big assist programme - opm evaluation

OPM Evaluation of the Assist Investment in National Infrastructure Programme

Evaluation of the Assist Investment in National Infrastructure Programme

Final Report

Report to NCVO and Big Lottery Fund

July 2015


Client NCVO and Big Lottery Fund

Company OPM

Title Evaluation of the Assist Investment in National Infrastructure Programme

Subtitle Final Report

Dates Last revised 23 Mar. 2016

Status Version: Final draft

Classification Restricted Internal

Project Code 8933

Author(s) Karen Naya, Oliver Ritchie, Sophie Wilson

Quality Assurance by Dr. Heather Heathfield

Main point of contact Karen Naya

Telephone 020 7239 7813

Email [email protected]

If you would like a large text version of this

document, please contact us.

OPM

252B Gray’s Inn Road 0845 055 3900

London www.opm.co.uk

WC1X 8XG [email protected]


Contents

Summary .................................................................................................................... 1

The evaluation ........................................................................................................ 1

Outputs and experience: infrastructure organisations ........................................... 2

Outputs and experience: suppliers ......................................................................... 2

Peer to peer experience: face to face and online .................................................. 3

Impacts on IOs ........................................................................................................ 4

How well has BIG Assist met the outcomes for evaluation? .................................. 4

The future and recommendations .......................................................................... 6

Introduction ................................................................................................................ 7

The context for infrastructure ................................................................................. 7

What is BIG assist and how does the programme work? ...................................... 8

The evaluation of BIG Assist .................................................................................. 9

Findings .................................................................................................................... 12

How to navigate this section ................................................................................. 12

The Marketplace ...................................................................................................... 13

Customer outputs and experience ....................................................................... 13

Finding out about the programme ........................................................................ 13

Motivations for engaging with BIG Assist and key outputs .................................. 14

Use of the online platform to apply for vouchers .................................................. 17

Accessing a supplier ............................................................................................. 18

Receiving support ................................................................................................. 19

Making the most of vouchers ............................................................................... 21

The customer experience: conclusions ................................................................ 23

Suppliers: outputs, experience and impacts ....................................................... 25

Motivations for engaging with BIG Assist and uptake/outputs ............................. 25

Suppliers: Reflections on the programme design ................................................ 28

Impact for suppliers .............................................................................................. 30

The Supplier experience, outputs and impacts: conclusions ............................... 30

Peer to peer offers: Outputs, experience and impact ......................................... 32

Motivations for engaging and uptake/ outputs ..................................................... 33

The peer to peer experience: conclusions ........................................................... 36


Impacts on infrastructure organisations .............................................................. 38

Extra help and added impact ................................................................................ 39

Greater efficiency ................................................................................................. 45

Other and longer term changes ............................................................................ 47

Factors influencing the level of impact on infrastructure organisations: drivers and barriers 48

Conclusions: Impacts on infrastructure organisations ......................................... 52

Overall conclusions and recommendations ........................................................ 53

Summary .............................................................................................................. 53

Conclusions: Has BIG Assist met the outcomes for evaluation? ......................... 53

Recommendations ................................................................................................ 55

Appendices .............................................................................................................. 57

Appendix 1: Pathways to Outcomes Model ......................................................... 57

Appendix 2: Evaluation activity and programme milestones ............................... 58

Appendix 3: Sampling for customer and supplier interviews ............................... 59

Appendix 4: Summary of output data used in this evaluation .............................. 61

Collation of output data used in this report ........................................................... 61

Appendix 5: Interview Topic Guides ..................................................................... 64


Page 1 of 87

Summary

BIG Assist

BIG Assist is a £6million programme funded by the BIG Lottery Fund and delivered by the

National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO). The programme has piloted new ways

of offering a targeted support programme to help voluntary sector infrastructure organisations

(IOs) be more efficient, effective and sustainable. Support is offered across the following

areas:

- Strategy, planning and managing change.

- Financial sustainability.

- Innovation, new products and ways of working.

- Marketing and building strategic relationships.

- Supporting and developing people and organisational change

Infrastructure organisations access relevant support via an online marketplace of

approved suppliers, and pay for the support using vouchers supplied by the BIG Assist

programme.

A key element of the programme is also to promote peer to peer learning and the

exchange of ideas between IOs.

The evaluation

OPM conducted an independent evaluation of the BIG Assist programme between

December 2012 and April 2015. The evaluation focuses on the impact of the BIG Assist

Programme and the extent to which the following four programme outcomes have been met:

1. Infrastructure organisations perceive and can evidence that they provide higher

quality support to customer and frontline VCSE organisations.

2. National VCS and private sector support providers develop better and more

sustainable models of providing support services to infrastructure organisations.

3. IOs value and feel they benefit from the opportunities for peer to peer learning and

support.

4. BIG Assist develops and shares learning about how demand-led models of

national support services could work in a local and national context and in a more

market oriented way.

The evaluation drew upon qualitative interviews with IOs, suppliers and the BIG Assist

team, as well as routinely collected programme output data which are largely quantitative.


Page 2 of 87

Outputs and experience: infrastructure organisations

BIG Assist support to IOs has been extensive - the programme has issued 846 vouchers,

with a total value of £3,545,9501. Over 700 IOs have completed diagnostic review to access

voucher support and 576 IOs have been awarded vouchers2. The average voucher award

was £8,040.70.

The IOs that engaged in BA were motivated and wanted to make changes that would secure

their survival in a challenging world. Programme changes especially the increase in value of

the voucher awards encouraged more to engage.

Planning for a more sustainable future was their key focus. IOs wanted to develop new

and efficient ways of working. They looked to BIG assist to identify new sources of funding

and be more effective at generating income.

The Marketplace experience has worked well for IOs in terms of:

- The online platform to apply for vouchers – Many found the experience of

applying to BIG Assist a simple and positive experience. Review calls provided an

important opportunity for them to reflect on their needs as an organisation.

- Accessing a supplier - IOs were largely able to access a choice of supplier,

although it could sometimes be hard to differentiate between supplier offers. Some

IOs in rural areas and with specialist needs experienced issues with supplier

availability.

- Receiving support – IOs were very satisfied with the support they received. The vast

majority gave their supplier the highest rating available. They particularly appreciated

their expertise and understanding of IO issues and wider context.

- Making the most of vouchers – Larger vouchers also helped. IOs generally

reflected that larger vouchers had enabled them to conduct more comprehensive, far

reaching projects. Many benefitted from the opportunity to apply again for support

and vouchers. A few smaller customers pooled their vouchers, using flexibility within

the programme, to get more value from support.

- Advantages to a voucher system - It is less time consuming for customers to

administer and because vouchers were for specific, ring fenced work, funds for

support were secure and could not be diverted for other purposes.

Outputs and experience: suppliers

There are 223 approved suppliers in the Marketplace and they are a diverse group of

organisation type including companies (106), VCS organisations (69), sole traders (34) and

others (14).

1 Source of all output data: BIG Assist programme data. Reported 22nd May 2015

2 These figures include IOs resubmitting to the programme for further support.


Page 3 of 87

There is variation in the volume of projects they have undertaken. One supplier has

completed 37 projects, to a value of £196,000. 124 Suppliers, 53% have completed at least 1

completed project.

Suppliers were motivated to join BIG assist for a variety of reasons. It was an important

new source of funding their work; it helped them reach new clients who needed their support;

and many hoped that being an approved supplier to Big Assist would raise their profile

across the sector. Some also felt that approved supplier status was a ‘badge of recognition’

for their experience and quality of support.

The self-assessment and review call meant that customers had a good knowledge of

their support needs before work started. Some suppliers however still had to work with

customers to identify what could be realistically delivered for the voucher value.

Suppliers feel the Marketplace is an efficient model for delivering support. They

understand that sustainability is an issue for BIG Assist. Without ongoing funding the

Marketplace would soon disappear, although they hope that the new contacts they’ve made

may endure.

Peer to peer experience: face to face and online

Peer to peer opportunities have developed along with the programme. Awareness and

involvement have increased over time, as the numbers involved in BIG Assist have grown

and feedback and information has spread.

ConnectSpace, offering sponsored visits (and mentoring, now suspended) has seen

significant uptake. 229 visitors have participated in supported visits.

IOs are positive about the visit experience. They have made new contacts, gained

confidence and practical knowledge about the areas they need to develop and in some

cases, have found new collaborators for projects.

ShareSpace, offering online discussion forms around key topics, has seen very

considerable volumes of traffic. Some live discussions have had over 10,000 views. IOs

access the forum and are interested in the topics raised. We have little evidence about how

active participation is and how IOs are using ShareSpace to build their own capacity.

The BIG Assist Library has built up over 600 resources for IOs. We have little evidence

about how active participation is and how IOs are using the library to build their own capacity.

The library resources are viewed on average 26 times per month, with the following pages

being the most popular:

1. Six challenges for infrastructure organisations 2. Changing role not just for volunteer centres 3. Five ways to stay afloat without more revenue 4. The perils of ignoring infrastructure 5. Small charities big impact


Page 4 of 87

Impacts on IOs

Extra help and added impact. BIG Assist is a valued source of funded support in a time of

great need for IOs. Important change projects were unlikely to have happened without BIG

Assist funded resources and expertise from suppliers, or support would have been of lesser

quality and/ or delayed, limiting impact.

New sources of funding. IOs have won new sources of grant funding or contracts to deliver

work. This has sometimes been because BIG Assist has helped them identify new funding

sources to bid for and/ or because IOs can demonstrate they operate more effectively, which

has been important to funders.

Improved opportunities for consortia bidding. This is an emerging impact of the

programme. Using vouchers to set up consortia has allowed IOs to identify and work more

effectively with partners and they can now bid effectively as a group.

New ideas for generating income. This includes IOs developing new chargeable services

or products.

Increased ability or capacity to adapt to change. BIG Assist has been a catalyst for

necessary change in many organisations. BIG Assist projects have helped to secure staff

and Trustee engagement and buy-in for change. Having independent, expert support has

built staff confidence in the solutions put forward.

Clearer focus on impactful and/or sustainable activities. IOs feel it is likely that BIG

Assist support will make a long term difference to them. Some benefits won’t be felt for some

time however, and sustainability over the longer term is subject to many variables, including

the tough economic environment.

How well has BIG Assist met the outcomes for evaluation?

1. Many infrastructure organisations perceive that they can provide higher quality

support to customer and frontline VCSE organisations, or will be in able to in

time.

This programme has had extensive reach. Many IOs have gained new knowledge and

skills that are of direct relevance to supporting frontline organisations. By improving their

offer and range of support to the frontline, IOs hope to become more sustainable. In

addition, BIG Assist has helped IOs extend their networks and find collaborators for new

projects.

Some organisations made rapid changes to the way they work and provide services, or

saw immediate results from applying new skills. Others feel that the impact of some

changes and projects are likely to be manifested over the medium to longer term.

The wider context remains very challenging and may be limiting the capacity of

infrastructure organisations to maximise the full potential of their BIG Assist support.


Page 5 of 87

However without BIG Assist support, projects are unlikely to have happened in many

cases, despite being of high importance to the organisation.

2. We are unable conclude that National VCS and private sector suppliers have

developed better and more sustainable models of providing support services to

infrastructure organisations. However, we have found much positive evidence

that:

This model is effective. Suppliers have delivered high volumes of quality support

through the programme, which matches their own areas of expertise and IOs’ needs.

The Marketplace has worked well for those who use BIG Assist as a means to deliver

support both to existing clients and networks, and new clients. Suppliers have

successfully extended their reach through the programme.

IOs are exercising choice from a selection of quality suppliers but there is room for

suppliers to improve the ways they respond to customers, market their expertise and raise

their profiles in the Marketplace.

3. IOs do value and feel they benefit from opportunities for peer to peer learning

and support.

Peer to peer offers have grown with the programme. There are some very high levels

of interest and participation. Sponsored visits are of great benefit to visitors and hosts,

with positive feedback and emerging case studies suggesting immediate and medium

term impacts.

IOs are choosing to view ShareSpace live forum discussions in very large numbers.

The potential for knowledge exchange is considerable given the interest, although

there is limited evidence of how IOs are using their participation to support change in

their own organisations.

IOs value opportunities to exchange knowledge with others in similar positions to

themselves, who are perhaps working in different ways. Time constraints on IO staff

appear to be a limiting factor to more active participation.

4. Big Assist develops and shares learning about how demand-led models of

national support services could work in a local and national context and in a

more market oriented way, although there are opportunities to do more.

BIG Assist has established a range of channels for developing and sharing learning about

this pilot. Events, both face to face and online, are reaching a large audience.

Since its launch, BIG Assist has used feedback from stakeholders, self-reflection and

learning from evaluation to develop and refine the programme offer.

There are opportunities to engage a wider group of stakeholders, connecting with

infrastructure organisations that do not actively participate in BIG Assist offers. There is

also potential to share learning with funders and others who influence VSC policy.


Page 6 of 87

The future and recommendations

The BIG Assist 3 year contract has been extended for a further year in order to develop four

work areas:

1. A further £1 million investment in the infrastructure through the BIG Assist platform.

2. An extension of the evaluation.

3. A programme of outreach and consultation with funders and other stakeholders to

secure additional investment to support the longer term sustainability of the BIG

Assist platform.

4. A programme of engagement with leading infrastructure organisations to learn

from and share their vision for the future.

These work areas are strongly supported by the findings and conclusions of this

evaluation.

This evaluation makes the following recommendations for the programme:

1. Continue to offer demand led support for IOs through a marketplace model,

retaining the features of self-assessment and range of topic areas for support.

2. Revisit opportunities to strengthen the provision of support for follow-up and

implementation of projects, through approved suppliers and peer infrastructure

organisations.

3. Explore options for making the programme sustainable over the long term by

opening up the BIG Assist platform to partnership with other funders.

4. Work to engage infrastructure organisations in BIG Assist who have not yet

participated in order to (i) better understand obstacles to access and (ii) broaden

impact across the sector and demonstrate the potential reach, or limitations, of this

demand-led model.

5. Maintain the existing high levels of programme flexibility and responsiveness to

feedback from infrastructure organisations in order to sustain change and to

ensure that the programme stays closely aligned to the needs of the sector.

6. Track impact within individual infrastructure organisations over an extended

timescale in order to (i) provide evidence of longer term programme impact and (ii)

better understand the impact of wider contextual barriers and levers for change.


Page 7 of 87

Introduction

The context for infrastructure

Changes in the voluntary sector environment have meant that more infrastructure

organisations (IOs) than ever are seeking extra support and advice to help become more

efficient, effective and sustainable.

Austerity measures in the national budget have led to significant cuts across local

government.3 As a result, there has been a large reduction in the amount of money that

councils are able to make available to support infrastructure organisations through grant

funding. Competition for the remaining grants has become increasingly tough, and

infrastructure organisations are being forced to find new ways to fund themselves, either by

working with local government on a contract basis, by finding external funding sources, or by

raising money themselves.4

The combined effects of the economic downturn and reduced spending on welfare and public

services have also led to some front line charities experiencing increased demand for their

services, at a time when some charities are also struggling to maintain their funding streams.

In some cases, this has placed additional pressure on infrastructure organisations because

the charities that they work with are asking for increased support, or because their support

needs are changing.

As a result of these pressures, a number of infrastructure organisations have downsized or

been forced to close down entirely over the past few years.

As part of the BIG Assist programme, voluntary sector infrastructure organisations were

asked to mark themselves on a map in order to build a picture of the infrastructure sector.

898 infrastructure organisations were identified by August 2015. These organisations had an

income of around £811 million in 2013/14. This was a drop of around £113 million in cash

terms from 2010/11.5

3 Local Government Association. (April 2014). Under Pressure: How councils are planning for future cuts.

Available http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180/5854661/Under+pressure.pdf/0c864f60-8e34-442a-8ed7-9037b9c59b46 (accessed 17/04/2015)

4 Justin Davis-Smith. (2013). The Future of Infrastructure. Speech at 3rd July 2013 BIG Assist Conference.

Available http://blogs.ncvo.org.uk/2013/07/03/six-challenges-for-infrastructure-organisations/ (accessed 17/04/2015)

5 NCVO Almanac. Available http://data.ncvo.org.uk/data/voluntary-sector-infrastructure/

http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180/5854661/Under+pressure.pdf/0c864f60-8e34-442a-8ed7-9037b9c59b46

http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180/5854661/Under+pressure.pdf/0c864f60-8e34-442a-8ed7-9037b9c59b46

http://blogs.ncvo.org.uk/2013/07/03/six-challenges-for-infrastructure-organisations/

http://data.ncvo.org.uk/data/voluntary-sector-infrastructure/


Page 8 of 87

What is BIG assist and how does the programme work?

The £6 million programme BIG Assist, aims to provide support that meets sector needs in

these challenging times. Since 2012 NCVO has delivered the BIG Assist programme under

contract to the BIG Lottery Fund. BIG Assist is testing new ways of delivering support to

infrastructure organisations in the voluntary sector to adapt and change how they work to

meet the challenges of a much changed operating environment. The programme has been

piloting a ‘demand led’ model of support by awarding a voucher that the organisation uses to

select support of their choice through an on line market place of approved suppliers of

support.

The BIG Assist programme offers a wide range of support for infrastructure organisations in

addition to awarding vouchers, through a large peer to peer programme.

BIG Assist opportunities include:

Marketplace: where infrastructure organisations can browse and get in

touch with BIG Assist approved suppliers.

ShareSpace: an online discussion forum where infrastructure

organisations are encouraged to engage with each other by sharing thoughts,

ideas and other information.

ConnectSpace: opportunities to get involved in sponsored visits and BIG

Assist events (both face to face events around the country and online

participation).

The BIG Assist Library, giving access to handpicked resources that are

relevant to infrastructure. This includes opportunities to proactively edit and add

content.

The aim of BIG Assist is to help infrastructure organisations be more effective, sustainable

and better able to adapt to change’. As such BIG Assist offers organisational support in the

following topic areas:

Strategy, planning and managing change.

Financial Sustainability.

Innovation, new products and ways of working.

Marketing and building strategic relationships.

Supporting and developing people and organisational culture.

To apply for BIG Assist vouchers, IOs, or customers, organisations that access support

through BIG Assist go through a 3 step process: firstly, they answer a set of on-line pre-

qualifying questions to determine they are eligible for an award. Next, they must submit an

on-line self-assessment which is a more detailed set of questions about the organisation.

Finally, they have a review call with a BIG Assist customer consultant, who will have read

through the on line self- assessment and undertaken desk research about the organisation.


Page 9 of 87

The review call is used to identify areas of need and assess the organisations ability to

implement change. Support priorities and clear outcomes for the support are agreed. Review

calls take approximately 1 hour.

Once the focus of support and voucher value of support is agreed between the customer and

BIG Assist, customers go to the on line Marketplace to review suppliers and select a supplier

of their choice. Customers make contact with suppliers by email or telephone and once a

project is agreed, BIG assist is notified and work can commence. On completion of the

project, the supplier submits their invoice for payment and customers are asked to rate and

comment on the support provided by their supplier. Reviews are available online for other

customers to see.

Suppliers apply online. The supplier applications are assessed by independent assessors to

determine if they are approved as a BIG Assist supplier to deliver support though the

programme. Approval includes assessment of relevant experience, prior work and

references.

Infrastructure organisations can be both customers and suppliers through BIG Assist.

Support from the BIG Assist team is available to both customers and suppliers at each stage,

over the telephone, on-line and through guidance documents and information.

The evaluation of BIG Assist

Aims and objectives

OPM has been asked to conduct an independent evaluation of the Assist programme. The

evaluation will focus on the impact of Assist: the extent to which the following outcomes have

been met:

1. Infrastructure organisations perceive and can evidence that they provide higher

quality support to customer and frontline VCSE organisations because through

Assist, they:

Gain knowledge and skills to implement change and new ways of working.

Over the medium to longer term, have implemented changes to the way

they work and provide service.

Feel increased confidence that they will be more sustainable in the future.

2. National VCS and private sector support providers develop better and more

sustainable models of providing support services to infrastructure organisations

because they:

Supply support which matches their own areas of quality practice and IOs

needs.

Learn from, and can respond to, IOs exercising choice from a selection of

quality suppliers.


Page 10 of 87

Learn from and make changes to the support they provide in response to

IO feedback.

3. IOs value and feel they benefit from the opportunities for peer to peer learning and

support.

4. Assist develops and shares learning about how demand-led models of national

support services could work in a local and national context and in a more market

oriented way.

Evaluation activities and methods

The evaluation was conducted between December 2012 and April 2015. Appendix 2

shows how evaluation activities aligned with key milestones in the programme.

Evaluation employed a range of activities consisting of:

A ‘pathways to outcomes’ model: developed to understand the

programme and provide a guiding framework for the evaluation priorities and

questions.

In depth qualitative interviews with 50 customers which engaged with

the programme. These were grouped into 2 sets of informants. Each set was

interviewed initially after they have been involved in the programme for 6 months

to 1 year (first interview) and again when they exited the programme or support

has been delivered (follow up interview).

In depth qualitative interviews with 5 IOs who are eligible for the

programme but who have not engaged with it;

- In depth qualitative interviews with 47 approved suppliers. These were

grouped into in 2 sets of informants. The first group were interviewed at the start

of the programme and the second group as projects were being delivered,

towards the end of the programme

- Three group interviews with the BIG Assist team: developed to understand

the learning from voucher awards and peer to peer support opportunities

IOs were sampled to cover a range of support needs, regions, and focus for their own work.

Suppliers were sampled from all regions of England, and include sole traders, companies

and VCS suppliers. Details of the sampling framework and interviews conducted are

provided in Appendix 3

Interview data have been analysed thematically, i.e. all interview notes were reviewed and

categorized, to identify patterns and developing themes. This evaluation also draws upon

BIG Assist reports and output data:

- These data are sourced largely from the BIG Assist online administration

platform.


Page 11 of 87

- Data are submitted directly by customers and other infrastructure

organisations, or are created automatically by the on-line system.

- BIG Assist supplied additional quantitative data, which it routinely collects, to

OPM.

- Programme data have been selected and interpreted by OPM and verified by

BIG Assist.

We employed descriptive statistics to understand these data, describing the main features of

the data and providing summaries where appropriate, i.e. frequencies and some basic

measures of central tendency. A table collating the quantitiive programme data used in this

report is provided in Appendix 4.

Considerations around the evaluation

It is useful to note the following considerations:

Whilst the evaluation has focused around the impacts of BIG Assist, this is

a largely formative evaluation. BIG Assist started from scratch and we should

recognise that the experiences of customers and suppliers have changed, as the

programme developed.

Not all offers were fully in place from the start of the programme (notably

peer to peer support) and important changes have been implemented along the

journey, for example phasing from the pilot Beta online platform to full online

functionality, and increasing the maximum voucher value. We acknowledge the

effect on interviewee experiences and when interpreting the programme data.

Impacts of the programme are still emerging and it is not possible to fully

understand the extent of some changes within the scope of the current evaluation.

BIG Assist is being delivered in a very challenging environment for the

VCS. IOs are experiencing high demand on staff time and in many cases there

has been significant staff turnover. This has influenced the experience of the

programme and its impact, but has also meant that it has not always been

possible to conduct evaluation interviews with the target informant, or someone

who can discuss the ‘big picture’ of the BIG Assist context and journey for an IO.


Page 12 of 87

Findings

How to navigate this section

In this section we discuss the experiences and outputs of IOs and suppliers at various stages

in their journey with BIG Assist. We also present findings around the impacts of BIG assist on

IOs. This is a complex programme. To present findings and conclusions systematically, we

have structured them as follows:

We start with the Marketplace:

Customers: We first present the customer experience of the Marketplace

and voucher system, with key customer outputs and impact. This is prefaced with

an overview of these findings. We offer brief conclusions at the end of this

subsection.

Suppliers: We then present the supplier experience of the Marketplace

and key supplier outputs. This is prefaced with an overview of these findings. We

offer brief conclusions at the end of this subsection.

We move on to peer to peer offers: online and face to face:

Here we present the experience and outputs of the various peer to peer

offers. This is prefaced with an overview of these findings. We offer brief

conclusions at the end of this subsection.

We then present impacts for IOs:

Impacts on IOs, attributable to various offers of the BIG Assist

programme, are identified and discussed. This is prefaced with an overview of

these findings. We offer brief conclusions at the end of this subsection.


Page 13 of 87

The Marketplace

Customer outputs and experience

Overview of outputs and experience

IOs were motivated to engage with BIG Assist to make changes that

would secure their survival in a challenging world. Financial sustainability was

their key focus. IOs wanted to develop new and efficient ways of working. They

looked to BIG assist to identify new sources of funding and be more effective at

generating income.

BIG Assist support has been extensive: the programme has issued 846

vouchers, with a total value of £3,545,9506. The maximum number of vouchers

awarded to an IO is 5. The average is 1.91 per IO, with an average total value

per IO of £8,040.70.

The process of applying for vouchers in itself added value for some IOs,

because it gave them an opportunity to discuss and clearly identify their needs

through the diagnostic review.

Customers were able to access a choice of supplier and the range of

suppliers was good, for most customers.

Customers were generally very satisfied with the support they received.

72% gave their supplier the highest rating possible. Suppliers are

knowledgeable and experienced. They also demonstrated commitment to

helping IOs and offered good value.

They report that larger vouchers allowed more comprehensive work to

take place. Many had received larger vouchers and had also resubmitted to the

programme, for further voucher support. This was often a way of embedding the

impact of the initial project.

Finding out about the programme

BIG Assist was promoted widely through a series of face to face engagement events. Nearly

1,400 people attended events held between October 2012 and September 2014. 15 events

took place in Year 1 of the programme, 11 in Year 2 and 3 in Year 3. The BIG assist National

Summer Conference in 2013 was attended by 162 delegates.

6 Source for all output data: BIG Assist. Data reports extracted 22nd May 2015.


Page 14 of 87

The majority of IOs that we spoke to found out about BIG Assist through email alerts,

particularly through the NCVO and NAVCA mailing lists. Additional ways in which IOs found

out about the programme include networking events or colleague contacts.

Motivations for engaging with BIG Assist and key outputs

IOs were seeking support to secure their survival

A number of organisations applied to the BIG Assist programme because they recognised a

fundamental need for support which would help them to survive in a challenging world.

In this context, a number of infrastructure organisations have hailed the BIG Assist

programme as a source of much needed support for a struggling sector.

“There were no other sources of support around. Even realising that things were

not right you put everything down to the external environment – you are a product

of your environment, but it is you that can change it, react to it, take yourself out

of it. That is hard to do when you are so engrossed in that. […] BA were able to

do that in partnership with us. We know we had to do something, but were not

sure what. […] It has really helped.” IO, round 1, first interview

7557 IOs completed on line diagnostic the second stage of applying for voucher support.

Key outputs showing response to demand

We will describe IO motivations for applying in more detail below, but here it is important to

understand the scale and type of support BIG Assist has provided, in response to IOs:

Overall, BIG Assist has issued 846 vouchers to support infrastructure, with a value of

£3,545,950.

576 IOs received voucher awards8.

The table below shows the allocation of BIG Assist vouchers for support, by topic area and

sub topic.

7 This figure includes re-submissions and applications since withdrawn.

8 This figure includes re-submissions


Page 15 of 87

Topic area Sub-topic Number

issued

Total value

Financial sustainability Cost efficiency and

savings

1 £3,000

Financial management 8 £30,000

Income strategy and new

business models

153 £620,750

Managing your assets 6 £28,000

Innovation, new products and ways of

working

Developing new products,

services and ways of

working

130 £560,500

Innovating culture 2 £11,000

Marketing and strategic relationships Collaboration and

partnerships

27 £113,000

Marketing and

communications

131 £533,500

Strengthening and

creating effective

relationships

23 £91,000

Strategy, planning and managing

change

Business planning 103 £398,000

Leading change 17 £84,200

Organisational strategy 80 £330,500

Planning, assessing and

communicating impact

52 £217,500

Supporting and developing people

and organisational culture

Developing skills and

adapting to change

75 £363,000

New structures and ways

of working

34 £146,000

Organisational culture 4 £16,000

TOTAL 846 £3,545,950

We can see that the biggest single sub topic area for both number and value of voucher

awards was around income strategy and developing new business models, in the topic area

of Financial Sustainability, Over 150 vouchers were issued for this sub-topic with a total

value of £620,750. Marketing and strategic communications, and Developing new products,


Page 16 of 87

services and ways of working were the next greatest sub-categories in terms of number of

vouchers issued.

Planning for a more sustainable future

Seeking support to adapt to the tough economic landscape was a major driver for IOs to

apply to BIG Assist for support. Many organisations saw assistance from the BIG Assist

programme as a means of planning for a more sustainable financial future. Several

organisations were reaching the end of a grant cycle and applied to use the voucher to

secure a future beyond this funding:

“Where are we going to get money from? We looked around…and out of the

blue popped up the Big Assist Offer which we grabbed with both hands”. Round

2, first interview with IO

Infrastructure organisations commented that support for voluntary and community

infrastructure organisations has become increasingly intermittent, and mentioned that other

CVSs have disappeared. As a result, many IOs recognised the need to ‘come up with a

different approach’, and used the programme to help them to implement this.

“It is a great resource, any money you can get as an infrastructure organisation,

it’s always more difficult to get money as a second-tier organisation – so I think

it’s important to know about”. Round 2, first interview with IO

Developing more efficient ways of working

Many IOs hoped that BIG Assist support would help them to streamline their ways of

working, in order to use available resources more efficiently

Some wanted to use the vouchers to increase the scope and reach of their organisation, so

that they could provide more support, or reach a greater number of frontline organisations:

“This will benefit the community and voluntary organisations because if we are bigger

they are better”. Round 2, first interview with IO

Many IOs also talked about being motivated to apply to BIG Assist to become more

streamlined and accessible in order to serve their present members in an increasingly

efficient and timely manner. In several cases, this involved developing more comprehensive

online materials, or modifying the services they deliver to ensure they meet the needs of their

user groups. IOs also reflected that increasing their own efficiency would enable them to

minimise costs for services to front line organisations, or even allow them to deliver some

support at no charge.


Page 17 of 87

Use of the online platform to apply for vouchers

The application process could be a positive experience and provide space to focus on the future

BIG Assist required the creation of an entirely new online platform. Many customers found

the experience of applying to BIG Assist a simple and a positive experience, This was either

because they viewed it as being less burdensome than other applications that they had taken

part in, or because it was actively helpful, providing support to structure their thinking about

what they need to do as an organisation.

For a number of IOs, the application process was an important opportunity to take time to

focus clearly on their needs and future. Finding this time and making it a priority was

sometimes difficult to do in a busy organisation, driven by immediate demands.

Review calls add value for infrastructure organisations

We predominantly gathered feedback on customer review calls in the baseline round 1 and

baseline round 2 interviews. Customers were particularly positive about their review calls,

which took place as part of the diagnostic review process. Often customers felt the interview

helped them to prioritise issues and understand the needs of their organisation better, by

providing a space for constructive reflection. Many commented that the interview process

added value in itself, and indeed one applicant identified the interview and subsequent report

as the most valuable part of the BIG Assist programme:

“One of the best interviews I’ve ever had; informative and constructive”. Round 2,

first interview with IO

“The guidance was brilliant, they were professional, they asked lots of questions,

really took time to understand our organisation”. Round 2, first interview with IO

Many interviewees added that the interviewer had been able to provide them with helpful

suggestions and advice, informed by a thorough understanding of the needs of the sector.

Some interviewees described how the interviews could be further improved. This included

having more information in advance about what information would be needed during the

interviews so that they could prepare, and there being more clarity about whether the

interview would affect whether they got vouchers, or whether it was purely diagnostic of their

needs.

It should be noted that a minority of interviewees, particularly those in early rounds of

interviews, felt that the online application process was time-consuming and placed a

significant demand on the IO to complete. This theme lessened as the initial online pilot site,

was phased out and replaced from January 2013 onwards. Based on user feedback the BIG

Assist team modified and improved the on line diagnostic including amending the wording of

questions and providing guidance information such as Question and Answer guides, to help


Page 18 of 87

IOs through the process as smoothly as possible. This suggests that ongoing work to

improve the website and application process has been successful

To understand how the adoption of an online system might affect the impacts of BIG Assist,

and to identify potential areas for programme improvement, in the second round of interviews

with customers we asked participants about their self-assessed IT ability. Whilst this requires

the respondent to judge, it is perhaps helpful context about their general levels of capacity

and ‘comfort’ around using online systems. Responses to this question showed that there are

a number of individuals in the sector who find IT difficult in general. This may provide one

explanation for the issues reported by some organisations.

A consistent theme throughout the evaluation found that where people had difficulties using

the online platform, the BIG Assist team were able to support people effectively and remedy

difficulties quickly.

“I do have to say that my human contact and IT based contact are two very

different experiences”. Round 2, first interview with IO

The BIG Assist team are responsive and able to provide solutions

A strong theme was that interviewees provided positive feedback about the responsiveness

of the BIG Assist team. When issues had arisen (for a minority), phone or email contact had

minimised or negated the impact of any difficulties they had been experiencing. Such

comments were made in all rounds of interviews, especially the later rounds, possibly

indicating that contact from the team has been maintained throughout the customer’s BIG

Assist journey and did not tail off after the initial application process.

Accessing a supplier

Customers were able to exercise choice of supplier

Feedback on the availability of suppliers was generally positive. Most customers reported

that they were able to find a suitable supplier.

Approaches to identifying a supplier varied greatly between different infrastructure

organisations. While many customers browsed the information on the online marketplace to

identify a supplier, others looked for organisations they were familiar with, or even

encouraged their preferred supplier to sign up to the BIG Assist programme if they were not

already on the approved supplier list.

With over 220 suppliers available (across all topics for support, nationally) customers

frequently described how it could be difficult to differentiate between suppliers on the online

marketplace. It was felt this was because many suppliers had put up similar information

about themselves, or had ticked the same range of boxes as to what types of support that


Page 19 of 87

they could deliver. Ratings systems and online feedback were valued as a source of

additional information to help make a decision, and this information built up over the course

of the programme. Some customers nevertheless reported that more advanced sorting and

search functions would have been helpful to refine their selection.

Many customers initially approached a range of suppliers (those we interviewed typically

contacted approximately 3-5) before making a decision about which to select. These

approaches varied considerably in formality from sending out a quick email or ringing up

possible providers for a discussion, to producing ‘invitation to tender’ documents asking

suppliers to produce bids for the work. Customers told us they did not always receive

responses from all of their contacts to suppliers, which some felt had limited their options.

Not all customers used the on line market place to find suppliers. A few applied to the BIG

Assist programme already knowing which supplier they planned to use, perhaps because

they had worked with them before. In some cases, they encouraged a supplier to register on

the programme so that they could use them. The BIG Assist Marketplace was therefore used

by some as a vehicle for working with established contacts. Additionally, many customers

who were involved in more than one round of support chose to use the same suppliers again

a second time, rather than go back to the marketplace and make a new selection. Some said

that this was because they knew that they would be satisfied with the support that they

received, while others said it was because it meant that the supplier would already know their

background context, making the support delivery more efficient.

A few customers expressed a preference for working with VCS suppliers, feeling that where

possible ‘money’ should be kept within the sector. The marketplace enabled these customers

to choose VCS suppliers for their support.

However a few organisations with specific needs reported some difficulties. Additionally,

some customers in more rural locations felt that many of the suppliers seemed to be based in

cities. One customer based in a very remote area said that after discussions with suppliers,

some had declined working with them due to the distances involved, which they felt had

limited the options available to them.

Despite this minority experience, BIG Assist have an understanding gained from interactions

with customers and suppliers that suppliers are travelling and extending their range to deliver

projects. Evaluation interviews with suppliers also suggest this happens in some cases.

Receiving support

Customers were very satisfied with the support they received

Customers had the opportunity to rate the support that they had received from 1 to 5, as part

of a feedback process in the online systems. Levels of satisfaction with the supplier were

very high overall. 72% (487 / 676) of customers gave a 5 rating – the maximum possible - for

the support that they received as part of the programme. 162/ 676 customers awarded a

rating of 4, indicating good satisfaction.


Page 20 of 87

Interviewees and online reviews show that organisations giving high scores to suppliers often

highlighted the supplier’s excellent knowledge of the operating context for IOs and their

responsiveness to the specific issues they faced.

“Very experienced and knowledgeable consultant who quickly grasped our

operating context, culture and challenges. ” IO, online feedback

Several IOs reported that they are already working with the same supplier on another

project, or hope to do so if they can obtain more funding because of their high levels of

satisfaction with the support that they received.

“We couldn’t have afforded it [without BIG Assist funding] even though it was only

a small amount – we’re only a small organisation, and the work wouldn’t have got

done at all. […] This piece of work was invaluable.” Round 1, follow up interview

with IO

IOs as new clients for a consultancy model of support

In fact, some IOs have changed their views of using external consultancy support as a result

of their positive experiences of BIG Assist. A comment made by a few infrastructure

organisations was that prior to the BIG Assist programme, they had not seriously considered

the possibility of bringing consultancy support to help them. The programme had therefore

given them experience of a new way of working. Some of these organisations said that if

they could afford to do so they would consider engaging a consultant again in the future as a

result of their experiences.

One organisation told us about a bad experience that they had had with consultants in the

past, which had made them initially a little wary of the support model. However, the positive

support that they received through the BIG Assist programme made them more open to the

possibility of using a consultant again in the future.

Some respondents who awarded a lower score of 3/5 said that this was due to the need for

additional internal capacity of their own to take the support forward and achieve outcomes,

rather than because the support had not been high quality. For this small group, it is hard to

conclude if the supplier may have made unrealistic assumptions or demands around the

customer’s capacity, which might explain the lower score and would in effect, be associated

with to the quality of supplier support.

Only a tiny minority (5 ratings, less than 1%) awarded low scores of 2 or 1 to their supplier.

Where customers gave a low score, they commonly explained that this was due to how well

the supplier understood their local context, or how easy it was to communicate with the

supplier, for example how easy it was to organise dates for training.

“[They] had no knowledge of the local issues in [the local area]. Their advice was

of a standard nature and the research they intended to undertake was already

known to us.” IO, online feedback


Page 21 of 87

Commitment and value from suppliers

During interviews, some organisations also noted that their supplier went ‘above and beyond’

the amount of work they would normally do for that amount of money. This dedication was

greatly appreciated by the IOs. However a few also noted that due to the small size of each

voucher, they might not have been able to fulfil their aims if suppliers hadn’t worked over and

above in this way.

“We got more from the consultant than expected. The extra value they added

was going above and beyond the call of duty; they did more than we paid them

for. […] If [the consultant] had only done what they’d been paid to do I don’t think

we’d have got the kind of results we got.” Round 1, follow up interview with IO

Making the most of vouchers

For high numbers of interviewees, the use of a voucher-based system ran smoothly and had

not presented any particular issues.

Larger vouchers allowed more comprehensive work to take place

In May 2014, towards the end of the programme, the maximum voucher size available to

infrastructure organisations increased. In the final rounds of interviews we spoke to a number

of organisations which had been awarded larger vouchers (up to approximately £9k each, in

our sample) It was felt that these larger vouchers had allowed more comprehensive work to

take place, meaning that the level of input from suppliers has enabled customers to take

forward new ideas into practice, rather than just delivering information about them. There is

anecdotal evidence that this has done a good deal to increase the impact of the support, as

some organisations had previously struggled to find the resources to make full use of the

strategic guidance that they had received from their support.

Use of multiple vouchers

Customers were able to receive more than one voucher, either through one application and

award, or by re-applying to the programme for additional support. A voucher is awarded for

each area of support. It is common for customers to need support in a number of different

areas.

Customers received on average 2 voucher awards. 162 organisations reapplied for voucher

awards. The average award over the whole programme was £6,258. One organisation

received 5 voucher awards to the value of £18,000, this was the highest award.

Where two vouchers were awarded at one time, the same supplier was generally, although

not always, used for both vouchers.


Page 22 of 87

Resubmitting for additional support

Many organisations we spoke to in follow up interviews said they had applied to the

programme a second time and received additional support. Organisations had done this as a

way to further embed the impacts of the initial support. For example, organisations initially

applied for support developing a new strategy, and then later applied for a second voucher to

help implement this. Others applied for additional vouchers in order to meet support needs

that had been identified through the initial support.

Pooling vouchers with other organisations

The opportunity to pool vouchers with other organisations was a flexibility offered by the

programme. Pooling arrangements were intended to allow IOs to get added value from

combined support. Some customers were supported by the BIG Assist team to do this.

Others sorted this out themselves.

“Working with another organisation worked well- a lot of shared learning can

happen across that. A £2,500 grant doesn’t pay for much consultant time- 5 or 6

days. By working together and combining projects, it feels like we got better

value.” Round 1, second interview with IO

The programme has details of the situations where the team have supported the pooling of

vouchers but it has not been able to record all situations where organisations have

themselves shared vouchers. So we cannot quantify the uptake of this opportunity.

Interviewees described several reasons for pooling vouchers. Some did this because they

were trying to find ways to work more efficiently with one another or wished to set up a

consortia. Others did it because they realised that they had similar needs, and wanted to be

able to afford a bit more support. In such situations, one piece of feedback that we received

during round 1 interviews was that while BIG Assist processes did not seem to have been

explicitly designed to accommodate voucher pooling, the BIG Assist team were flexible about

customers’ pooling arrangements and were helpful in making them a possibility.

Vouchers can benefit IOs not directly involved in BIG Assist

Some organisations spent their voucher in a way that was beneficial to another organisation,

even if that other organisation had not also applied to the BIG Assist programme. In one

such example, two CVSs were considering merging, and one of them used support from the

BIG Assist programme to help consult stakeholder views on this.

Advantages to using a voucher system

Some IOs, especially smaller ones or those with less back office support, welcomed the fact

that they did not have to process payments to suppliers themselves, as this can use up


Page 23 of 87

valuable admin time. It also made budgeting easier for some because the money did not

have to pass through their systems at all.

Some interviewees thought that receiving the support as a voucher for a specific element of

their work meant it had a greater impact than if they had simply been given the money. One

reason for this is that the programme helped them to identify what their needs were, and then

provided them with funding that was ring fenced to address these. Some interviewees said

that if they had been given cash, it might have been harder to justify using the money to

support longer term investment in this way, rather than simply using it to help balance to

books in the short or medium term.

We also received feedback that the use of vouchers could lead to a better working

relationship between customers and suppliers because payment was assured through the

BIG Assist process. Just one customer who we spoke to in the first round of interviews had a

different experience: a delay in drawing down the voucher meant that their supplier was paid

late, and they were worried that this might have affected their relationship.

Challenges around the use of vouchers: timescales

A minority of infrastructure organisations suggested that deadlines for customers to choose

and engage suppliers were not long enough. This observation is supported by the fact that in

the round one follow up interviews, over half of interviewees reported having asked for an

extension to finish spending their voucher.

Suppliers also commented on the tight timescales, with vouchers expiring after 4 months,

explaining that the time left to complete the work after being approached and contracted was

sometimes insufficient to do a really good job.

However, one interviewee from an infrastructure organisation said that they had found the

deadlines extremely helpful in keeping her on task. She explained that without them, it would

have been harder to prioritise organising the support, and it would have taken her much

longer to engage a provider.

The BIG Assist team have reflected on this learning. They state their experience is that the

longer timescales given at the early stages of the programme led to a lack of momentum

around selecting suppliers and starting the work. These delays in starting were perceived by

the BIG assist team as a limiting factor on impact and the reduced timescales introduced

during the programme encouraged customers to get on with the work and take action.

The customer experience: conclusions

BIG Assist has delivered important support to help IOs survive in a very

challenging landscape.

Outputs are very significant: there are great numbers of IO applying for,

and receiving support. Whilst we are unable to make definitive conclusions about


Page 24 of 87

the reach of BIG Assist, due to uncertainties of mapping the VCS infrastructure

sector.

Feedback and programme data around the allocation of vouchers

suggests that BIG Assist projects are closely aligned to the needs of IOs.

Most IOs are highly satisfied with the support they have received.

Applying to BIG Assist has given IOs an opportunity to consider their future

and identify needs in a focused way, aided by review calls with the BIG Assist

team

They have exercised their choice of supplier.

Customers can manage the online process and come back to the

programme for more support.

The BIG Assist team have developed much insight into the needs of IOs.

We note that a process using cash based transactions could also identify

needs, determine the focus of support and set time limits for undertaking the

project in the same way. Apart from any efficiencies around reduced IO

administration through a voucher as opposed to managing a cash award, use of a

voucher process for support may be a ‘psychological’ benefit over a cash based

process.


Page 25 of 87

Suppliers: outputs, experience and impacts

Overview of outputs and experience

Suppliers were quick to engage with BIG Assist. There are 223 approved

suppliers in the Marketplace.

Suppliers are a diverse group, the majority are companies (106), followed by

VCS organisations (69), Sole traders (34) and others (14).

There is variation in the volume of projects they have undertaken. One supplier

has completed 37 projects, to a value of £196,000. The 124 Suppliers with at least

1 completed project have delivered an average of 5.7 projects each.

Suppliers were motivated to join BIG assist because it was a new source of

funding their work with infrastructure. They expected BIG Assist to be the vehicle

for delivering the bulk of infrastructure support and felt they needed to be on board.

They hoped that being an approved supplier would raise their profile across the

sector and introduce them to new clients. They wanted BIG Assist to help them to

reach clients who needed their support.

Suppliers think the voucher system is an efficient way of working although

would sometimes like more time to complete projects, or to deliver an extended

period of support to help embed change.

Finding out about the programme

Suppliers heard about BIG assist through their own networks of contacts, including news

updates from key VCS organisations and through promotional material produced by BIG

Assist. In some cases, infrastructure organisations told us that they had asked suppliers to

sign up to the programme so that they could get support from them.

Motivations for engaging with BIG Assist and uptake/outputs

A new source of funding their work with infrastructure

Many suppliers saw the BIG Assist programme as the means by which they could access

funding for infrastructure support work within the wider context of austerity. They were

motivated by being part of a programme that enables them to exchange support and share

expertise. Key outputs regarding suppliers are shown below:


Page 26 of 87

The Marketplace attracted a large number of suppliers

223 approved suppliers are currently in the Marketplace. Suppliers were quick to engage

with the programme. Around 200 applied to be approved suppliers in the first application

round when the programme opened.

Approved suppliers are a diverse group. A breakdown from programme data shows:

Companies: 106.

Other: 14.

Sole traders: 34.

Voluntary or community organisations 69.

The amount of support delivered by various suppliers differs greatly.

There is variation in the volume of projects completed by suppliers. An average of 3.15

projects have been undertaken per supplier (if all approved suppliers are included). However,

the 124 suppliers with completed projects9 have delivered an average of 5.7 projects each.

Some suppliers have undertaken a great deal of projects - the greatest number of completed

projects by any supplier was 37, with a total voucher value of £196,000.

This diversity makes variation in suppliers’ experiences of the programme inevitable.

However, themes did emerge from the interviews conducted throughout the programme.

These are reported below:

Big expectations of BIG Assist

When we spoke to suppliers in December 2012 – January 2013, some thought that most, or

all, infrastructure support might end up being delivered through the BIG Assist Programme. A

number therefore saw it as essential to register on the programme in order to ‘stay in the

game’. A very large number signed up at the first opportunity when the programme opened,

with over 200 applications received.

This view of BIG Assist as the main source of work for delivering infrastructure support was

not discussed to the same extent in the second round of interviews, conducted after

suppliers had started to deliver support from June 2014.

Uncertainty about the volume of new work

Although suppliers appreciated the scale of BIG Assist early on, they were not always sure

how much work they would end up delivering through it. Expectations were particularly

unclear to suppliers in early interviews. In the round two interviews we found that

9 The BIG assist online system shows projects as completed when supplier invoicing and other requirements

have been met, so this would not include suppliers with their first projects pending or underway


Page 27 of 87

experiences had been quite varied, with some organisations managing to deliver a good deal

more than anticipated and others a little less.

Opportunity to work with new contacts and/ or work in new ways

Suppliers saw BIG Assist as an opportunity to reach out to new clients. Suppliers hoped the

programme would expand their networks of contacts and clients and we heard from many

that they had achieved this aim.

In some cases, BIG Assist projects brought suppliers into contact with clients from slightly

different backgrounds from their usual client base. This was more of a theme for suppliers

who were companies, who despite demonstrating relevant experience, were in some cases

used to working predominantly with slightly larger organisations than BIG Assist customers.

Raising their profile

Across both sets of interviews, suppliers were attracted by the potential for the programme to

raise their profile. Several suppliers said they felt ‘proud’ to be on the scheme and felt they

would benefit from being associated with the BIG Lottery and the NCVO brands.

Suppliers felt that involvement in the programme would ensure their visibility to IOs in the

sector. For example, one stated reason for getting involved was:

‘So people who need me, can find me’ (Round 1 supplier interviews).

Some suppliers also thought that becoming an approved supplier would act as a mark or

standard of their quality and so would help them be accredited for the work they’d done

previously. Going forward, they hoped that Approved Supplier status would help them to win

work outside of BIG Assist.

Feedback from some suppliers was that they were not always clear on how they could

market themselves most effectively through the online marketplace, especially if they did not

come up on the first few search pages, or had become involved in the programme later.

Suppliers joining the programme later told us they felt marketing themselves was more

difficult because other suppliers already had a good deal of positive reviews from customers,

which made it harder for them to get their first piece of work through the programme.

Others said that they had not tried very hard to market themselves, either because they were

getting as much work through the programme as they wanted, or because they did not have

the time to do so due to other commitments.

The BIG Assist team have encouraged suppliers to improve their marketing and presence on

the online platform, and have issued information to support them to do this more effectively.


Page 28 of 87

Suppliers: Reflections on the programme design

Some suppliers also changed their practice by expanding their geographical working area, or

stated that they were available to work across a wider area. We do not have data on how

many of those who wished to do so may not have been selected because customers prefer a

local supplier.

Knowledge of customer’s support needs

A positive piece of feedback from suppliers was that because infrastructure organisations

went through a rigorous application process, customers often had a clear idea of what

support they wanted, making it easier to deliver what was needed. However not all suppliers

had this experience: some said that they often had to do some work initially to help

customers work out what could reasonably be achieved with the budget.

Timescales for delivery

Like customers, some suppliers reported challenges around programme timescales.

Suppliers articulated their issues as sometimes finding it quite demanding to finish work by

the deadline set for completion. This was particularly an issue where customers had taken a

long time deciding which supplier to use. However, in such situations solutions were often

found. In some cases suppliers report that it was possible to get an extension from the Big

Assist team, in others they report treating the deadlines slightly informally, for example by

conducting some unpaid follow up work after being paid on the official deadline.

Timing of payments

A number of smaller suppliers (especially sole traders) said that the voucher payment system

could cause them cash flow difficulties because the money is only released after the project

is complete.

Follow-up support to maximise impact

Like some customers, suppliers reported the need for follow up support after the work had

been delivered, in order to ensure maximum impact. One individual reported that in order to

fund an extended period of support, they charged slightly higher rates for the period of

‘official’ support, on the assumption that they would then provide additional input for no

further charge over subsequent months.

BIG Assist is an efficient way to deliver support

A few suppliers also commented on the efficiency of the BIG Assist model. One commented

that a marketplace is an effective way for them to spend money because it allows them to


Page 29 of 87

only pay for the exact support that is delivered: if they were to use in house employees to

deliver the support there might be additional overhead costs involved.

“From Assist’s point of view it’s a low risk model, they’re not employing me, if

people don’t choose to work with me there’s no consequence re cost, there’s no

management with regard to me on BIG Assists part, they only pay me for

something I deliver. […] It’s a new way of working, a leaner way […] so this

means the money stretches further and the frontline services can continue.”

Supplier interview, 2013

In addition, some suppliers conceptualised the support that they were providing as being part

of a cascade model: they would help to upskill infrastructure organisations, which in turn

could pass that learning on to the organisations that they support. One supplier described

this as ‘developing 10 birds with one stone’ (supplier, round 1 interview.)

Potential of an open marketplace

A minority of third sector organisations (VCS suppliers and BIG Assist customers) felt

strongly that where possible, money for infrastructure support should be kept ‘within the

sector’. Some suppliers with this view said that they hoped that customers would choose

them over commercial suppliers for this reason.

Some suppliers (and some customers) noted that certain VCS organisations could be quite

‘territorial’, only asking for or delivering services to organisations on their patch. A number of

suppliers said that they thought the online marketplace might help to encourage IOs to look

at a wider range of possible options to meet their support needs. There is evidence from BIG

Assist team learning that while geography remained an important consideration for many

customers, some did report engaging in suppliers who they wouldn’t have considered

otherwise as a result of the programme.

Sustainability of BIG Assist

Suppliers (and customers) reflected that the BIG Assist programme had created a somewhat

artificial market for support services because while infrastructure organisations have a good

deal of need for support, they do not typically have the resource to buy it in themselves. It

was therefore observed that the while a useful market had been created, if the financial

injection provided by the BIG Assist programme was to cease, then the market would quickly

collapse. This observation was not typically meant as a criticism: it was simply an

observation that positive influences of the programme on the market may not last long

beyond the end of the programme


Page 30 of 87

Impact for suppliers

New markets and new work for suppliers

Taking part in the Assist programme has had a number of positive impacts on suppliers,

including helping some to access new markets, and providing them with a source of income.

We spoke to suppliers at two different stages of the programme. In the first round of

interviews, they had provided little or no support as yet, while the second cohort of suppliers

that we spoke to had all delivered some.

As discussed previously, suppliers’ experiences of the programme were varied, with some

delivering much larger amounts of support than others. There was consequently a degree of

variation in the types of impact that suppliers experienced.

When we spoke to suppliers in the round 1 interview, a number said that they were hoping to

use the programme to become involved in new markets, either in terms of the type of work

that they were doing, the type of organisation they were supporting or the geographical

region in which they were working. During the second round of interviews, many suppliers

said that they had indeed managed to access new markets in this way.

“For me it has expanded my geography. When I started working on BA most of

my clients were in one area, and I have now had them all over the country.”

Round two, supplier interview

For some suppliers, the support in accessing new markets, or increasing their profile in

existing ones was considered a greater impact than any profits that they made as a result of

the work. Indeed, some suppliers told us that they delivered work through BIG Assist for very

little or no profit, as a way to expand their client base. There is some supporting evidence for

this from customers, who said that their supplier had delivered work ‘over and above’ the

value of the voucher.

The Supplier experience, outputs and impacts: conclusions

BIG Assist has successfully created a Marketplace of suppliers.

Suppliers recognise the scale and importance of BIG Assist to the sector.

They are using the opportunity to reach out to old and new clients,

although there is room for some to improve their visibility in the Marketplace.

Some suppliers have found BIG Assist to be a strong source of work,

delivering multiple projects through voucher support.

Suppliers identify the challenges IOs face around implementing support

over the longer term. They see a need to offer longer periods of support to IOs, or

additional capacity to maximise the impact of BIG Assist projects.


Page 31 of 87

There is limited evidence that suppliers have changed their ways of

working as a result of BIG Assist. We cannot assess the extent to which suppliers’

expressed willingness to work in different ways (for example in new geographical

areas or with new types of client) has translated into practice. There is some

evidence that a number of suppliers have varied their geographical range of

operation.

Despite the huge volumes of support work carried out through BIG Assist,

we cannot know the extent to which BIG Assist has become the main vehicle

through which IO support is delivered, as some suppliers anticipated. Projects

provided additional work that suppliers would not have otherwise undertaken.


Page 32 of 87

Peer to peer offers: Outputs, experience and

impact

A key element of the programme is around facilitating peer to peer learning and exchange

between IOs.

This section discusses the peer to peer support provided by BIG Assist, beyond the

Marketplace and voucher system.

It is important to note that much of this support was offered and promoted to infrastructure

organisations that had not received a voucher to engage a supplier, as well as those who

had received vouchers.

The evidence reported here draws upon programme data (output data around on-line and

other peer to peer activity) and a secondary analysis of the reports submitted by those

participating in Sponsored visits. We also report themes emerging from interviews with

voucher recipients.

Overview of findings: outputs, experience and impact

Peer to peer opportunities have developed along with the programme.

Awareness and involvement have increased over time, as the numbers

engaged in BIG Assist has grown and feedback and information has spread.

ConnectSpace, offering face to face and online events, sponsored visits

(and mentoring, now suspended) has seen significant uptake.

229 visits have taken place, by 129 organisations.

IOs are positive about their visit experience.

Impacts are emerging. IOs have made new contacts, gained confidence

and practical knowledge about the areas they need to develop. Some have

found new collaborators for projects. IOs feel positive impacts will emerge from

visits.

ShareSpace, offering online discussion forms around key topics, has

attracted considerable volumes of ‘traffic’. Some live discussions have had over

10,000 views.

There have been 29 events over the 3 years of the programme, the

largest with 162 delegates.


Page 33 of 87

Motivations for engaging and uptake/ outputs

ConnectSpace: Face to face and online events, sponsored visits and mentoring

The programme team has promoted opportunities for sponsored visits and, until spring 2014,

mentoring opportunities.

In all, programme metrics show that 229 visitors participated.

There has been significant uptake of sponsored visits as the programme has run, probably

due to word of mouth reporting through networks, feedback about visits online and efforts

from the BIG Assist team to promote sponsored visits. The BIG Assist team has

communicated about visits actively via a bi-monthly newsletter, social media and through

case studies demonstrating the benefits of visits, which may have also increased interest.

Sponsored visits have been welcomed by IOs and feedback is highly positive. They report

the main benefits of visits are:

Time out to focus

IOs valued ‘time out’ to exchange knowledge in a focused way. Some felt that time for fact-

finding and networking visits with a clear purpose can be easier to justify, in a context where

resource constraints can make it difficult to take time away from day to day delivery.

Value of connecting with others in a similar position

Many interviewees reported finding it particularly useful to speak to organisations which

worked in a similar context to them (e.g. do they have a membership model in a local area,

or provide a particular service nationally). This was more important for many interviewees

than visiting a geographically close organisation, or one in a similar stage of development.

For example, visitors were keen to have the chance to speak to others who had already

initiated a similar charging process for their services. They reported finding it incredibly

helpful in informing the design of their own processes. However it was commented on by

many that meeting organisations who were approaching things a bit differently to them was

one of the more useful aspects of the visits.

Value of seeing new ways of working

Visitors state that they had benefited by seeing new ways of working in practice. They

find it helpful to use alternative approaches being adopted by organisations in a similar

position to themselves.

“We came away with a very clear picture about elements we need to work on in

order to move to charging for development support, including determining what


Page 34 of 87

services to charge for, pricing, publicity and managing relationships with donors

and service users. We will share our learning with the rest of our staff team and

trustees. We will produce a menu of services and publicity about the new

approach. We will examine our systems (admin / finance) and update where

necessary to support this new approach.” IO, online feedback about a sponsored

visit to an organisation, focusing on developing a model for charging for support.

Value of developing networks

In addition, IOs report how visits have developed their networks of contacts. They have

identified potential for future collaborations on projects and some collaboration is emerging at

this stage.

“This has supported the group to establish a more coherent regional offer, share

practice and investigate how we can share resources and a more national offer in

the future. We have identified a number of areas for joint delivery [with the host

organisation] and the format for a business plan. Additionally we will be

facilitating more specific sessions to follow up this work.” IO, online feedback

Potential for more IOs to become engaged

Many in the round two follow up interviews said that lack of time had held them back from

making greater use of the ConnectSpace offer. Some planned to make greater use of it in

the future.

“One of the things that we haven’t tapped into is the site visits and the stuff on the

website. You can only use so much stuff at once. I think it is just time.” Round 2,

second interview with IO

The positive experience of visiting encouraged one host to engage further in BIG Assist, by

applying both for a voucher for support themselves, and as a potential supplier of support to

others.

ShareSpace: Online discussion forums

Programme data show the traffic on ShareSpace, the BIG Assist platform for online

discussion forums.

ShareSpace: number of topics and posts per forum

Forum Topics Posts

Innovation

One live discussion achieved over 11k views.

24 550

http://www.bigassist.org.uk/forum/forum/3/


Page 35 of 87

People and culture 20 41

Financial sustainability 16 137

Marketing and relationships

3 live discussions with over 7k to over 10k views each

22 504

Strategy and change

One live discussion with nearly 5k views

Live Q&A with nearly 8k views

26 237

General 47 96

We can see that certain forums, notably Innovation and Marketing and relationships have

over 500 posts, so have found an audience and there are active contributions being made.

However the greatest levels of engagement came from live on line discussions. Many of

these discussions have a very high number of views (with 2 over 10 thousand). Live

discussions with the greatest number of views reflect IO interest in developing innovative

ways of working and reaching new audiences/ markets, or working in more effective ways

with the market they have.

This is an extensive level of interest in live discussions. Audiences are clearly able to access

the content and topics selected for discussion are resonating with those involved, in their

thousands, in many cases.

However some caution must be taken interpreting the data, as we cannot know how many

views are by single individuals, or by people viewing in groups. Some individuals may be

logging in and out repeatedly to discussions, rather than joining in continuously.

Far fewer organisations actively post or contribute and it is therefore difficult to infer what

impact participation has at this stage. It may be worth exploring the impact of forums more, if

the programme is to continue offering this opportunity.

Of course, in the early rounds of evaluation interviews, the peer to peer offer and supporting

platforms were still in development. We explored interviewee knowledge and use of

ShareSpace in more detail in the round two follow up interviews.

While awareness of the online forums was high at that point, many interviewees said that

they had not yet made much use of them. This finding is difficult to reconcile with the high

viewing rates for online discussions. Our interviewees gave reasons for why they hadn’t yet

made use of the opportunity. They described how they were too busy or had not yet had a

chance to engage with Sharespace [the online forum]. Many interviewees in the round two

follow up interviews commented that receiving and implementing support from the BIG Assist

programme had increased their workloads, and that once the support was over and they had

a bit more free time they would be more likely to engage online. However, a couple of







Page 36 of 87

individuals were unsure how long they would still have access to these resources, either

because they were no longer actively receiving support from the programme, or because of

uncertainty over how long the programme would continue to exist.

BIG Assist Library: resources including articles and wikis

The BIG Assist Library contains over 600 articles and wikis, including case studies to share

experience and learning10 .This extensive Library and its resources were mentioned rarely in

interviews. When prompted, there was limited awareness of the offer amongst our

interviewees.

The BIG Assist team have worked to drive up ‘traffic’ and engagement in the Library by

promoting it widely and ensuring content is updated and responds to current issues for

infrastructure.

From online analytics, the library resources are viewed on average 26 times per month, with

the following pages being the most popular:

1. Six challenges for infrastructure organisations 2. Changing role not just for volunteer centres 3. Five ways to stay afloat without more revenue 4. The perils of ignoring infrastructure 5. Small charities big impact

Events for shared learning

BIG Assist has delivered a range of events as an opportunity for stakeholders to find out

more about BIG Assist and share learning about how it can support them. Events were held

between October 2012 and March 2015. 15 events took place in year 1, 11 in year 2 and 3 in

year 3. The BIG Assist National Summer Conference in 2013 had the greatest attendance

with 162 delegates.

IOs told us that they value events as an opportunity to network face to face. People also

came to hear about innovative practice and practical ideas for taking them forward. A few

reported it was easier, or felt more justifiable, for them to take time out for learning at a

designated event than for other forums for knowledge exchange.

The peer to peer experience: conclusions

Peer to peer offers are a way for very large numbers of IOs to access

support that is designed with their needs in mind.

IOs are eager to exchange knowledge with their peers, particularly those in

similar circumstances who are implementing new ways of working. Interest and

10 Data extracted from online platform on 22nd May 2015


Page 37 of 87

engagement in some offers, e.g. events, have been apparent from the start of the

programme.

Sponsored visits are very well received and are showing promising

impacts for IOs. Increased knowledge, confidence and partnerships are leading to

new opportunities for income generation and/ or improving services offered to the

frontline. There is evidence from post-visit reviews and interviews that we can

expect other changes to emerge as a result of active participation in visits.

ShareSpace, offering live discussions, is attracting huge volumes of traffic

for some outputs. This indicates that a great many IOs are able to access

materials and find the topics of interest. This level of views suggests enormous

potential for shared learning.

However, we cannot currently determine how active ShareSpace

participation is and how IOs are using ShareSpace to build their own capacity.

Despite huge viewing figures, conversations with voucher recipients (who

made limited use of on-line peer to peer resources) suggest that there is

further room for increased uptake of the on-line peer to peer offer.

At this point, it is difficult to conclude what the impacts of Share Space will

be.

At this point, there is little evidence for us to draw conclusions about the

BIG Assist Library, in terms of the use experience or possible impacts.

It can be difficult for IOs to make time for reflection and learning in such

times of constraint and demand, despite an awareness of the need to do so.

Funding time for knowledge exchange appears to be an enabling factor but having

a clear focus for how that time will be used, for example through a dedicated

event, with practical outcomes, may give IOs the ‘permission’ they need to step

back and take a wider view.


Page 38 of 87

Impacts on infrastructure organisations

Summary of findings around impact

BIG Assist has been a catalyst for necessary change in many

organisations. Change projects and the resulting impacts were unlikely to have

happened without BIG Assist funded resources and expertise from suppliers, or

support would have been of lesser quality, and/ or would have taken IOs longer

to get around to.

Impacts are emerging in critical areas for IOs.

The support received through BIG Assist has helped a number of IOs to

win new sources of grant funding or contracts to deliver work.

IOs are identifying new ideas for generating income. This includes the

development of chargeable services and/ or products.

Improved consortia bidding is an emerging impact of the programme.

Using vouchers to set up consortia has allowed IOs to identify and work more

effectively with partners and they can now bid effectively as a group.

IOs report that the BIG Assist project has helped to secure staff and

Trustee engagement and buy-in for change, due to the external nature of the

support.

Some IOs feel that the main impacts of the programme are of a longer

term nature and are likely to emerge in the future.

Enablers of change include:

Voucher value (although impact is seen with smaller voucher awards)

Relevant, tailored support

Role of external, independent support

Barriers to change include:

Organisational capacity and timing

Wider context

In this section, we describe the key impacts of BIG Assist on IOs.

We also use examples from specific organisations to illustrate these impacts.


Page 39 of 87

Extra help and added impact

A source of funded support in a time of great need

Many organisations said that they would not have been able to get support via other means,

so the impacts seen through the programme would have not taken place. They lacked

capacity internally and could not have found resources to bring in a consultant. Some said

that they would have tried to do similar work of their own accord, but this would not have

been done as quickly, efficiently, or to the same quality.

Very few organisations said that they would have managed to get the same quality of

support, or the same outcomes that they described in the absence of the BIG Assist

programme.

New sources of funding

Improved fundraising abilities

Organisations described how BIG Assist projects helped them to demonstrate the quality of

their work, and hence strengthen their ability to win bids.

Projects which improved core internal processes, such as financial management and staff

development, also helped customers to secure funding,

More awareness of funding options and new sources of funding

Case study: new sources of funding

One organisation has accessed multiple sources of new funding following support from the

BIG Assist programme. Their first vouchers award focused on income generation and

innovative ways of working encouraged them to apply for workplace development funding

from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. This has provided the IO with

steady funding for the next three years.

“The biggest impact has been the new funding stream. Without this I think we

would be having a very different conversation if we didn’t have this contract.

We would be a different second tier organisation by this point.”

This contract has had a significant impact on the organisation as a whole, allowing them to

develop expertise in education and training:

Growth in the number of staff members from 1 to 17.

New organisational structure including an operations manager.

Two new dedicated spaces in London and the North.

Accredited existing training.


Page 40 of 87

Developed 2 new training qualifications.

The original vouchers also encouraged the IO to look at a donation model for increasing

funding; they have since raised £60,000 in donations. The IO has since reapplied and

received more vouchers from the BIG Assist looking at sustainability in response to the IO

having to frontload costs to deliver the programme. These new vouchers have supported

the IO to manage their growth ‘mindfully’, without over extending beyond their means: “we

are not expanding or creating an operational cost we can’t sustain”.

The IO felt the BIG Assist programme had met their needs “100%”.

“It’s enabled us to develop and grow, and I think in this current climate that is

quite unusual.”

Improved consortia bidding

Some organisations also used the vouchers to support the organisation to set up consortia or

other, more informal, arrangements to help multiple smaller providers to work together to

deliver work. This has allowed the voluntary and community sector to compete more

effectively with private organisations and larger national providers. Individuals who we

interviewed were often positive that the new arrangements would help the organisations

involved to win funding. One organisation described how they had used the support to help

them to improve their processes of working with other organisations, which allowed them to

bid more effectively as a consortium. They said that a direct impact from this was that they

had been able to win much larger grants and contacts from local funders:

“It helped to secure £1m from the local authority over two years, and an

additional £42k a year from the CCG. Helped join up our work and bring us more

closely together. The council have always told us there would be one contract-

the BIG Assist helped us to get there. It has given us the database to do the work

together and do the monitoring and provide the evidence that funders need.”

Round 2 second interview with IO

Case study: Training for front line organisations

One London based IO used BIG Assist to develop training in partnership with a supplier

organisation. This was designed to support front line organisations to work with the health

and social care sector. The training sessions revolved around:

Procurement and commissioning skills.

Managing a voluntary consortium.

The training and events have helped to bring voluntary organisations together into

consortia, allowing them to bid for £700,000 new funding from the local CCG. In addition to


Page 41 of 87

entering the health care sector, and opening up new funding opportunities, local

organisations can transfer the skills they have learnt into other sectors.

“We ran these two training sessions which were particularly aimed at health but

if you have skills in procurement this can help you apply for any type of funding

it doesn’t have to be health. If you are used to putting together a consortia you

can apply for any future funding around consortia not just in health.”

It was felt that a range of national funders are moving towards a consortia approach,

looking to commission joint bids, therefore this training will ‘stand the voluntary

sector in good stead’ by increasing their wider skills and knowledge base.

New income generating ideas

In addition to winning funding to deliver services, BIG Assist has also helped organisations to

generate income from new activity, for example developing chargeable services and/ or

products

Some were supported in starting to provide consultancy work to help cross subsidise the

support that they provide to front line charities. This ranged from small additional consultancy

offers, to launching whole new business arms to an organisation.

Due to the reduced availability of grant funding, many infrastructure organisations across

the country have had to start charging for some of the services that they have traditionally

provided for free. Across all rounds of interviews, a common message was that this is not

something that staff in infrastructure organisations may have much experience of doing.

We spoke to a number of individuals from infrastructure organisations that that said that

they had identified the need to start charging for services, but did not know the best way

to go about doing this. For example, they were unsure how much to charge, which

services they should start charging for, or how to communicate these changes to the

organisations that they support. In such situations, support gained through BIG Assist has

often been essential because consultants were able to bring appropriate experience to

the table and help organisations to develop a clear business case that balanced revenue

generation for infrastructure organisations with the needs of front line organisations. For

example, a few organisations said that they had settled on a system where the prices that

they charged varied according to the size of the organisations that they support, so that

organisations with the means to do so were charged more to ensure that smaller

organisations could still get some help.

Some infrastructure organisations thought that work around diversifying or increasing

their income streams might mean that they are able to provide more free support to those

front line organisations that need it most, even if this meant having to charge for some

services from those front line organisations that could afford it.

This is one area in which peer to peer visits appear to have been particularly effective. As we

have already described. Where infrastructure organisations had the chance to speak to


Page 42 of 87

others who has initiated a similar charging process for their services, they reported finding it

incredibly helpful in informing the design of their own processes. Many interviewees reported

finding it particularly useful to speak to organisations which worked in a similar context to

them (e.g. do they have a membership model in a local area, or provide a particular service

nationally). This was more important for many interviewees than visiting a geographically

close organisation, or one in a similar stage of development (indeed it was commented by

many that meeting organisations who were approaching things a bit differently to them was

one of the more useful aspects of the visits). However, a few interviewees said that

geography could be a barrier: one organisation said that they had chosen not to take part in

a peer to peer visit because the suggested organisation for them to see was simply too far

away.

Winning new and larger contracts

Case study, winning new contracts

One volunteer centre, that received support focused on their governance and finance

needs, provides a good example of how the positive impacts of the BIG Assist programme

can be complicated by contextual factors.

They used their BIG Assist supplier to help them restructure their organisation to make

decision making processes more transparent, and also to help make their management

structures more efficient in making quick decisions when needed.

“I think it’s really given us the capacity to keep up with the times- deal with

bigger issues around funding, strategy development, government, giving us

confidence to make decisions quickly. Knowing we don’t need to take months

to make a decision- can be done outside of trustee meetings.”

The support they received also helped them to apply for grants in addition to their core

funding from the local authority more successfully. Following the support they won a piece

of funding that they had previously failed to get:

“An immediate impact was securing funding for three years- we hadn’t been

able to secure that before because our applications needed better governance

and finance arrangements.”

“Our core funding comes from the Local authority: everything else is project

work. Because of the BIG Assist intervention it has enabled us and empowered

us to look for bigger funds and bigger opportunities- we have only just got

there- haven’t secured enough yet- maybe by next year we would have got

enough to survive without the council.”

Unfortunately this organisation lost its core funding with the local authority to another

provider. They realised that even with the extra funding that they had been able to win,

they would not be able to remain financially viable, and would have to close down.

es


Page 43 of 87

Increased ability and/ or capacity to adapt to change

Value of an expert perspective

Many IO’s commented that BIG Assist provided access to valuable expertise to instigate or

catalyse change.

“BIG Assist has made definite changes and it gave us a boost, because it has

given us an injection of expertise into our team that we would have no way been

able to afford as a small organisation.” Round 2, first interview with IO

Many felt that without BIG Assist, such expertise would otherwise have been out of their

reach, due to unaffordability or a lack of capacity to develop firm plans. One organisation had

been trying to instigate changes for the last 18 months but it was only through the BIG Assist

intervention that a stronger business plan was developed and implemented. However this is

not the case for all organisations that we spoke to. A minority commented that they would

probably have found a way to get the support in any case, for example by using their own

funds to pay for it, as the need for change was so great.

Extra capacity to drive change

Many infrastructure organisations said that they had been aware of a need for some time, but

simply did not have the capacity to take it forward. In these cases, the value of the support

was mainly in providing extra capacity to actually deliver the necessary changes. In some

cases, the external support helped provide a reason for staff in an infrastructure organisation

to prioritise working on the change project over other activities.

Case study: providing capacity (in this case, to develop new products)

This customer has used BIG Assist vouchers to develop a new product, something they

did not have the capacity to do in-house.

“It’s been very important because it’s helped us to remain commercially viable.

It was developing a whole part of our strategy which we saw as a major plank

in income generation for the future. So it was helping us to develop those

products that we had already established in our financial strategy but we didn’t

have quite the capacity to develop.”

It was felt that the organisation would have developed the product without the BIG Assist

programme, but it would have taken longer and it would have had associated financial

implications. In particular, the specialist expertise of the consultant was valued in

developing what they needed: “It was responsive and they were very professional.”

The new product has had a large impact upon the organisation as a whole, leading the IO

to change all of their marketing and communications in line with a greater focus on quality.

“We knew what we wanted but just didn’t have the money, so the support was

very helpful.”


Page 44 of 87

Staff/ Trustee engagement and buy-in for change

In some cases the independence of the support received was essential in helping to

maximise the impact of the support. A common piece of feedback from organisations that

were making more radical changes such as extensive restructures was that external

support can help secure staff buy in for change across the organisation.

“The single biggest impact was that it got the team on board with the changes we

had to make […] Because we have been involved in the process of development,

the team have ownership of what is needed- in the long run that has greater

value than the product itself.” Round 1, second interview with IO

One interviewee expanded on this saying that staff buy in was further enhanced by the fact

that the support was essentially free. Given how difficult their circumstances were, they

thought it unlikely that staff would have been so open to an external consultant if that

consultant was seen as costing the organisation much needed money.

“Without BA - we would have had to spend some of our reserves. In the end I

would have had to find the money to do the work- would have had to be

structured differently. I’m not sure we would have got the level of buy in and

support across the team” Round 1, second interview with IO

The external nature of the support also provided the leadership in some infrastructure

organisations with the confidence to go through with ideas that they had previously been

unsure about. Some interviewees explained that they already had a good idea about what

needed to be done, but needed the external validation in order to be sure that they should go

ahead.

“In the landscape we’re in now it’s very hard to make decisions with 100%

accuracy, but we feel that the decisions we’re making now have got some

grounding with the professional advice and the way we’ve approached it. We’ve

made decisions with more confidence. Without the BIG Assist we would have

perhaps taken longer to make those decisions, been less confident in them, been

less clear in the route” Round 1, second interview with IO

A clearer focus on more impactful and/ or sustainable activities

IOs said that BIG Assist support had given them the chance to consider, at a fundamental

level, what they were trying to achieve as an organisation and how they could best secure

that. A few organisations said that as a result they had decided to change the services that

they were trying to deliver, for example by focusing more on a specific set of clients or

issues.

“We wanted the project to really stretch our perspective and get past what we

thought might be our 'blind spots' on our membership offer and also to really drill


Page 45 of 87

down into what we suspected were the motivations for people to join.” IO, online

feedback

These impacts were not always what might be expected. One organisation said that the

support that they received had helped them to realise that trying to compete for decreasing

amounts of funding with the other infrastructure organisations in the area was not helpful for

the front line organisations that they existed to serve. They decided to pull out of that area of

work entirely, and focus their energies on being a rural community council instead, where

they perceived that they could have a bigger impact.

Case study: Focusing and rationalising the offer

The BIG Assist vouchers have supported one IO to rationalise their operations and provide

greater consistency in their services. This was described as having a ‘more commercial

outlook’.

“It’s enabled us to do fewer things better, in a more consistent and straight

forward manner.”

The IO used to offer individual post boxes for voluntary sector organisations, now they

provide a package of support combining post boxes with additional services including hot-

desking facilities. The BA supplier helped by providing the organisation with the confidence

to make these changes, and help to make the Board feel more comfortable taking strategic

decisions:

“What they do is give you the confidence of what you already know.”

Greater efficiency

Streamlining processes

Another major impact of the BIG Assist support was that it helped infrastructure

organisations to update the service that they have been providing, in order to support front

line organisations more efficiently and effectively.

BIG Assist has helped some IOs to identify ways of increasing the efficiency of their own

processes. This has enabled IOs to direct more resources to supporting front line

organisations.

“We will be able to reply and respond to help groups more quickly than ever

before in a much more targeted and efficient way”. IO round 2, first interview

Depending on the exact circumstances of the organisation involved, the ways in which this

has taken place have varied considerably. One organisation that operates on a membership


Page 46 of 87

model was given support to improve their electronic systems for managing communications

with their members. In addition to saving them time (the interviewee estimated that they were

saving the equivalent of two full time posts in reduced admin time, freeing up staff to work on

other projects), this also meant that they could give an improved service to their members by

using the system to tailor the communications given to each organisation, rather than

sending a generic mail out to them all.

“In the past people got big docs in the post. Now they can choose which e-

bulletins they want- they can sign on and off as they see fit.” Round 2, second

interview with IO

Finding ways to continue delivering services

For many of the organisations that we interviewed, the main reason that they saw a need to

change was not to improve the overall quality of the service that they were delivering, but to

find ways to continue to deliver a service at all in the context of funding cuts and a changing

policy landscape. A good outcome might simply be an organisation managing to still provide

some service rather than no service, even if that service is no higher in quality than the

organisation had been able to deliver in the past.

For example, one infrastructure organisation that provides support on a national basis was

unable to balance its books and faced closure. They used support from the BIG Assist to

help them move to a ‘virtual office’ where staff works from home or from the offices of the

charities that they are supporting, in order to save money on rent. While a large reduction in

the size of the organisation was still necessary, this process allowed enough money to be

saved to keep the organisation viable in a smaller form. This change had a number of

positive knock on impacts. For example, being able to go into front line organisations’ offices

and support them from there reportedly improved the level of engagement that they had with

those organisations and meant that they could provide a better service.

Case study: Communicating in new ways

One IO in the South of England used the BIG Assist voucher for an independent

evaluation of their services. One of the points made by the evaluator focused on

developing representation and information sharing in an interactive way. In response, the

IO now uploads all the meetings they attend or hold onto their website. This provides the

option for members to comment on events and feed in their perspective online, information

that the organisation’s representatives can use in the meetings they attend.

“Off the back of that we have helped to better inform the new Children and

Young People’s Plan as a direct result of some of that work.”

The costs of the project were not fully covered by the BIG Assist vouchers, so the IO had

to top up the costs themselves.


Page 47 of 87

Other and longer term changes

A number of organisations thought that it would take a while to be fully sure what the impacts

of BIG Assist involvement have been.

[What do you think the biggest impact of your involvement in the programme will

be?] “I think I can answer that in a year’s time. I have big hopes that we will be

able to develop a range of things that will add value to the operation of managers

in local hubs” Round two, second interview with IO

During the round two follow up interviews with infrastructure organisations in 2015, we asked

a sample of 22 infrastructure organisations to answer four closed questions about the level of

impact that the programme has had on them. Theses quantitative data were produced at the

suggestion of Big Lottery Fund.

It should be noted that this sample of 22 customers is only a very small snapshot of

organisations that took part in the programme, however, findings very positive about the

impact and importance of BIG Assist support.

As well as being able to describe specific impacts that the support had already had on their

organisation, most interviewees from infrastructure organisations felt confident that additional

benefits were likely to emerge in the longer term.

The chart reflects this belief. Over half of respondents felt their support was very likely to

make a long term difference to the organisation.

Not likely, 1 Neither likely nor unlikely, 2

Likely, 6Very likely, 13

How likely is the support that you received to make a long term difference to your organisation? (1= not at all likely, 5 = very likely)

(n = 22)


Page 48 of 87

This small group were also positive about their experience of BIG Assist overall:

Most were very positive about the overall value of their BIG assist experience. 18 out of 22

respondents felt their experience had been very worthwhile or mostly worthwhile.

Factors influencing the level of impact on infrastructure

organisations: drivers and barriers

Relevance and tailored nature of BIG Assist support

A few interviewees drew comparisons between the BIG Assist programme and other

infrastructure development programmes, especially the BIG Lottery ‘Transforming Local

Infrastructure’ fund. A common piece of feedback was that one of the strengths of BIG Assist

was that it was less directive than other programmes about how the money should be spent.

Organisations were able to more flexibly spend it on the issues that were of importance to

them. Some interviewees thought that this feature of the programme had helped to maximise

its ability to lead to effective change.

Many respondents reported that it had been very easy to make use of the support they had

received. It should be noted that the round of interviewees which were asked this question

were able to benefit from the increased voucher size: Their responses are shown in the chart

below:

Slightly worthwhile, 1 Somewhat

worthwhile, 2

Mostly worthwhile, 9

Very worthwhile, 9

No comment, 1

Overall, how worthwhile has your experience been of the BA programme? (1=not worthwhile, 5=very worthwhile) (n = 22)


Page 49 of 87

We asked the same sample how important BIG Assist support has been to their organisation.

The results in the chart below show that the great majority saw their BIG assist projects as

essential.

One explained that it had been essential because they already knew what they needed to do

before taking part in the programme, but had not been able to do it due to a lack of funds.

The programme allowed to them to make the changes that they needed as an organisation.

Not at all easily

Not easily

Neither easily nor uneasily

Easily

Very easily

How easily will you be able to make use of/implement the support you have received? (1 = not at all easily, 5 = very easily) (n = 22)

Somewhat irrelevant, 1

Neither relevant nor irrelevant, 3

Relevant, 3

Totally essential to the organisation,

15

How important has the support received through BA been to your organisation? (1= totally irrelevant, 5=totally essential to the

organisation) (n = 22)


Page 50 of 87

The value of vouchers

The amount of voucher value available to organisations has changed over the course of the

programme. In the period corresponding to our round one customer baseline and follow up

interviews it was up to £7.5K. However, in May 2014 the maximum voucher size rose to £15k

and a number included in our round two sample received higher awards.

Customers are now reporting that they can achieve impact through relatively small projects.

However, early in the evaluation respondents suggested increasing the value of vouchers as

an improvement to the programme, and this learning was fed back to BIG Assist.

Infrastructure organisations did subsequently report that the increase in voucher value had

helped to increase the level of impact. While it is perhaps unsurprising that they would

welcome a larger voucher, they did provide some compelling arguments as to why

distributing the money in slightly larger chunks might increase the overall impact of support:

one big advantage of the larger vouchers was that they did not necessarily require any more

admin time to apply for vouchers, select a supplier and take projects forward, but they led to

much more support.

It was also noted that the level of support that could be provided for the cost of one of the

smaller vouchers was not always enough to come up with a plan of action, implement it and

ensure that it is properly embedded in organisational practice. Recipients of the larger

vouchers said that they had led to a greater impact because there was enough resource

available for suppliers to help with implementation as well as just identifying what needed to

happen. This last point was echoed up by a number of suppliers, who preferred to be able to

see the work through to completion.

“With the bigger grants (vouchers) there is more of a chance to build a

relationship and get under the bonnet. It is more rewarding for me and more

rewarding for them. Previously I have had a 2k voucher and there is very little you

can do with that.” Round 2, supplier interview

Organisational capacity and timing

Whilst we heard from customers who felt it would be easy to implement the support they

received, we were also told that after support had been delivered, it was often crucial to

undertake additional work to embed the consultant’s suggestions. One interviewee from an

infrastructure organisation said that the support they received had helped them to develop a

new business plan. While they were happy with this business plan they had not had a

chance to implement it yet because senior staff in the organisation had been too busy with

other matters.

“To achieve the intended outcomes will require further resources to build on the

connections made by [the supplier] and translate their initial contacts into deeper

and longer-term relationships.” IO, online feedback

In this case, capacity and timing of other priorities has meant that change had been deferred.


Page 51 of 87

Willingness to change

A number of suppliers said that they had noticed big differences in the willingness of

infrastructure organisations to make changes. They reported that where organisations were

already willing to make changes and improve, it could be much easier to help them to

achieve big impacts. However they reported that some organisations were not fully on board

with the idea of making changes and this could create barriers to making the changes

suppliers feel were necessary. We have already spoken of how BIG assist has helped many

organisations to achieve buy-in from senior staff, but in some cases a reluctance to change

can be an obstacle to impact.

Wider context: a barrier to impact

We have already seen the case study of the volunteer centre that used their BIG Assist

support to develop better governance and finance arrangements. This was successful in that

they subsequently secured 3yrs of funding that they had previously failed to get.

Despite this positive outcome, this organisation lost its core funding with the local authority

and realised that even with the extra new funding they would have to close down.

Even at this stage they reported that the BIG Assist programme had a positive impact on

them: the new management structures and ways of working that they had implemented

meant that they had more clarity about how much money that they had and how much they

needed, so that they could make the decision to close down in an informed way.

“While we have money for redundancy to close accounts properly- we can do it

properly. This way we have a few months have a big celebration and leave a

legacy.”

Limited organisational capacity: a barrier to impact

IOs often have significant constraints on their internal resources to engage with the project –

to apply and set it up in first place and then work with the Supplier to ensure delivery. For

example, projects can require IOs to supply a lot of evidence or data, or to set up

engagement and consultation. Staff are stretched and find this difficult.

One infrastructure organisation said that they simply hadn’t had the capacity to implement

the strategy that their supplier had given them.

“If we could have said, thanks for strategy, and then put in a bid to implement or

engage someone for a year to implement that strategy that would be fantastic.”

Round 2 second interview with IO

Feedback from a number of IOs is that vouchers could perhaps be used in different ways in

order to maximise change. They suggested allowing voucher support to be used over a


Page 52 of 87

longer term extends access to external help for delivery, They also suggested allowing IOs to

use vouchers to increase their own internal resources to ‘back-fill’ for staff working on BIG

Assist projects, or to dedicate more internal time to a change project

Conclusions: Impacts on infrastructure organisations

BIG Assist is making a difference for IOs. Support has been the right

project, at the right time.

Impacts are being seen in areas that IOs have prioritised as critical to their

survival: around improving financial sustainability.

Importantly, there is some evidence that IOs feel confident they can

implement their projects and see them through, despite the presence of some

obstacles to change, such as constrained resources and a very challenging wider

climate for infrastructure.

A need for follow-up resources to maximise the impacts of BIG Assist

projects, which has been suggested, may not be essential in every case.


Page 53 of 87

Overall conclusions and recommendations

Summary

BIG Assist has come at an opportune moment to generate impacts in the sector for

infrastructure

It is an important source of support at this critical time and IOs have engaged with the

programme in very large numbers.

BIG Assist offers support in areas that IOs need: helping them to identify and secure

additional or new funding, and by working in improved or new ways.

BIG Assist is helping IOs by giving them, firstly, a clear focus for change through helpful self-

assessment and ‘time out’ to exchange knowledge with others - including peers.

Secondly, BIG Assist is supplying the tools IOs need to make change happen. Projects are

relevant, focused and delivered by quality providers.

There is evidence to state that the vast majority of IOs would not have been able to achieve

what they had done without the BIG Assist programme. In some cases this was because

they would not otherwise have had the money to bring in a consultant to do the work, and

would not have had the capacity or skills to do the work internally. In other cases, it was

because they might not have prioritised this work if the programme had not existed to

support them.

Wider contextual factors do present a number of challenges for the infrastructure

organisations and the BIG Assist programme.

The staff at many organisations were under notable levels of pressure, trying to juggle large

amounts of work with insufficient budgets. In some cases this limited their ability to take the

time to make the most of what the BIG Assist programme had to offer.

Despite positive impacts from BIG Assist which support longer term sustainability and

viability of IOs, the wider economic climate and challenges around rising demand may still

leave the future uncertain for many. Even if this were not the case, much of the support

delivered through the programme can be expected to have an impact over a medium to long

term, beyond the scope of this phase of the evaluation. Additional evaluation work over the

coming years will be required to capture the full range of impacts of the programme and the

ways in which other factors have supported and blocked change.

Conclusions: Has BIG Assist met the outcomes for evaluation?

There is evidence for the following conclusions about the extent to which the outcomes for evaluation have been met:


Page 54 of 87

5. Many infrastructure organisations perceive that they can provide higher

quality support to customer and frontline VCSE organisations, or will be in

able to in time.

This programme has had extensive reach.

Many have gained new knowledge and skills that are of direct relevance to

supporting frontline organisations, in terms of helping to ensure the IO is more

sustainable and by improving their offer and range of support to the frontline.

Whilst the impact of some changes and projects may be manifested over

the medium to longer term, there are immediate benefits to the programme.

Some organisations made rapid changes to the way they work and provide

services, or saw immediate results from applying new skills.

Some have found supporting their BIG Assist projects, and making the

changes identified, more difficult. The wider context remains very challenging and

may be limiting the capacity of infrastructure organisations to maximise the full

potential of their BIG Assist support.

Projects funded by BIG Assist are unlikely to have happened otherwise for

some time, if at all, despite being of high importance to the organisation.

6. We cannot conclude that National VCS and private sector support providers

have developed better and more sustainable models of providing support

services to infrastructure organisations. However, there is much positive

evidence that:

Suppliers have delivered high quality support, which matches their own

areas of expertise and IOs needs.

The Marketplace has worked well for those who use BIG Assist as a

means to deliver support to existing clients and networks, and other suppliers

have successfully extended their reach.

There is limited evidence as yet that feedback from IOs has influenced the

practice of suppliers. The BIG Assist team have provided feedback and guidance

to encourage suppliers to improve the ways they market their expertise and raise

their profiles in the Marketplace.

IOs are exercising choice from a selection of quality suppliers but there is

room for suppliers to improve the ways they respond to customers, market their

expertise and raise their profiles in the Marketplace.

7. IOs do value and feel they benefit from some opportunities for peer to peer

learning and support

- Uptake of peer to peer offers has grown with the programme.


Page 55 of 87

- There are some very high levels of interest and participation. Sponsored visits

are of benefit to visitors and hosts, with positive feedback and emerging case

studies suggesting immediate and medium term impacts.

- Infrastructure organisations are choosing to access ShareSpace live forum

discussions in very large numbers, although the potential for impact here is

considerable, there is limited evidence available of practical impact at this

point.

- IOs value opportunities to exchange knowledge with others in similar positions

to themselves, who are perhaps working in different ways. Time constraints on

IO staff are a limiting factor to more active participation.

8. Assist develops and shares learning about how demand-led models of

national support services could work in a local and national context and in a

more market oriented way, although there are opportunities to do more.

BIG Assist has created a range of channels for developing and sharing

learning about this pilot programme. Peer to peer offers for shared learning are

available reaching an audience. Events – both face to face and online – have

reached large numbers.

Since launch, BIG Assist has used feedback from stakeholders, self-

reflection and learning from the evaluation to develop and refine the programme

offer.

There are opportunities to engage a wider group of stakeholders,

connecting with infrastructure organisations that do not actively participate in BIG

Assist offers. There is also potential to share more learning with funders and

others who influence VSC policy.

Recommendations

Recommendations from the evaluation acknowledge the BIG Assist 3 year contract being

extended for a further year in order to develop four work areas:

A further £1 million investment in the infrastructure through the BIG Assist

platform

An extension of the evaluation

A programme of outreach and consultation with funders and other

stakeholders to secure additional investment to support the longer term

sustainability of the BIG Assist platform

A programme of engagement with leading infrastructure organisations to

learn from and share their vision for the future

These work areas are strongly supported by this evaluation.


Page 56 of 87

This evaluation makes the following recommendations:

1 The programme should continue to offer demand led support for IOs through a

marketplace model, retaining the features of self-assessment and range of topic

areas for support

2 Revisit opportunities to strengthen the provision of support for follow-up and

implementation of projects, through approved suppliers and peer infrastructure

organisations

3 Explore options for making the programme sustainable over the long term by

opening up the BIG Assist platform to partnership with other funders.

4 Work to engage infrastructure organisations in BIG Assist who have not yet

participated

To better understand obstacles to access.

To broaden impact across the sector and demonstrate the potential reach, or

limitations, of this demand-led model.

5 Maintain the existing high levels of programme flexibility and responsiveness to

feedback from infrastructure organisations

To sustain change and to ensure that the programme stays closely aligned to the

needs of the sector.

6 Track impact within individual infrastructure organisations over an extended

timescale.

To provide evidence of longer term programme impact.

To better understand the impact of wider contextual barriers and levers for

change.


Page 57 of 87

Appendices

Appendix 1: Pathways to Outcomes Model


Restricted Internal Version 3.9 - Draft 27/04/2015 58

Appendix 2: Evaluation activity and programme milestones

Figure: evaluation activity aligned with key programme milestones



Appendix 3: Sampling for customer and supplier interviews

Customers and suppliers engaged in the programme

OPM utilised the BIG Assist information system to sample customers and suppliers. In each

round of interviews, members of the OPM team contacted those selected to schedule

interviews. The OPM team actively attempted to sample a range of individuals to speak with in

each round, with frameworks agreed with the BIG Assist team.

Sample framework for customers Sample framework for suppliers

Region: Aim for at least 3 IOs from each of

the 9 regions, to ensure spread

East Midlands/ East of England/ Greater

London/ North East/ North West/ South East/

South West/ West Midlands

Region: Aim for a mix of regions

East Midlands/ East of England/ Greater

London/ North East/ North West/ South East/

South West/ West Midlands

Type of infrastructure organisation: Aim

for a spread across categories

National IO/ Regional/ Local and Specialist/

generic.

Type of organisation: Aim for spread

across categories

Company/ VCS/ Sole Trader/ IO/ Other

Nature of the support:

* It should be noted that the topics and

subtopics of support were re-categorised by

the BIG Assist team after the initial ‘pilot’

recruitment group.

Nature of the support:

During each round of interviews, it was not always possible to reach everyone on a sample. In

these instances, the OPM team selected another participant with similar selection criteria as far

as possible. Likewise, in follow-up interviews with infrastructure organisations OPM were not

always able to speak with the same individual interviewed in the first round. Here, every attempt

was made to talk to another member of the organisation with experience of the BIG Assist

programme, but there was some attrition between the first and follow up interviews.

Non engaged infrastructure organisations

Interviews were also conducted with five organisations that enquired about BIG Assist but had

decided not to apply at the time of the interviews.

Initially we aimed to speak to five non-applicants who were potential customers. This sample

was not practical to achieve for a number of reasons. Firstly, many of the organisations were



unresponsive to contact. Secondly, many organisations that we did manage to speak to were

unsure whether they had wanted to become customers, suppliers, or indeed both. Thirdly, a

number of organisations on the sample list, at the time of us arranging interviews had

completed an application. After sampling 28 organisations, we conducted 5 interviews.

The achieved sample consisted of:

Two potential customer infrastructure organisations;

Two potential supplier organisations, and;

One organisation which was potentially interested in being both a supplier and a

customer.

Table summarising the interviews conducted throughout the evaluation.

Customers Suppliers

Round 1 IOs Round 2 IOs Non-engaged IOs

Round 1 Suppliers Round 2 Suppliers

When Total When Total When Total When Total When Total

1st interview May-June 2013

15 May-June 2014

35 30 IN

Dec 2012

5 Dec 2012 25 June 2014 - Feb 2015

22

Follow up interview

Jan- Feb

2014

15 10 IN

Jan - March 2015

24



Appendix 4: Summary of output data used in this evaluation

Table: Collated output data used in this report

Collation of output data used in this report

Over 900 organisations supported in total11

Face to face engagement

Events with 1,392 total attendees (held between October 2012 and

September 2014).

15 events took place in Year 1, 11 in Year 2, and 3 in Year 3.

BIG Assist National Summer Conference 2013 had the greatest attendance

with 162 delegates.

Voucher awards

755 IOs completed a self-assessment (including resubmissions and

applications that have since been withdrawn.

846 vouchers have been awarded, with a total value of £3,545,950.

576 infrastructure organisations have received vouchers (including

resubmissions).

The median number of vouchers received by IOs was 1.9 with a median

value of £8040.70. 1 customer received 5 vouchers. The maximum voucher value

to any IO was £18000.

179 IOs received a zero voucher award, were ineligible, had other support

offered, withdrew their application or the organisation closed).

32 vouchers were allocated but have expired. Reasons are unknown but

may include lack of capacity in the IO to take the project forward, they have been

unable to spend the voucher within the programme timescales.

223 Approved Suppliers in Marketplace

Company: 106

Other: 14

Sole trader: 34

Voluntary or community organisation: 69

11 http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/big-lottery-fund-awards-ncvo-18m-extend-big-assist-

programme/infrastructure/article/1333063

http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/big-lottery-fund-awards-ncvo-18m-extend-big-assist-programme/infrastructure/article/1333063

http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/big-lottery-fund-awards-ncvo-18m-extend-big-assist-programme/infrastructure/article/1333063



245 applied and were rejected.

There are currently 99 suppliers without any completed projects reported

on the BIG Assist system. Some may be involved in active projects that are yet to

complete.

Across all approved suppliers, an average of 3.15 projects were delivered

(completed or marked as completed).

The greatest number of projects (completed and marked completed) to a single supplier is

37 projects, with a value of £196,000

Voucher topics/ types of support

by voucher topic & subtopic

Topic area Sub-topic

Number

issued

Total

value

Financial sustainability Cost efficiency and savings 1 3000

Financial sustainability Financial management 8 30000

Financial sustainability

Income strategy and new

business models 153 620750

Financial sustainability Managing your assets 6 28000

Innovation, new products and ways

of working

Developing new products,

services and ways of working 130 560500

Innovation, new products and ways

of working Innovating culture 2 11000

Marketing and strategic relationships Collaboration and partnerships 27 113000

Marketing and strategic relationships

Marketing and

communications 131 533500

Marketing and strategic relationships

Strengthening and creating

effective relationships 23 91000


change Business planning 103 398000


change Leading change 17 84200


change Organisational strategy 80 330500




change

Planning, assessing and

communicating impact 52 217500



Developing skills and adapting

to change 75 363000



New structures and ways of

working 34 146000


and organisational culture Organisational culture 4 16000

Of 676 reviews of supplier support, 72% of customers gave the support 5 out of 5

(maximum), 24% gave the support 4 out of 5 and 3% gave 3 out of 5 (rounded to

nearest whole percentage). Only five organisations gave a score of 1 or 2.

Peer to peer activity

Sponsored visits: 229 visits have taken place, by 129 organisations.

Visitors have, on average, been on 1.77 visits, Host organisations have an average of

3.31 visits.

ShareSpace: BIG Assist forums

Forum Topics Posts

Innovation

Live discussions, one with

over 11k views

Webinar on demand led

support with 1,422 views

24 550

Strategy and change

1 live discussion with nearly

5k views

26 237

People and culture

20 41

Financial sustainability 16 137

Marketing and relationships

3 live discussions with over 7k

to over 10k views each

Live Q&A with nearly 8k views

22 504

General 47 96









Library: 608 articles and wikis, including case studies to share experience and

learning

Appendix 5: Interview Topic Guides

Round 1 Customer Interviews – 1st Interview

Introduction

BIG Assist is a programme funded by the BIG Lottery Fund (BIG) and delivered by NCVO. The

programme will offer a targeted support programme to help voluntary sector infrastructure

organisations be more efficient, effective and sustainable - it's all about building the future for

infrastructure.

The evaluation


evaluation will focus on the extent to which programme outcomes have been met. Learning

from the evaluation will be shared with BIG and NCVO throughout the course of the

programme. The evaluation will take place from December 2012 to May 2015 and will consist

of:

Analysis of programme generated data

In depth qualitative interviews with a number of infrastructure organisations who have

engaged with the programme, after they have received support from a Supplier through the

programme (6 months to 1 year afterwards) and again when they have had time to

implement this support and reflect on its impact.

In depth qualitative interviews with a number of infrastructure organisations who are eligible

for the programme but who have not engaged with it

In depth qualitative interviews with a number of Suppliers who are delivering support to

infrastructure organisations, at the start of the programme and towards the end of the

programme

On line survey of NCVO members to assess the impact of, and their experiences of, the

support they have received from the local providers

This interview

We would like to speak to you as an infrastructure organisation that has been accepted to

receive support through the Assist programme. We would like to speak to you to gather

information about: what support you have received from the Assist programme; the impact of

the Assist programme on the support you deliver; what aspect of the Assist programme you find

most and least helpful; and, any aspect of the Assist programme which could be improved.



This interview is designed to capture information about the impact of Assist on the support you

deliver at the beginning of the Assist programme. We will also ask you to take part in a follow up

interview later in the programme to assess any further changes that have arisen as a result of

your involvement.

This interview should take no longer than 40 minutes. The findings from this interview, and the

other research we do, will be used in a report to the BIG Lottery Fund. Everything you say will

remain confidential, no names will be used in the report and although quotes may be used they

will not be attributable.

Is it okay to record this interview – for my notes?

Do you have any questions before we begin?

Background

1. What is the nature of your role/ position at [insert name of organisation]?

2. Can you tell me more about your organisation?

What is the function of your organisation?

What services do you deliver?

Who do you deliver your services to? Who are your customers?

What size is your organisation?

Where are you based?

What area do you work in?

3. Why did you apply to the Assist programme?

How did you hear about it?

What type of support did you apply to achieve?

What did you want to achieve for your organisation?

What did you want to achieve for frontline VCSE organisations?

In what way is there a need for this type of support? In your organisation? In VCSE

organisations?

Receiving support through the Assist programme

Note: if the local provider has received more than one type of support, ask the following

questions for each type of support received. Remember that a range of peer to peer support is

an important part of the ‘offer’ from Assist – not just the vouchers.

4. What support have you received through the Assist programme?

What type(s) of support have you received?

Which supplier(s) delivered this support?



Who in your organisation received this support?

When did you receive this support?

5. How was support delivered?

Probe around: structure, content, delivery, length, frequency duration, who delivered the

support, information and materials provided. Did they consider or use the e. commerce

capability to partner with another IO and/ or ‘top-up’ their vouchers?

6. What did you think about the support you received?

Probe as appropriate: structure, content, delivery, length, duration, knowledge/ expertise of

the person/ organisation providing the support, information provided, materials, other

relevant aspects

What was the best aspect of the support you received?

What could have been improved?

To what extent did the support meet your expectations?

To what extent did it meet your support needs?

Did you use the Assist rating system to feedback your experience?

Probe as appropriate: What are your thoughts on the feedback system? do you think this

is an effective mechanism and why, any response received and any outcome – such as

queries or contact from other infrastructure organisations and what this led to

Did you use any other means of sharing your experience of the support you

received?

Probe as appropriate: do you think this is an effective mechanism and why, any

response received and any outcome – such as queries or contact from other

infrastructure organisations and what this led to

7. What did you think about the Assist application and screening process?

What was the best aspect of the application and screening process?

To what extent was it useful: Probe as appropriate: in clarifying your needs,

identifying new issues, signposting you to other resources and options for

development; feedback on interview with NCVO


8. Have you accessed any other development support for the same type of needs (outside

the Assist programme)?

Prompts: other types of support, guidance, advice

What did you think about these other types of support?

In contrast to answers to the questions above, how does this support compare with

support received through the Assist programme?



Impact of the Assist programme

Note: if the infrastructure organisation has received more than one type of support, ask the

following questions for each type of support received

9. Overall, what would you say the impact of support from Assist has been on you?

10. What changes have you made, as a result of your involvement with the Assist

programme, to how you would normally deliver support?

What changes have there been to the types of support you deliver?

Prompts: Have you started delivering any new types of support? Why has this

happened? Have you stopped delivering any support which you used to provide? Why

has this happened?

What changes have been made to the quality of the support you deliver?

What aspect of the support has helped or led to this change?

11. [If local provider has received more than one type of support through Assist] Which type

of support has led to the most changes in the support you deliver?

Why has this type of support led to this change?

12. What factors support you to improve the quality of your services?

What factors, if any, constrain you when trying to improve the quality of your

services?

13. What would you say has been the main impact, of your involvement in the Assist

programme, on the frontline and VCSE organisations you work with?

14. How do you monitor the quality of your services?

What evidence do/ will you have, if any, of improved quality to the support you

deliver?

What evidence do/ will you have from the perspective of your customers?

15. What do you think would have happened if you hadn’t of taken part in the Assist

programme?

Learning from the Assist programme

16. What aspects of the Assist programme do you feel are most helpful in helping your

organisation’s capacity to improve?

What aspects are least helpful?



17. How would you like to see the Assist programme improved?

Why do you say that?

18. Would you recommend the Assist programme to other infrastructure organisations?

Why?

Why not?

Thanks and close

Non Engaged Infrastructure Organisations Topic Guide

Introduction

BIG Assist is a programme funded by the Big Lottery Fund (BIG) and delivered by NCVO. The



infrastructure.

The evaluation


evaluation is focusing on the extent to which programme outcomes have been met. Learning


programme. The evaluation started in December 2012 and will end in May 2015. The following

evaluation activities are taking place:






in depth qualitative interviews with a number of infrastructure organisations who are eligible




programme



This interview

As well as speaking to organisations who did apply for support through them Assist programme,

we are speaking to organisations who were eligible for the Assist programme but who didn’t get



involved in it. The purpose of this is to gather learning about why organisations choose to

engage with programmes such as Assist.


other research we do, will be used in a report to the Big Lottery Fund. Everything you say will



Background


2. Can you tell me more about your organisation?

What is the function of your organisation?

What services do you deliver?

Who do you deliver your services to? Who are your customers?

What size is your organisation?

Where are you based?

What area do you work in?

3. How did you hear about the Assist programme?

Where and when did you hear about it?

What do you understand the Assist programme to be about?

What, if anything, particularly interested you in the programme?

Were there any aspects you were particularly interested in?

4. Why have you decided not to participant in the programme?

What decisions did you make about whether to get involved in Assist? Why did you

make these?

Were there any particular deterrents or obstacles?

What would need to happen to make you decide to apply/ participate?

If thinking of applying in the future probe factors which will determine whether they do

or not.

5. What information did you receive about the Assist programme?

How was this information received?

What did you think of this information?



Would you have liked more information or less information?

In what other ways would you have liked to receive information? e.g. other channels

of communication?

6. In what ways do you think there could be a need for the kind of support offered through

Assist?

In your organisation?

In VCSE frontline organisations?

7. How else have you heard about Assist?

Have you had any feedback from peers who’ve been involved in Assist or who tried

to engage with Assist?

Are you aware of any suppliers or infrastructure organisations involved in the

programme in your local area?

What have you heard?

Did this in any way influence your decision to not get involved in Assist?

8. Would you consider applying in future?

9. To what extent are you interested in the long term impact of the programme,

What are the reasons for this?

Thank you.

Round 1 Follow Up Interview Topic Guide

Introduction




infrastructure.

The evaluation



from the evaluation is being with BIG and NCVO throughout the course of the programme. The

evaluation started in December 2012 and will end in March 2013. The following evaluation

activities are taking place:




In depth qualitative interviews with a number of local providers who have engaged with the

programme, after they have been involved in the programme for 6 months to 1 year and

again when they exit the programme

in depth qualitative interviews with a number of local providers who are eligible for the

programme but who have not engaged with it

In depth qualitative interviews with a number of national providers who are delivering support

to local providers, at the start of the programme and towards the end of the programme



This interview

We would like to speak to you as an infrastructure organisation that has received support

through the Assist programme. We conducted an interview with your organisation after your

involvement in the Assist programme after a period of 6 months to 1 year. This is a follow up

interview to assess the impact of the Assist programme on you as you exit the programme and

to assess the extent to which programme outcomes have been met.

We would like to speak to you to explore: your views on the design and delivery of the Assist

programme; what you will do differently as a result of the programme and how you will measure

the improved quality of your services.






Background


Receiving support through the Assist programme

Note: for the following questions, please concentrate on the support delivered since the

previous interview

2. What types of support have you received through the Assist programme?


Which organisation(s) delivered this support?

Who in your organisation received this support?

When did you receive this support?


Probe around: structure, content, delivery, length, frequency duration, who delivered the

support, information and materials provided






relevant aspects

What was the best aspect of the support you received?


To what extent did the support meet your expectations?

To what extent did it meet your support needs?


5. Overall, what would you say the impact of support from Assist has been on you?

6. Overall, what changes have been made to how you would normally deliver support, as a

result of your involvement with the Assist programme?

What changes have you made, or will you make, to the services you offer?

PROMPTS: have you stopped or started providing any types of support? Have you transformed

or improved the services you deliver?

Why have you made these changes?

What aspect of the Assist programme has led to you making these changes?

PROBE around: specific types of support received; learning from peer the peer support aspect

of the programme, or any other learning from the Assist programme, any other aspects of the

Assist programme which have led to changes.



Interviewer note: probe for specific examples of what has happened to what types of

organisations and which aspects of the Assist programme led to this support.

8. How will you, or have you been, monitor(ing) the quality of your services?

Is this different from what you intended to do? Why?

What evidence do you have, if any, of improved quality to the support you deliver?

What evidence do you have from the perspective of your customers?

Learning from the Assist programme

9. What are your views on the design and delivery of the Assist programme?

a. What aspects have been most helpful in helping your organisation’s capacity to

improve?



b. What aspects have been least helpful?

Would you do anything differently in the future?



11. Would you recommend the Assist programme to other local providers?

Why?

Why not?

Any other comments?

Thanks and close

Round 2 follow up interview topic guide

Introduction




infrastructure.

BA is a pilot programme into providing support to organisations in a new way. It includes a diagnostic review to help identify and prioritise areas of support need, and a voucher award and for organisation to select the support of their choice from the on line market place.

The evaluation

OPM has been asked to conduct an independent evaluation of the BIG Assist programme. The


from the evaluation is being shared with BIG and NCVO throughout the course of the

programme. The evaluation started in December 2012 and has been extended to December

2015. The following evaluation activities are taking place:



engaged with the programme, after they have been involved in the programme for 6 months

to 1 year and again after they have completed support funded through BIG Assist vouchers.



In depth qualitative interviews with a number of suppliers who are delivering support to local

providers, at the start of the programme and towards the end of the programme

(Likely to) produce a small number of impact stories/ case studies



This interview

We would like to speak to you as an infrastructure organisation that has received support

through the BIG Assist programme. We conducted an interview with your organisation 6 months

to 1 year after your allocation of a BIG Assist Voucher. This is a follow up interview to

understand the impact of the support you received through the BA programme now you have

completed this support and to explore the extent to which programme outcomes have been met.

We would like your views on the impact of the Assist programme; how helpful the support has

been, it’s quality and what will be different as a result.


other evaluation we conduct, will be used in a report to NCVO and the Big Lottery Fund.

Everything you say in this interview will remain confidential, no names will be used in the report

and although quotes may be used they will not be attributable.


Background


Receiving support through the BIG Assist programme

Note: for the following questions, please concentrate on the support you have received through

BA since the previous interview

2. What types of support have you received through the Assist programme?


Which organisation(s) delivered this support?

Who in your organisation was involved in the support you received through BA this

support?

When did the support you received happen?

Did you receive support through any other ways from the BA programme? If so what

were they?

Open first, then probe: Online Q&A, newsletters on specific topics, additional

guidance e.g. on selecting a supplier, discussion forums…


a. Need to find out here the type of support – 121, workshop, training etc. also ask

what type of activities did the support involve




relevant aspects – refer to the purpose of the voucher that they received.

What was the best aspect of the support your organisation received?




To what extent did the support meet your organisation’s expectations?

To what extent did it meet your organisation’s support needs?

(Also ask about peer visits and online forums, online events, face to face events etc.

if relevant)

Impact of the Big Assist programme

5. Overall, what would you say the impact of support from BIG Assist has been on your

organisation?

(Make sure to ask about peer visits online forums etc. if relevant)

6. Overall, what changes did your organisation make as a result of support accessed

through BA programme? (Nb this might include how they deliver support to the orgs

they support or are their members)

What changes have you made, to your organisation and how you work

…to the services you offer?

PROMPTS: have you stopped or started providing any types of support? Have you transformed

or improved the services you deliver?

Why have you made these changes?

What aspect of the Assist programme has led to you making these changes?

PROBE around: specific types of support received; learning from peer to peer support aspect of

the programme, or any other learning from the Assist programme, any other aspects of the

Assist programme which have led to changes.



Interviewer note: probe for specific examples of what has happened to what types of

organisations and which aspects of the Assist programme led to this support.

8. How will you know that the support you received through BA has had an impact

E.g. have you got any evidence, feedback etc?

Learning from the BIG Assist programme

NOTE: In this section need to tease out the different parts of the programme – the diagnostic

and review call in potentially helping determine focus of support, selecting and managing the

supplier and support, accessing other BA support – and learning opportunities e.g. on line

events, f2f event etc.



9. What are your views on the scope and delivery of the Assist programme?

a. What aspects have been most helpful in helping your organisation’s capacity to

improve?

b. What aspects have been least helpful?

Would you do anything differently in the future?



11. Finally, we have four very short questions where we ask you to rate aspects of the

programme. These will use a scale of 1-5, where 1 is v. low/ not at all and 5 is very high.

(Probe if rating is unexpected based on rest of interview, or v. low or v. high: what are

their reasons for this rating?)

1) How easily will you be able to make use of/implement the support you have

received? (1 = not at all easily, 5 = very easily)

2) How likely is the support that you received to make a long term difference to your

organisation? (1= not at all likely, 5 = very likely)

3) How important has the support received through BA been to your organisation?

(1=irrelevant, 5=totally essential to the org

(e.g. if it was a sustainability project, how important has BA been to the

organisation’s sustainability.)

4) Overall, how worthwhile has your experience been of the BA programme? (1=not

worthwhile, 5=very worthwhile)

Any other comments

Thanks.

Mention that we may like to interview them a third (and final time) later this year, to understand

the longer term impact of BIG Assist.

Close.

Round 1 interviews with suppliers

Introduction

BIG Assist is a programme funded by the BIG Lottery Fund (BIG) and delivered by NCVO. The



infrastructure.



The evaluation




programme. The evaluation will take place from December 2012 to May 2015 and will consist of


In depth qualitative interviews with a number of infrastructure organisations which have

engaged with the programme, after they have been involved in the programme for 6 months

to 1 year and again when they exit the programme



In depth qualitative interviews with a number of national suppliers who are delivering support

to infrastructure organisations, at the start of the programme and towards the end of the

programme


support they have received from infrastructure organisations.

This interview

We would like to speak to you as national support provider who has been accepted to provide

support through the Assist programme. During this interview, we would like to find out more

about: your current business model and income streams; how you intend to deliver support

through the Assist programme; and, what you expect to be the impact of the programme on you

as an organisation.

This interview is designed to capture baseline information (the position of you and your group at

the start of the support programme) about your organisation. We will ask you to take part in a

follow up interview towards the end of the Assist programme to assess any changes which have

arisen as a result of your involvement.


other research we do, will be used in a report to the BIG Lottery Fund. Everything you say will





2. What is the function of your organisation?

What support or services do you deliver?

Who do you deliver support or services to?

What are your main income streams?



PROBE: proportion of income from voluntary sector, central and local government; commercial

organisation.

3. How did you get involved in the Assist programme?

How did you hear about it?

4. What was your organisation hoping to achieve through the Assist programme?

Unprompted then ask:

What did you hope to achieve for your organisation?

What, if anything, did you want to achieve for local support providers?

What, if anything, did you want to achieve for frontline VCSE organisations?

In what ways did you see a need for the type of support you deliver in local providers?

What about in frontline VCSE organisations?

Delivering support through the Assist programme

1. What type(s) of support are you approved to deliver through the Assist programme?

2. What is your model for delivering support?

What kinds of support do you expect you will deliver through Assist?

What types of organisations do you expect to deliver support to?

What outcomes do you expect the support you deliver to achieve?

How do you intend to deliver support?

Why is support delivered in this way?

How does delivering support in this way lead to the intended outcomes discussed

above?

In what ways does this differ from how you normally deliver support as an

organisation? Why?

3. Who is involved in delivering your support?

What are the roles and responsibilities of the key staff involved?

Is the support delivered through paid staff or volunteers?

Are they existing staff or are they recruited to deliver support through Assist?

4. What are your views on the adequacy of staffing?

What types of skills and experience do staff need to deliver support?



What are your views about the expertise of staff to deliver support through the Assist

programme?

What are your views about the capacity of staff to deliver support as part of the

Assist programme?

What training and development activities will staff be involved in to develop their

expertise?

5. How much support do you expect to be delivering through the Assist programme?

How often and to how many organisations?

What are these expectations about volume of support based on?

Prompts: Anticipated demand, communication with NCVO

What are your views about your capacity as an organisation to deliver support

through the Assist programme?

What strategies do you have, if any, in a situation where demand for your support is

greater than your capacity to deliver?

6. How do you intend to manage the quality of the support you provide through the Assist

programme?

What systems do you have in place to respond to feedback from local providers?

How do you intend to respond to feedback from local providers?


7. What do you expect to be the impact on your organisation from taking part in the Assist

programme?

Unprompted then probe around:

Impact on how you provide support services to local support providers?

Impact on your skills and experience as an organisation to provide support services

to local support providers?

Impact on the menu of services/ support you provide in the future?

Impact on the sustainability of you as an organisation?

8. What impact would you like to have on the local support providers you deliver support

to?

What aspect of your support do you think will lead to this impact?

What could be the challenges to achieving impact?

9. What impact do you think the Assist programme could have on frontline VCSE

organisations?



What aspect of the programme could lead to this impact?

What could be the challenges to achieving impact?

10. What impact do you think the Assist programme could have on the wider market?

What impact could it have on the supply for support from national providers?

What impact could it have on the demand for support from national providers?

What could this mean for the national providers taking part in the Assist programme?

Thanks and close

Round 2 supplier interviews

Introduction




infrastructure.

The evaluation




programme. The evaluation will take place from December 2012 to May 2015 and will consist

of:






In depth qualitative interviews with a number of infrastructure organisations who are eligible




programme



This interview

We would like to speak to you as support provider who has been accepted to provide support

through the Assist programme. In a telephone interview, we would like to find out more about:

your current business model; what support you have delivered, or are intending to deliver,



through the Assist programme; and what impact you expect the programme will have on your

organisation and the organisations you work with.







The Supplier Register

2. Where did you hear about the Big Assist?

3. How do you find the process of registering to become a supplier?

a. Online

b. Contact with the BA team

Delivering support through the Assist programme

Interviewer note: please focus on support delivered since the last interview.

4. What support have you delivered through the Assist programme?

5. How have you been delivering support through the Assist programme?

What is the model for delivering support?

What types of organisations have you delivered support to?

Who has delivered support?

Is this different to how you originally intended to deliver support?

Why have you made changes?

What has the main learning been in this respect?

6. How much support have you delivered through the Assist programme?

How often and to how many organisations?

How has this met your expectations about how much support you thought you would

deliver?

Have there been any challenges in this respect?



7. How have you managed the quality of the support you provide through the Assist

programme?

What systems do you have in place to respond to feedback from local providers?

How have you responded to feedback from local providers?

Probe for specific examples

How has this differed from how you intended to manage the quality of support?


8. What has been the impact on your organisation from taking part in the Assist

programme?

Unprompted then ask about impacts in the following areas:

Impact on how you deliver support to infrastructure organisations?

Impact on your skills and experience as an organisation to provide support services

to local support providers?

Impact on the menu of services/ support you provide?

Impact on your income streams?

Impact on the sustainability of your organisation?

Interviewer note: for each impact identified ask for specific examples of what has changed and

what aspect of being part of the programme has led to this change?

9. What impact do you think you have had on the infrastructure organisations you deliver

support to?

What aspect of your support do you think has led to this impact?

What have been the challenges in this respect?

What evidence do you have?

10. What impact do you think the Assist programme has had on frontline VCSE

organisations?

What aspect of the programme has led to this impact?

What have been the challenges in this respect?

11. How has the Assist programme impacted on the wider market?

What impact has it had on the supply of support from national providers?

What impact has it had in the demand for support from national providers?

What impact has this change in the wider market had on national providers who have

been involved in the Assist programme?



Final remarks

12. What is the best aspect of the Big Assist Programme?

13. What is the worst aspect of the Big Assist Programme?

14. How could the Big Assist Programme be improved?

15. Would you recommend the Big Assist Programme?

Thanks and close

big assist programme - opm evaluation

Government & Nonprofit