Building long term and holistic outcomes into statutory systems

By Paul Streets OBE, Chief Executive, Lloyds Bank Foundation

At Lloyds Bank Foundation, we support charities working with people facing multiple disadvantage. For these people, holistic interventions are central to long term success and we regularly see what this looks like through the charities we support. Room to Heal in London, providing holistic support to refugees and survivors of torture, is one such example whose success has been recognised through our Charity Achievement Awards this year.  As their application said: “It didn’t take us long to realise that it is futile offering counselling to someone who has no bed for the night, no lawyer to fight their case, or no money to buy food. Our therapeutic and casework teams work hand in hand to support each individual through the unique, myriad challenges they face.”  Treating people as individuals, rather than statistics means they do not easily fit into a box. Service providers need to be able to adapt to emerging needs and tailor their support for the individual. As a funder, this is something we look for in the charities we support, but in statutory systems this has proved much harder to achieve.

Over specification?

Payment by results and contracts built upon prescriptive outcomes should aim to enable commissioners to commission for long term and holistic outcomes but too often this does not happen in practice. Measurements are needed to demonstrate impact but a focus on narrowly defined outcomes can make it hard to understand the real value of a holistic intervention. The pertinence of this hit home recently when meeting a domestic abuse survivor who had accessed a range of services from a charity we support. She described the importance of the wrap-around person-centred support she’d received which enabled her to be a proper mum to her children, able to provide them with the care and attention they needed because her needs were met by the charity. Hearing this assessment, it was obvious that the charity delivered holistic, long term interventions but translating this into something that could be measured for a statutory service becomes more difficult.

Fixing funding

There are no easy answers here but it is a challenge we need to address, in the same way that we need to address the challenges presented by funding. In many cases, funding wide-reaching services demands better integration of budgets but doing so cannot simply be an amalgamation of funding streams that retains all the objectives and reporting requirements of each stakeholder origin. This is where co-production becomes so important, establishing new governance arrangements between organisations and working with service providers to determine how services can be commissioned in a way that meets individuals’ needs.

At the same time, we need to look at the length of grants and contracts. Local authorities may feel their hands are tied by not knowing their budgets from year to year but they need to be bold. For individuals facing multiple disadvantage, you cannot put a time frame on the period a service is needed and statutory funding needs to recognise this. Similarly service providers themselves need a degree of stability with longer term funding to give them the flexibility to innovate and the space to concentrate on service delivery. We have seen evidence of a longer term view in some areas where funding is available for longer time frames. For example, Camden has recently announced a new seven year funding strategy that aims to engage local charities in new forms of collaboration. We have also heard of examples where interventions are working and contracts can be easily extended without re-tendering for services.

The role of small and medium charities

Building long term, holistic interventions into statutory provision means taking a long term view. It means pooling budgets so that charities can be funded to meet a range of needs but in doing so, this cannot mean seeking one provider to deliver all services. Instead it means enabling a range of organisations to deliver a range of services. We know that small and medium sized charities can deliver the long term, holistic interventions that are part of an effective health and social care system. Grounded in their communities, they have a deep understanding of local need and can provide the person-centred, wrap-around support that people need so it is essential that funding opportunities work for them too. Funding is a real issue for these organisations at the moment, with 81% of respondents to our grantee survey listing it as the greatest challenge they face. If government is serious about building long term, holistic outcomes into statutory services, it has to consider how small and medium sized charities can deliver these. It means developing services in consultation with the sector and service users and ensuring contract sizes recognise the different skills and specialisms that a range of different organisations can bring to the table. By working together, these organisations can support government to deliver the services that people need.

Have your say on the future of funding and partnerships between the government and VCSE health and care providers. 

One thought on “Building long term and holistic outcomes into statutory systems

  1. This article really,really lifted my spirits.Paul Street so obviously “gets it” when discussing the funding challenges facing projects that works with people experiencing multiple disadvantage.

    I am Director of a small charity,Asha Womens Centre in Worcester, we have been working with women who have multiple disadvantages and complex needs,with the vast proportion having lived with disadvantage and discrimination throughout their lives.
    We provide services aimed at providing holistic “wrap- around person centered” support across a range of issues,working to their priorities and at their pace.We aim to enable and empower women who use our services to work on the root causes of their issues not just the effect.As Paul Street comments it is futile to just deal with the presenting issue with people who,in our experience,often have around 4-6 critical issues,so we explore everything the woman wishes to work on from within a team of experienced workers from a diverse range of backgrounds.

    We have been working holistically for over 20 years and our model has been endorsed by professionals and services users alike…..they know it works.BUT ……..it proves to be both our strength and weakness …the women thrive in the women only “no label” environment but funders seem to struggle when asked to support costs ,(core costs) for work that is not “pigeon holed” into prescriptive,narrowly defined outcomes or projects.

    On behalf of the woman at Asha I do hope other funders and decision makers such as Mr Street begin to take this on Board as projects such as mine are living on borrowed time.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s