hosted by: funded by: issues in evaluating the distinctive contribution and impact of the ‘third...
Post on 02-Apr-2015
216 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Ho
sted
by:
Fu
nd
ed b
y:
Issues in evaluating the distinctive contribution and impact of the ‘third sector’
Malin ArvidsonStephen McKayDomenico Moro
Contents
1. Researching the third sector workforce2. Frameworks for evaluation of Third
Sectors Organizations
Distinctive features: employment and workforce
• Small size (2.6% of employment) and uncertainty about boundaries
• Importance of volunteering as a labour input
• Role of philanthropy … but also contracts from public sector
How many people does the sector employ?
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 200918,500,000
19,000,000
19,500,000
20,000,000
20,500,000
21,000,000
21,500,000
22,000,000
400,000
450,000
500,000
550,000
600,000
650,000
700,000
750,000
800,000
Private
21,443,949
20,378,707
VCS
777,909LFS - employees in private and voluntary and community sector
(VCS)
Employees - distinctiveness• Percentage of workers in the VCS rises quite strongly with
age (Proportion of workers in the VCS in 2008)
Employees - distinctiveness• Percentage of workers in the VCS according to their
education. (Proportion in 2008)
Degree
or equiva
lent
Higher
educ
GCE A Le
vel o
r equiv
GCSE gr
ades
A-C or equiv
Other quali
fications
No qualifica
tion
Don't know
National
.0%1.0%2.0%3.0%4.0%
Voluntary - VCS
Employers - distinctiveness
• Many part-time jobs (2008)
Private Public VCS0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Part-timeFull-time
Growth of the sector: 1997-2010Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
LFS - average hours worked in a week Voluntary and Community Sector vs Private
Private
VCS
Under-employmentVCS Total
Would like to work longer hours
2007 – q1 7.4% 7.5%
2010 – q1 10.4% 10.1%
Part-time because cannot find a full-time job (among part-time staff)2007 – q1 9.8% 9.1%
2010 – q1 16.0% 14.3%
Industries affected by the recession-Private
• These are suffering the most
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q12007 2008 2009 2010
80.00%
85.00%
90.00%
95.00%
100.00%
105.00%
82.17%
88.23%
93.51%
100.00%
89.12%
Manufacturing Construction Wholesale, retail & motor trade Financial intermediation
Industries
• Health, social work, education and real estate cover 93.5% of VCS employment
• Using the SIC 92 classification– In 2008, of 100 workers in VCS• 62 were working in health & social work• 13 were in other social / community• 10.5 in education• 8 in real estate
• Growing industries all with strong VCS presence are still growing
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q12007 2008 2009 2010
95.00%
100.00%
105.00%
110.00%
115.00%
120.00%
125.00%
130.00%
107.56%
124.35%
112.10%
100.00%101.94%
Real estate, renting & business activ. Education Health & social work Other community, social & personal
… within these industries VCS is doing better than private sector.
Relative growth of selected industries from Q1 2007 to Q1 2010 Real estate, renting & business activ.
Education
Health & social work
Other community, social & personal 107.56%124.35%
112.10%
101.94%
109.62%
136.62%106.97%156.92%
PrivateVCS
2. Framework for evaluation
• Ideas of value – Created, instrumental, and intrinsic value
• Theory of change approach• Cost-Benefit analyst approach– Value for money – Efficiency– Savings
Social Return on Investment (SROI)
• General move from input/output focus• Now: outcome, impact and theory-of-
change approaches• ‘value for money’, savings, and added value
are important concepts• The project Measuring Social Value is
behind SROI UK, funded by OTS, running from 2008-2011
Social Return on Investment (SROI)
In relation to an organisational evaluation:• an adjusted cost-benefit-analysis• allows for social, environmental and financial
values to be appreciatedThe SROI project is envisioned to contribute to:• reducing inequality• preventing environmental degradation• improve well-being
SROI: Strengths
Strengths:• ideally engages stakeholders that come
from very different backgrounds• clarifies the organisation’s theory of change• encourages better understanding of
concepts such as drop-off, deadweight, and attribution
SROI: Weaknesses
Weaknesses:• based on imprecise ideas about pricing and
savings• does not recognise the different dimensions
of ‘value’• leaves ample room for discretion and
manipulation
TSRCwww.tsrc.ac.uk
Existing papers• Paper 28: The growing workforce in the voluntary and
community sectors, Domenico Moro and Stephen McKay• Paper 27: Impact and evaluation of the third sector, Malin
Arvidson • Paper 26: Business or the Third Sector, Andrea Westall• Paper 25: Value and the Third Sector, Andrea Westall• Paper 14: Economic analysis and the third sector, Andrea
Westall
TSRCForthcoming papers• Stephen McKay and Domenico Moro, Recession and the ‘third sector’
Workforce consequences, TSRC Working Paper• Stephen McKay and Domenico Moro, Is job satisfaction really higher in
the voluntary sector? A longitudinal analysis. TSRC Working Paper• Stephen McKay, Domenico Moro, Arvidson, M. and F. Lyon; The
promises and problems of SROI, TSRC Working Paper• Stephen McKay, Domenico Moro, The economic value of volunteering,
TSRC Working Paper• Rebecca Edwards, Graham Smith and Milena Büchs (forthcoming)
Mainstreaming the Environment: The Third Sector and Environmental Performance Management, TSRC Working Paper
• Arvidson, M. and F. Lyon (forthcoming) Reporting social impact: practices, processes and power, TSRC Working Paper
top related