of homelessness, alcohol misuse & other Ireland) Belfast associated issues.
Local women are encouraged & supported to build self-esteem, Footprints Women's confidence and develop skills through participation in the range of Centre Belfast programmes and activities on offer.
Single homeless men, mainly those in recovery from substance Springwell House Belfast misuse problems Centenary House (Salvation Army) Belfast Single homeless men Mill House (Simon Community) Ballymena Homeless people Disadvantaged and vulnerable Share Ardess Fermanagh people in the community including low income families Darkley House, Provides emergency shelter for those in need to short term Crossfire Armagh accommodation - cross community and cross border service St Vincent de Paul, Cookstown Cookstown Disadvantaged low income families Single Homeless including those who are sleeping rough
MUST Hostel Cookstown
45
Description/ Name of CFM Town/City Main Client Grp Young People - Homeless, in or leaving care, offenders/ex-offenders, Prince's Trust Belfast single parents or young carers Damien House (First Housing Aid & Support) Derry Men with chronic alcohol problems Methodist City Mission Derry Hostel for Homeless men Northlands Centre Derry Treatment Centre for Alcohol dependents Foyle Haven (DePaul) Derry Men & Women who have been drinkers in past & need support
Foyle Valley House Derry Single women who are homeless and alcohol dependent - APEX House in the Wells Derry Single homeless men Clarendon Shelter Derry Shelter for homeless women The Cookie Company Receive referrals from Western trust - people with learning (Praxis Foyle) Derry difficulties Praxis Young Adults & children with a learning disability, mental ill health, People's Project Derry acquired brain injury & for older people
Food Banks Trussle Trust Foodbank Store House Foodbank Belfast Vineyard Dungannon Enniskillen Elim Storehouse Ministries Enniskillen Bangor Foodbank Bangor
46
Appendix Three: SROI Principles and Guidelines
SROI is an approach to understanding and managing the value of the social, economic and environmental outcomes created by an activity or an organisation. It is based on a set of principles that are applied within a framework.
SROI seeks to include the values of people that are often excluded from markets in the same terms as used in markets, that is, money, in order to give people a voice in resource allocation decisions. SROI is a framework to structure thinking and understanding. It’s a story not a number. The story should show how you understand the value created, manage it and can prove it. SROI is based on the following seven principles:
1. Involve stakeholders Understand the way in which the organisation creates change through a dialogue with stakeholders
2. Understand what changes Acknowledge and articulate all the values, objectives and stakeholders of the organisation before agreeing which aspects of the organisation are to be included in the scope; and determine what must be included in the account in order that stakeholders can make reasonable decisions
3.Value the things that matter Use financial proxies for indicators in order to include the values of those excluded from markets in same terms as used in markets
4. Only include what is Articulate clearly how activities create change and evaluate this through material the evidence gathered
5. Do not over-claim Make comparisons of performance and impact using appropriate benchmarks, targets and external standards.
6. Be transparent Demonstrate the basis on which the findings may be considered accurate and honest; and showing that they will be reported to and discussed with stakeholders
7. Verify the result Ensure appropriate independent verification of the account
Discount Rates SROI endeavours to reduce the risk of over-claiming the value associated with a programme. The SROI methodology is an outcomes-based evaluation framework that maps program outcomes (the logic model) and then assigns value to these outcomes for the purpose of relating the value of the social change that is achieved to the upfront investment in the activity. Once value has been assigned to outcomes, SROI examines the impact of the program by considering four points: deadweight, displacement, attribution, and drop off.
Deadweight is the change that would have happened anyway. It accounts for any portion of change included in an outcome that would have occurred either due to environmental factors or an internal motivation to change.
47
For example, CHNI FareShare may have helped people to get sustainable jobs, but a portion of those people employed would likely have found a job regardless, either due to their own efforts or due to a change in the labour market. The value of those likely to have found a sustainable job anyway is not counted as part of the overall impact of the program.
Displacement looks at whether the social change due to the intervention displaced something else or had some sort of unintended consequence. For example, a new food bank initiative may supply additional healthy food options in one neighbourhood and in doing so unintentionally displace the work of CHNI FareShare carried out nearby. The value of achieving the outcome of increased health and wellbeing would be discounted in order to acknowledge effects of increased activity by a second organisation in supplying healthy food.
Attribution acknowledges that a portion of the change represented by an outcome was due to the contribution of another organisation, initiative or person. This acknowledges that social change often results from interconnected initiatives; therefore a portion of the value of the outcome achieved is attributed to other initiatives, organisations or people. For the analysis we have considered the role of other community and voluntary organisations and the role of family and peers in contributing to the impact experienced.
Drop off considers how a change resulting from a program will diminish over time. For example, if a program helps people to quit smoking, what portion may start smoking again in the future? When considering the value of associated outcomes, the rate of potential and likely drop off, needs to be considered while valuing overall program impact. The SROI analysis is taken over a forecast five year period to reflect the fact that outcomes remain to be experienced after the initial period of intervention, drop off allows for a realistic value to be placed on this future impact.
Overall, by taking into account deadweight, displacement, attribution and drop off in association with any outcomes achieved, it becomes possible to present the value of social impact. As explained throughout A Guide to Social Return on Investment published by the SROI Network in January 2012, establishing the difference between the value of outcomes and the value of impact is very important. Taking into account these four factors significantly reduces the risk of over-claiming the value associated with a programme, which means that the story of social change accomplished will be much more credible.
More information on SROI can be found at:
. The SROI Network including the revised 2012 Guide to SROI 24 . What is Social Return on Investment (SROI) 25 . New Philanthropy Capital, September 2010, “SROI for funders”, http://www.philanthropycapital.org . New Philanthropy Capital, April 2010, “SROI position paper”, http://www.philanthropycapital.org
24 The SROI Guide - www.thesroinetwork.org/publications/doc_details/241-a-guide-to-social-return-on-investment-2012 25 What is Social Return on Investment (SROI) - www.thesroinetwork.org/what-is-sroi
48
Appendix Four: List of Tables & Figures Figure 1: Input / Output Model ...... 2 Figure 2: Map of CHNI FareShare Community Food Member locations ...... 5 Figure 3: CHNI FareShare Chain of Events ...... 6 Figure 4: Project Achievements 2011-2013 ...... 7 Figure 5: Input / Output Model ...... 10 Figure 6: Theory of Change ...... 11 Figure 7: Quarterly Food Collection & Distribution data 2012-2013 ...... 14 Figure 8: Service Users Outcomes ...... 15 Figure 9: Food Poverty Indicators ...... 17 Figure 10: Service User’s Stories ...... 18 Figure 11: Service Users’ Comments about the CHNI FareShare programme...... 18 Figure 12: Values of Volunteer Benefits ...... 19 Figure 13: Volunteer Comments about the CHNI FareShare programme ...... 19 Figure 14: Community Food Member Comments...... 22 Figure 15: Food Industry Partner Comments...... 23 Figure 16: Food Recovery Hierarchy ...... 24 Figure 17: Impact value per stakeholder group ...... 32 Figure 18: Social Impact Tag Cloud...... 35
Table 1: Impact value per stakeholder group for Year 2012/2013 ...... 3 Table 2: Stakeholder Engagement - Rationale for inclusion / exclusion of stakeholders ...... 12 Table 3: Project Targets 2011-2013 ...... 14 Table 4: Service User benefits ...... 16 Table 5: Improved consumption of 'Eatwell Plate' ...... 16 Table 6: Referral Sources ...... 20 Table 7: Organisations attending Focus Group Meetings ...... 21 Table 8: Food Industry Suppliers data ...... 23 Table 9: Sources of Funding ...... 25 Table 10: CHNI FareShare Impact Map...... 26 Table 11: Discount Rates ...... 30 Table 12: Impact value per stakeholder group for Year 2012/2013 ...... 31 Table 13: Impact value per stakeholder group over 5 years ...... 31 Table 14: Sensitivity Analysis - Range ...... 33
49
FareShare is a UK network of community based partnerships with regional organisations and charities that deliver services to local community groups. CHNI operates the model, under license, across N. Ireland.
CHNI FareShare www.chni.org.uk/fareshareni.html
FareShare UK www.fareshare.org.uk
Gauge NI www.gaugeni.co.uk
Council for the Homeless Northern Ireland (CHNI), Central Office, Fourth floor, Andras House, 60 Great Victoria Street, Belfast, BT2 7BB | 02890 246440 | [email protected] | Charity No. XR2272 | Company No. NI27577.