Theme 4: Commissioning
Key Issue / Change we want to happen / Key audiencesRequirements of Commissioners
Members report that they experience significant demands to engage with commissioning (at all stages of the commissioning cycle) and that this is not always recognised, and is not always proportionate for small groups and small amounts of funding. / A process that is proportionate to the amount of money, with simpler forms for smaller amounts of funding.
Commissioners to state up front their requirements and to review these, taking into consideration the ability of groups to engage.
A less hands-on approach from Commissioners, that gives groups space to deliver and be creative.
Improved definitions of ‘outcomes’ and ‘outputs’ by Commissioners
Improved understanding of commissioning language within voluntary and community sector. / · Commissioners
· Partnerships
· Governance boards
· Voluntary and community Sector
· Community Works
Equality for small local organisations
Members are concerned that opportunities are preserved for smaller voluntary and community sector organisations, against the challenge of larger national, international and corporate organisations. / Social capital to be given appropriate weighting in local commissioning prospectuses and other funding opportunities. / · Commissioners
· Service designers
Collaborative Working
Commissioners encourage groups to work together but processes don’t always support that. This sometimes results in inadequate time and money to form partnerships, and poor processes leading to multiple reporting and unnecessary duplication of effort.
Organisations’ concern about losing their existing share of funding can be a barrier for some to forming partnerships. / Specific resource to support partnership building.
Realistic timescales built in to bidding process, e.g. for Prospectus to enable effective partnerships to form.
Commissioners to identify where they perceive there is duplication of service provision so that this can be addressed in bids.
Commissioners to review systems and processes to facilitate partnership bids, e.g. template forms reviewed with collaboration in mind.
Provide key information and templates for good partnership agreements. / · Commissioners
· Community and Equalities team within BHCC
· Community Works
Length of Contracts
Contracts can be over relatively short time scales which does now allow for strength in development and delivery to ensure sustainability. / Move to a longer contract cycle (at least 3-5 years, which the Prospectus has modelled), with sufficient opportunity for review of cost effectiveness and proven results. / · Commissioners
Consistency and Transparency
There is not consistency between commissioners eg around definitions of social value and around procurement processes
Budget cuts are being proposed without consultation with services affected. / A firm commitment from Public agencies to the Social Value Act, with a clear and meaningful statement of value and strategy.
Fresh commitment to the core aims of the 2009 local Compact[1] :
- Improve communication, common understanding, collaboration, trust and respect between the voluntary and community sector and the statutory sector.
- Set a framework for effective consultation, representation and partnership working including agreeing definitions, shared values and joint and distinct undertakings.
- Set out the principles for developing working relationships between the voluntary and community sector and the statutory sector
Quality standards for Commissioners. / · Commissioners
· Community Works
Planning
Members report duplication of effort in commissioning of services, ill-timing of communications, and being engaged in processes that aren’t followed through, e.g. the loss of the ‘Framework’ of providers for people with complex needs. / Even greater joined-up working between Commissioners with pooled budgets and clear shared overall vision.
Improved strategic planning with timetables and processes that recognise national holidays, key religious dates and school holidays, for example.
Commissioners to reflect on joint work carried out to design the prospectus, and capture learning from this. / · Commissioners
Prospectus Approach
On the whole members are very supportive of the Prospectus approach, the commitment to recognise social value and its simplicity. Members would welcome continuous improvement to the process based on experiences so far. / Further streamlining of processes
Greater clarity of definitions for ‘outcomes’ vs ‘outputs’.
Feedback from Commissioners on how they think it’s gone and what will be changed.
Refining of the way the sector inputs to the design of Prospectus outcomes.
Consideration of how Prospectus can be broadened out to include possible contributions of resources from across the membership of Brighton and Hove Connected (formerly LSP) and City Management Board. / · Commissioners
· Community Works
· Brighton and Hove Connected
· City Management Board
Evaluation and Development
Members would like greater opportunities to input to specification development in general.
Members are concerned to ensure that conflicts of interest are avoided for organisations who are consulted and who may subsequently bid. / A refresh of the Community Engagement Framework to promote good practise in community engagement, evaluation to encourage more meaningful input, starting earlier where possible.
Contract reviews to include meeting with service users, and information gained from this to shape commissioning prospectus.
A shadowing scheme between sectors so that Commissioners can see delivery on the ground and CW members can learn from Commissioners’ perspectives / · Commissioners
· Community Works
2
[1] Community & Voluntary Sector Forum (2009), The Brighton & Hove Compact & Codes of Practice. Available at: <http://www.cvsectorforum.org.uk/sites/cvsectorforum.org.uk/files/Compact_low_res.pdf>