valuing the voluntary sector · 2017-02-22 · arts centre trust, pentreath, silvanus trust,...

Valuing the Voluntary Sector

The impact of Objective 1 on the Voluntary and Community Sector in Cornwall 2000 – 2007

Commissioned by Cornwall Voluntary Sector Forum Perfect Moment May 2008

Valuing the Voluntary SectorThe impact of Objective 1 on the Voluntary and Community Sector in Cornwall 2000 – 2007

Photo: Courtesy of CN4C


2

Ack

now

ledg

emen

ts AcknowledgementsA large number of people have supported us without whom this research would not have been possible and whose unfailing goodwill and co-operation has been instrumental in pulling this work together:

• TheResearchSteeringGroup:MarkRichardson(CornwallRuralCommunityCouncil), BlairThomson(CVSF),LucyHarris(CornwallEnterprise),AndyBrelsford(Cornwall CentreforVolunteers)andMattOwen(CornwallCollege).• ThefollowingpeopleprovideduswithdetailedinformationaboutObjective1: GarryElderbrandandJanetWoolley(GovernmentOfficefortheSouthWest);SarahFear, PhilippaCollettandMarkWilliams(Learning&SkillsCouncil);JackiWilliams(JobCentre Plus)andCatherineRoberts(CornwallEnterprise).• Respondentstothetelephonesurveywhogaveuptheirtimetocontributetothisstudy.• Thein-depthinterviewparticipantswhogaveuptheirtimetocontributetothisstudy.• GuideStarUKandSallyBagwellinparticularforherhelp.• DaveMynneforthedesign-www.mynne.com-andHeadlandPrintersinPenzancefor theprinting-www.headlandprinters.co.uk.

Contacts for Further InformationGarethHart:Lead Project Consultant, Perfect Moment. Tel: 01736 332094. Email: [email protected]:Director, CVSF. Tel: 07770 844028. Email: [email protected]:Chair, CVSF. Tel: 01782 273952. Email: [email protected]

The Research TeamKevinBrownridge SeniorConsultantJohnLancaster SeniorConsultantGarethHart LeadProjectConsultantJuliaTwomlow AssistantProjectConsultantPaulRichards AssistantProjectConsultantJaneValBaker InterviewerandResearcherJanePugh InterviewerandResearcherJanEgan TranscriberPaulaMatson Administrator&DataEntryCo-ordinator

Gareth Hart & Kevin Brownridge, Perfect Moment, May 2008

Background and FundersCornwallVoluntarySectorForum(CVSF)commissionedthisreportfromPerfectMomentwithfundingfromtheEuropeanSocialFund,BigLotteryFund,PenwithCommunityDevelopmentTrust,CornwallCountyCouncilandPenwithDistrictCouncil.PartnersintheresearchprogrammewereCornwallCentreforVolunteersandCornwallCollege.Ourconclusionsandrecommendationsaretheresultsofourprofessionalexperienceandjudgementandarebased on survey and interview information provided to us by organisations in Cornwall and theregion,plussecondarydataprovidedtousbyarangeofotheragencies.TheGuideStardatausedinpartsofthisreporthasbeenprovidedtousbyGuideStarUK-themostcomprehensiveonlineencyclopaediaofcharitiesatwww.guidestar.org.uk.

ThisreportactsasanextendedsummaryofthemainValuing the Voluntary Sector document whichcontainsfullappendicesincludingthebibliography,listsofintervieweesandthesurveyquestionnaire.ThefullreportisavailablefromCVSForfromPerfectMomentatwww.perfect-moment.co.uk.Largeprintversionsofthisreportareavailablefromthecontactslistedonthispage.DownloadablePDFsofthereportareavailablefrom:www.perfect-moment.co.uk.

DisclaimerAnyusewhichathirdpartymakesofthisdocumentortheinformationcontainedherein,oranydecisionstheymakebaseduponit,areentirelytheresponsibilityofthethirdpartyandtheyshouldexerciseduecareanddiligenceintheuseofsuchinformation.PerfectMomentaccepts no liability or responsibility for any damages suffered by any third party as a result of actiontakenordecisionsbasedoninformationinthisdocument.

CopyrightCopyright©2008isheldbytheresearchcommissionerundertheCopyright,DesignsandPatentsAct1988.Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthisdocumentmaybereproduced,storedinretrievalsystems,ortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,recordingorotherwise,withoutthepriorpermissionofthecopyrightowner.

PhotographsThankstothefollowingorganisationsforprovidingphotographsforthereport:South West Lakes Trust, Cornwall Neighbourhoods for Change (CN4C), The National Trust, British Trust for Conservation Volunteers, Arts Centre Trust, Pentreath, Silvanus Trust, Penwith Community Development Trust, Mount Hawke Youth Group, Cornwall Arts Marketing, Lucia Griggi, Bill Newby and Rupert Tenison.

Valuing the Voluntary Sector Foreword

3

ForewordThevoluntaryandcommunitysectorinCornwallstandsatanimportantpointinit’shistory.Therearehugechallengesandopportunitiesaheadsuchastheproposedunitaryauthority,Convergencefundingandcommissioningforpublicservicedelivery.Foralongtimewehaveneededfirmevidencetoshowwhereweareandtounderpinfuturedevelopment.Nowwehaveit-Valuing the Voluntary Sector isatimelyreport.WearedelightedtofindthatthesectoranditsclientshavebeenmajorbeneficiariesofObjective1.Theprogrammerecognisedandvaluedourexpertise,accessibility,inclusivity,innovationanddiversity.Voluntaryandcommunitygroupshavedeliveredsuperbly:theyhavemettheirtargetsand,inmanycases,exceededexpectations.TheyhavebroughttangiblebenefitstothepeopleofCornwall.Inanumberoffieldsitisvoluntaryand‘thirdsector’organisationsthathavedrivenprivatesectorgrowth.Partsofthesectorhavechangeddramaticallyasaresultoftheinvestment.

Valuing the Voluntary SectordemonstratesclearlyoursignificancetotheeconomyofCornwall-thenumbersofpeopleworkingandvolunteeringinthecounty,ourfinancialcontributionandthedepthofengagementwiththepublicandprivatesectors.Wemakeapositivedifferenceacrossawidevarietyoffieldswithadiverserangeofactivitiesand,mostimportantly,wesupporthighnumbersofpeople,manyofwhomaredisadvantaged.

Theopportunitiesinthenearfuturearecompelling.TheOneCornwallunitaryauthoritywillprovideuswithconsiderablescopetoevolveandinfluencepolicy.Voluntaryorganisationsarebeingaskedtofulfilrolesthatweretraditionallyinthepubicdomain.Weknowthatthesectorcanperformtheseactivitiessuccessfully,professionallyandcost-effectively;however,itcannotdothisifitisunderresourced.Appropriateandcontinuedinvestmentisvitaltosustainandimproveexistinggoodworkandtoprovidethebuildingblockstoexplorenewhorizons.Weneedtoretainourpassion,ourvaluesandourindependenceifwearetoavoidbecominganewpublicsector.

Withoutdoubt,Objective1hashelpedraiseourprofileandthesectorisnowfarmore strategically influential with public and statutory bodies than it ever was before.Weneedtocapitalizeonthisandbeconfidentandrespectfullyassertivewithpartnersandfunders.Wehaveexpertiseandskillsthatthepublicandprivatesectorneeds.Toremaincredibleandengagedattheselevels,ourorganisationsandpartnershipsalsoneedtohaveclearrationales,begovernedwithintegrityand,asthisresearchhighlights,weneedtocommittoimprovingtrainingatalllevelsforourpaidandvolunteerworkforce.

Objective1wasjustthestart.CornwallVoluntarySectorForumhasrecentlyreceivedaBigLotteryFundgranttoprovideadvocacy,brokerage,communicationanddevelopmentservicesforvoluntaryorganisationsinthecounty.Thisfunding,alongside Valuing the Voluntary Sector, provides the foundations for an exciting periodintheevolutionoftheCornishvoluntarysector.

Mark Richardson - Chair, Cornwall Voluntary Sector Forum

Blair Thomson - Director, Cornwall Voluntary Sector Forum

CORNWALLVOLUNTARYSECTORFORUMisaRegisteredCharity andCompanyLimitedbyGuarantee. Charitynumber:1111169 Companynumber:05371203

Photo: Newlyn Art Gallery: The Exchange, PenzancePeterFreeman

4


1. Headline figures 2. Brief overview3. Definitions, methodology and accuracy of findings

3.1 Study definition of the voluntary and community sector3.2 Methodology3.3 Accuracy of the telephone survey findings

4. About Objective 14.1 Overview4.2 The programme aims

5. Main findings5.1 Size of the investment5.2 Nature of the investment5.3 The impact of the investment5.4 Size of the sector5.5 Nature and work of the sector5.6 Income and resources of the sector5.7 Staff5.8 Volunteers5.9 Workforce development issues5.10 Issues for organisational development

6. Strategy level findings 6.1 The strategy for engaging the voluntary sector 6.2 The relationship between the voluntary sector and Objective 1 6.3 Co-financing 6.4 The value of voluntary sector involvement in the programme 6.5 Gaps in support and delivery 6.6 Major issues for delivery 6.7 The impact of Objective 1 on the voluntary sector7. Case studies8. Conclusions and recommendations 8.1 Concluding remarks 8.2 Recommendations 8.3 Further workAppendix A: Direct grantsAppendix B: Learning & Skills Council grantsAppendix C: Job Centre Plus grants

Contents

5

p 7p 8

p 9–11

p 13

p 14–22

p 23–27

p 29–33p 34–36

p 37p 39p 40

6

1Valuing the Voluntary Sector

WithoutthevoluntaryandcommunitysectorObjective1wouldhavefailed.

EmmaLouiseCook,PolicyOfficer,CornwallCountyCouncil

Hea

dlin

e fi

gure

s

1Valuing the Voluntary Sector H

eadline figures

1. Headline figures

Impact of Objective 1

•Objective1invested£45.4 million in 271voluntaryandcommunitysectorprojectsinCornwall.

•Voluntaryandcommunitysectorprojectsaccountedfor13%ofthetotalfundsawardedunderObjective1.

• An additional £13.4 millionwenttonon-profitmakingor‘thirdsector’organisationsthatarecloselylinkedtothemainstreamvoluntarysector.

• A further £4.9 millionwasgiventononvoluntaryorganisationsforprojectsthatsignificantlysupportedthevoluntarysector.

• At least 20,000individualsbenefiteddirectlyfromObjective1voluntarysectorprogrammes.50%ofthesepeoplewentontofindjobsorgeta qualification.

•Thesectorismore co-ordinated with more effective partnerships and has a much higher profile asaresultofObjective1investment.

• Charitable and Third SectorsupportstructureshavehelpeddrivegrowthinkeyeconomicsectorsinCornwall,mostnoticeablyinthecreative industries, marine and environmentalsectors.

State of the Sector

• 17,120peoplecurrentlyworkinthevoluntarysectorinCornwall.Thisis7% ofthetotalworkforce.

•Employmentinthesectorgrewbyapproximately7%between2003and2007.

• Incomeinthesectorgrewfrom£331 million to £390 million between 2003 and 2007 - 18%growth.

• 10% of the sector generates 90%ofthisincome.

•Overhalf of the sector reports a yearly income of less than £10,000.Thehighestsingleincomeis£28 million,theaverageis£130,000 but the median income is around £7,000 peryear.

• 1 in 3 adultsinCornwalldosomekindofvoluntarywork.Thisisworththeequivalentof£390 milliontotheCornisheconomy.

•Thereareatleast3,000 voluntaryandcommunityorganisationsinCornwall.

•Thereisaclearneedformoretrainingforthevoluntarysectorworkforce,particularlyinfunding/fund-raising,marketing and management.

7

Valuing the Voluntary SectorB

rief

ove

rvie

w2

8

2. Brief overview

Valuing the Voluntary Sector is both a snap-shot of the state and thesignificanceofthesectorandananalysisoftheresponsetotheopportunitiesandchallengespresentedbytheObjective1programme.ThevoluntaryandcommunitysectorinCornwallnowemploysover17,000peopleinatleast3,000organisationsandisworthnearly£400milliontotheCornisheconomy.Infinancialtermsalone,volunteeringisworthatleastafurther£390milliontoCornwall.

Objective1investedover£45millioninthevoluntaryandcommunitysectorinCornwallandtheIslesofScilly.Thisaccountsfor13%ofthefundscommitted-morethanwenttotheCountyorDistrictCouncilsorprivatesector.Afurther£19millionwasinvestedinschemeswherevoluntary or community groups were primary partners or delivery was bya‘thirdsector’organisationsuchasanot-for-profitcompany,asocialenterpriseoraunion.ThemoneywasspentonawonderfullydiverserangeofprojectsacrossCornwallwhich,onthewhole,havemettheirtargetsandinmanycasesexceededexpectations.

Ourfindingsshowthat,whenObjective1firstbegan,Cornwall’svoluntaryandcommunityorganisationsformedadisparatebutenergeticgroup.Sixyearson,thereislittledoubtthatamorecoherentsectornowexists.Thereisnowmuchmoreco-ordination,moreinfluenceandengagementwiththepublicsectorandthecapacityofmanyorganisationshasincreased.Thegenerallevelofactivity,energyandaspirationhasgrownenormouslyandObjective1hashelpedraisethesector’sprofilehugelywithkeystakeholders.Weshould,however,bearinmindthatthesectorisstillcharacterised by high numbers of very small organisations that did not engagewithObjective1toanygreatextent.WhilstformanyorganisationsObjective1simplywasnotrelevantorappropriate,partsofthesectorcould have engaged but didn’t for reasons such as perceived bureaucracy orlackofawareness.Undoubtedly,somethatmissedoutcouldhavebenefited.

Anextremelysignificantfindingisthatvoluntaryand‘thirdsector’organisations have emerged to drive the prosperity of key parts of the

privatesector.ThecreativeindustriesinCornwallhavegeneratedanextra£100millionofincomewiththehelpofcharitablesupportstructures1.

Othershavealsobenefitedinsimilarways-theconstruction,fishing,environment,watersports,woodlandsandtourismfieldshaveallhadstrongvoluntarysectorinvolvement.Nourishingthisimportantinteractionbetweenvoluntary,publicandprivatesectorsisclearlyessentialforthefutureeconomicprosperityofCornwall.Itiscertainthatthesectoriswell placed to help lead initiatives to meet the economic models that ConvergencefundingseekstodevelopinCornwall.Wefoundthatthesector’s economic importance is often overlooked by policy makers who often do not recognise the depth of its relationship with private and public organisations.

WehavefoundthattherewaslimiteddirectinvestmentbyObjective1into voluntary sector infrastructure2but,wheretherewas,itwasverysuccessful.Thiskindofsupportiscrucialtomaintainflourishingandvibrantvoluntaryandcommunitygroups.Infrastructureandcapacitybuildingorganisationsworktoovercomemanyofthebarriersthatthesectorfaces.

Therearechallengesforthesectorsuchascommissioningtodeliverpublicservices,increasingprofessionalisationandcompetitionforfunds.Manypeople are concerned that the voluntary sector is in danger of becoming anewpublicsector.Inlightofallofthis,voluntaryandcommunitygroupsneedtoensurethattheyretaintheircorevalues,theirindependenceandpassionwhilstcontinuingtodeliverhighquality,accessibleandsustainableservices.

1 CornwallArtsCentreTrust:CountingonCreativity,June2007-page35.

2 TheHomeOfficedefines‘infrastructure’as:“Thephysicalfacilities,structures,systems,relationships,people,knowledgeandskillsthatexisttosupportanddevelop,coordinate,representandpromotefrontlineorganisations,thusenablingthemtodelivertheirmissionsmoreeffectively”-www.changeup.org.uk.

Valuing the Voluntary Sector Definitions, m

ethodology and accuracy of findings

9

3

ThevoluntarysectorbringstherealityofwhytheObjective1programmewashereinthefirstplace.

IanJones,CEO,CornwallCentreforVolunteers


10

Def

init

ions

, met

hodo

logy

and

acc

urac

y of

fin

ding

s3

3. Definitions, methodology and accuracy of findings3

3.1 Study definition of the voluntary and community sector

Akeyissuefortheresearchprogrammewastoagreeadefinitionofthe‘VoluntaryandCommunitySector’.Definingthesectorisathornyissue:termslike‘Third’,‘Charitable’,‘Voluntary’,‘Not-for-Profit’,‘Community’andothersareallused.Thereareprosandconsinallofthese,butnosinglephrasefullyreflectsthevaluesanddiversityofthesector.WereviewedthedefinitionsoftheNationalCouncilforVoluntaryOrganisations(NCVO),OfficeoftheThirdSector(OTS),theLearningandSkillsCouncil’s(LSC)definitionintheirreport‘ResearchingtheVoluntarySectorinCornwall’20034,theNationalAssociationforVoluntaryandCommunityAction(NAVCA),WikipediaandtheGraduateCareersService.

ForthepurposeofanalysingObjective1investmentintothevoluntaryand community sector we placed relevant grant recipients into three categories:

Mainstream Voluntary Sector

Wehaveusedcharitablestatusasadefinitiveindicatorofanorganisationbeinginthevoluntarysector.However,thisisnotanexclusiveindicator,soanorganisationcanalsobeinthevoluntarysectorwithoutbeingacharity.Grantstocharitiesandcharitysubsidiarieswereincludedinthissection,aswerecreditunions,housingassociationsandcommunitycentres.

Non Voluntary Sector, but delivering primarily or significantly to the Voluntary Sector

Grantstopublicsectororganisations,wherethemainpurposewassupportfor voluntary sector organisations or the delivery of voluntary sector-led activity,e.g.agranttoaCounciltoundertakeafeasibilitystudyforacharityorgrantstocollegeswheretheprojectwastoworkprimarilywithacharity.

3 PleaserefertoAppendixHofthefullreportforamoredetailedexplanationofourdefinitionofthevoluntarysector.

4 LearningandSkillsCouncil:ResearchingtheVoluntarySector-page2.

Not-for-Profit or ‘Third Sector’

An interesting third category emerged consisting of grants to organisationsthatwerenotclearlywithinthevoluntarysector,butcouldbetermed‘thirdsector’5.Forthisresearchthisistakentomeannon-private,non-public,not-for-profit(orassetlocked)entitiesandincludesorganisationslikeUnions,CommunityInterestCompanies,otherSocialEnterprisesandothernot-for-profitcompanies.

Forthetelephoneresearchwiththesectoritselfweneededtorefinethisdefinitiontodecidewhethertoincludeanorganisationinthesample.Oneofourprimeconsiderationswaswhetherthecontrollingbodyorboardwasessentiallyvoluntaryorworkinginanot-for-profit/non-profitdistributingmanner.Wegroupedorganisationsasfollows:

Group Category Examples

Group A SmallCommunityOrganisationsResidents’andTenants’AssociationsVillageHallCommittees

Group BVoluntaryOrganisationsdeliveringservices for the general public

CitizensAdviceBureauxRelate

Group CVoluntaryOrganisationsdeliveringservices primarily to voluntary sector itself

CVSVolunteer Bureaux

Group DGroupssupportingparticularcommunitiesofinterest(ofpeople)

DisabilityOrganisations,Equalitiesgroups

Group EOrganisationslinkedbyanoverarching theme or concept

Museums,Sportsclubs,Environmentalgroups,Artsand Cultural charities

Group FRegenerationandEconomicDevelopmentGroups

Developmenttrusts

Group GIndustrysubgroups(wherenon-profitdistributingorassetlocked)

Sometradeassociations,Members’networks,Not-for-profitco-ops

5 TheOfficeoftheThirdSectordefinesthisas:“Organisations[thatare]non-governmental…whicharedrivenbytheirvaluesandwhichprincipallyreinvestanyfinancialsurplusestofurthersocial,environmentalorculturalobjectives”-www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/third_sector.

Valuing the Voluntary Sector Definitions, m

ethodology and accuracy of findings

11

3

Withinthesecategoriesandgroupingsthereismuchroomforoverlap,butthisstratifiedsampleensuresthat,statistically,thereisavalidrepresentationofthekeyaspectsofthevoluntaryandcommunitysector.

3.2 Methodology

Study methods consisted of:

Desk-basedresearchandreviewofrelevantliterature,including•datacollectedformonitoringpurposesfromtheGovernmentOfficefortheSouthWest(GOSW),Objective1PartnershipOffice,theLearningandSkillsCouncil(LSC)andJobCentrePlus(JCP).Detailedsurveybytelephonequestionnaireof318voluntaryand•communitygroupsacrossalldistrictsinCornwallandtheIslesofScilly.26in-depth,qualitativeinterviewsconductedwithkeyindividualsin•thevoluntary,community,publicandstatutorysectorstoassess:

Strategydevelopment.o

Therelationshipbetweenthevoluntarysectorando

Objective1.Thevalueofvoluntarysectorinvolvement.o

ImpactofObjective1onthesector.o

Futureprioritiesandneedsofthesector.o

Comparabledataandstudiescollectedandanalysed,where•available.

TheinformationongrantswastakenfromtheObjective1PartnershipwebsiteandfrominformationprovidedbyGOSW,JCP,LSCandothers.Wehaveendeavouredtocrosscheckthesewherepossible,butsomeminorerrorsandomissionsareinevitable.

3.3 Accuracy of the telephone survey findings

Thefindingsofthetelephonesurveypresentedinthisreportarebasedonasurveyof318voluntaryandcommunityorganisationsselectedfromourfulldatabaseofnearly3,000organisations.Wewantedtoagetarepresentative sample from each of the districts in the county and across

thesevengroupsasdefinedabove.Wesplitthedatabaseintodistrictsections and then took a sample to ensure a cross section of the sector wasincluded.Thetablebelowshowsthemarginsoferrorforthefindingsata95%confidencelevel.

Themarginoferroristheplusorminusfigureusuallyreportedinsurveyresults.Forexample,if10%ofthesampleof318pickedacertainanswer,youcanbe95%surethatifyouhadaskedthequestionofthefullpopulation,between7%and13%wouldhavepickedthatanswer.Wheretheresponseismorediverse,sayata50%response,theerrorisslightlywider-sobetween45%and55%ofthefullpopulationwouldhaveansweredsimilarly.Itiseasiertobesureofextremeanswersthanofmiddle-of-the-roadones.

Margins of error (all at a 95% confidence level):

Total Voluntary and Community Sector Organisations = c3,000SampleSize 3185%or95%Response +or-2%10%or90%Response +or-3%20%or80%Response +or-4%30%or70%Response +or-5%40%or60%Response +or-5%50%Response +or-5%

12

Photo: Courtesy of CN4C

Valuing the Voluntary Sector About O

bjective 1

13

4

4. About Objective 1

4.1 Overview

Objective1wasaEuropeanUnionprogrammethataimedtoreducedifferences in the economic and social conditions between regions within thememberstates.Objective1investmentwasassignedtoregionswhereprosperitywas75%(orless)oftheEuropeanaverage.CornwallandtheIslesofScillyhadObjective1statusbetween2000and2006withatotalE.U.investmentofaround£350million.ThiswastobematchedwithasimilaramountofUKfunds.Objective1wasdistributedviafourfundsinCornwall:

EuropeanSocialFund-ESF.•EuropeanRegionalDevelopmentFund-ERDF.•EuropeanAgricultureGuidanceandGuaranteeFund-EAGGF.•FinancialInstrumentforFisheriesGuidance-FIFG.•

4.2 The programme aims

ForCornwallandtheIslesofScilly,theObjective1programme’svisionwas to create: ‘A prosperous Cornwall and Isles of Scilly where all people and communities share in an improving quality of life’6.

Threestrategicobjectiveswereidentified:

Toincreaseabsoluteprosperity.•Tocreatesustainablecommunities.•Toprotectandenhancetheenvironmentalandculturalandeconomic•opportunities of distinctiveness of Cornwall and Scilly7.

6 Objective1ProgrammeforCornwallandtheIslesofScilly2000-2006SingleProgrammingDocument(August2000)-page4.

7 Ibid-page4.

Fromthesethreeobjectivesfiveprioritieswereidentifiedin2000andrevisedin2005.Insummary,theseprioritiesintheirrevisedformwere:

Priority 1:• SmallandMediumSizedEnterprisesandMicro-BusinessSupport.Priority 2:• StrategicInvestmentsandDevelopment.Priority 3:• DevelopingPeople.Priority 4:• CommunityEconomicDevelopmentandRuralStructuralAdjustment.Priority 5:• RegionalDistinctiveness.

Strategicobjectivesflowedfromtheseprioritiesunderwhichprojectscouldbesupported.Thevoluntarysectorreceivedfundingfromalltheseprioritiesandfromfundsdelegatedtotheco-financingorganisations-TheLearningandSkillsCouncilandJobCentrePlus.


14

Mai

n fi

ndin

gs5

5. Main findings

5.1 Size of the investment

Intotal,Objective1invested£45.4millioninmainstreamvoluntary•sectorprojectsinCornwallbetween2000and2006(bothviadirectandco-financedfunds).Thiswasawardedto271projectsandincluded:

Directgrantsof£37.4millionto106projectsfromallfouro

funds:

Fund Amount Number of AwardsESF £6.7million 32ERDF £28.3million 50EAGGF £2million 11FIFG £0.4million 13

Anadditional£7.1millionofdirectgrantswenttoprojectso

working predominantly with the voluntary sector or to ‘thirdsector’organisations.LearningandSkillsCouncil(LSC)co-financingof£2.5o

millionto17projects.Afurther£10.5millionwasinvestedin schemes where the sector was a primary partner or deliverywasbya‘thirdsector’organisation.JobCentrePlus(JCP)co-financingof£3.8millionto19o

projects.Justover£0.6millionwasgiventoorganisationsworkingpredominantlywiththevoluntarysectoror‘thirdsector’groups.59RuralKeyFundgrantsofaround£1.2million.Thisfundo

wasdedicatedtothevoluntaryandcommunitysector.70CommunityFuturesgrantsofaround£267,223.o

Thisschemewasalsospecificallyforthevoluntaryandcommunitysector.Therewerealsoatleast16investmentsfromUnlockingo

CornishPotential(UCP)8 into the voluntary sector worth around£200,000.

8 ThiswasaCombinedUniversitiesinCornwall(CUC)projecttosupportbusinessesinCornwallbyplacinggraduatesincompaniestoundertakebusinessdevelopmentprojects.UCPprovidedasubsidytowardsthesalaryofthegraduateandhelpwithsomeothercosts-www.unlockingcornishpotential.co.uk.

Comment and Analysis

• At13%ofthetotalawardedunderObjective1,thisrepresentsasignificant slice of the funding cake, and probably more than may have been perceived by many. This compares to around 12% to the County Council, 7% to District Councils, 13% to Further Education Colleges, 12% to the Private Sector, 20% to Universities and 21% to other Public Sector bodies.

• Grantswerespreadacrossallthemainfunds-eveninthefundsdedicated for the fishing industry (FIFG). Most of these were grants to charitable harbour commissioners. This highlights the breadth of the engagement of the charitable voluntary sector.

• Asignificantleveloffundingwenttovoluntaryand‘thirdsector’organisations that provided support to the private sector (see also ‘Nature of the Investment below). This is an interesting theme in voluntary sector development.

• AlargeamountofLSCfunding(£8.7million)wenttotheLearningPartnership, a not-for-profit company, to deliver a wide range of projects including work targeted directly at supporting the voluntary and community sector through its Capacity Building and Community Skills for Life programmes. Many respondents to the surveys highlighted the Learning Partnership as an important broker of services.

• TheRuralKeyFund(RKF)andCommunityFuturesFund(CFF)wereset up specifically for voluntary and community groups. They have funded high numbers of organisations with smaller amounts of money. These schemes were important for smaller voluntary and community groups and were set up to provide easier access to European funding. The final evaluation of CFF highlighted its successes at funding a wide distribution of projects geographically and to many beneficiaries. The CFF study also found that the scheme broadly met its objectives and had a positive impact.9 These smaller funding streams are a vital first step for many community groups and recipients of grants from both schemes have gone on to receive funding from larger sources.

• TheUCPsupportcoveredworksuchasmarketing,businessanalysis,IT and conservation. The value of these investments went much further than the pure monetary impact as the organisations gained from the work conducted by the graduates involved in the scheme.

9 CommunityFuturesFundFinalEvaluation(August2005)-page45.

Valuing the Voluntary Sector Main findings

15

5

5.2 Nature of the investment

UnderDirectbiddingawiderangeofprojectswasfunded,•includingbothcapitalandrevenuegrants.Thesplitwasasfollows:

Capital Grants Amount Number of Awards

MainstreamVoluntarySector £23.7million 52

NonVoluntarySectorbutsignificantlysupporting the voluntary sector £1.4million 4

ThirdSector £1.2million 9

Revenue Grants Amount Number of Awards

MainstreamVoluntarySector £13.7million 54

NonVoluntarySectorbutsignificantlysupport the voluntary sector £1.3million 5

ThirdSector £3.3million 14

Thecapitalgrantsincludedfundingfor:•Communitycentres,visitorattractions,trainingcentres,o

recyclingcentres,museumsandartgalleries,familylearningcentres,harbour/portdevelopments(allrunbycharities).

Therevenueprojectsincluded:•Marketingcampaigns,supportforyoungentrepreneurs,o

ITtraining,vocationalguidance,capacitybuildingsupportforcommunitygroups,building/constructionindustryskillstraining.

TheLSCandJCPfundedawiderangeoftrainingandjobcreation•programmes.Theseincluded:

Digitalmediatraining,ITtraining,employmento

programmes,adviceandcounselling,environmentalandwoodworkingschemes,capacitybuildingandothertraining.


• Thelargecapitalinvestmentisskewedbyasomesignificantgrantsfor the Eden Project (a charity and social enterprise). In total, Eden receivedaround£16millionfromObjective1.

• Thediversityofprogrammesandschemeshighlightsoneofthegreat strengths of the voluntary sector: it is active in many fields and works in a multitude of different methods. This brings the possibility of real width and depth of engagement in many forms with different individuals and organisations. Much of this work is cross sectoral and engages profoundly with the private and public sector.

• Thebottomup,project-by-projectapproachtotacklinglocalneedsis effective to a certain degree - there is always a danger that a strategically important project could be missed. This model therefore needs to be balanced with a clear strategy at the top and support where necessary to fund projects deemed essential to meet the overall aims of the funding programme.

• Thismultiplicityofschemesisastrength,butalsopresentspotentialissues for funders. The project funding model was criticised for being un-strategic by many in the face-to-face survey and managing many contracts is resource intensive. However, consolidating funding into a few schemes to try to achieve top-down strategic aims will undoubtedly reduce the diversity of delivery.

• WithintheConvergenceprogramme,thedecisionhasbeentakentobe more strategic and fund fewer but more significant projects. This approach will favour bigger institutions and there is a risk that smaller voluntary sector or grass roots projects - which may well be good ideas and meet crucial local needs - will be missed. This research highlights the need for a balanced approach to this issue and that some flexibility is still needed in strategic delivery.

• Inmanycasesitisthevoluntaryor‘thirdsector’thatisleadingsupportto the private sector, e.g., in the case of the creative industries with Arts Centre Trust; the Silvanus Trust with the forestry/environmental industries and the fishing industry grants to charitable and voluntary harbour organisations. It is important for the voluntary sector to continue to deliver these kinds of services and there is potential in finding emerging voluntary organisations that can tie in closely with the economic agendas of Convergence funding.


16

Mai

n fi

ndin

gs5

5.3 The impact of the investment

ThefollowingkeyoutputswereachievedonERDFDirectgrants:•

Output TypeMainstream Voluntary

Sector

Non VS but Supporting

VS

Third Sector Organisations

Total

Number of Beneficiaries 2,362 13 3 2,378

FullTimeEquivalentJobsCreated

483 124 281 888

SMEsSupported 579 1 1,880 2,459

Number of Facilities/Community Centres,etc

24 1 6 31

FTEJobsSafeguarded 365 0 99 464

ThefollowingkeyoutputswereachievedonESFDirectgrants:•

Output TypeMainstream Voluntary

Sector

Non VS but Supporting

VS

Third Sector Organisations

Total

Number of Beneficiaries 3,938 339 1,190 5,467

Number of JobsCreated 647 67 0 714

Number of Qualifications 762 180 491 1,433

SMEsSupported 172 1 65 238

JobCentrePlusprovidedthefollowinginformationaboutvoluntary•sectoroutputsfromtheirESFco-financedprogrammes:

Target Type Target Number Achieved (to Sept 07) Success RateStarts 4,228 4,058 96%JobOutcomes 1,262 1,383 110%IntoTraining/Achieving a Qualification

1,376 1,275 93%

SMEsSupported 67 87 130%

TheLearningandSkillsCouncilprovidedthefollowinginformation•aboutvoluntarysectoroutputsfromtheirESFco-financedprogrammes:

Target Type Target Number Achieved (to Nov 07) Success RateBeneficiaryStarts 10,131 9,496 94%LearnersAchieving a Qualification

N/A1 5,363 N/A

SMEsSupported 264 616 233%

Wesurveyedamixofvoluntaryandpublicsectorrepresentatives•inface-to-faceinterviews.RespondentsfromallagenciesobservedthefollowingkeyimpactsofvoluntarysectorObjective1programmes(formoreinformationseesection6ofthisreport):

Softeroutcomessuchasincreasingconfidenceandself-o

esteemweredeliveredsuccessfully.People who were disengaged from more formal learning o

schemesweresuccessfullysupported.Thevoluntarysectorhelpedtoengagepeopleinciviclifeo

andgotpeopleinvolvedintheObjective1programme.Objective1alsohadanimpactonthesectoritself,inparticularby•(seesection6.7formoredetail):

Improvingpartnershipsandco-ordination.o

Increasingthecapacityofthesector.o

Raisingtheprofileofthesectorandmakingthesectoro

moreinfluentialinpolicydecisions.Helpingtomakethesectormore‘professional’,i.e.,bettero

governed,managedandpromoted.Improvingskillsandknowledgewithinthesector.o


17

5


• AcrossalltheObjective1programmesthemainstreamvoluntarysector supported 19,854 beneficiaries. Of these, 2,513 got jobs and 7,400 got a qualification of some kind. 1,454 SME’s were supported.

• Withatotalof£45.4millioninvested,acrudeestimateisthatthe2,513jobswerecreatedat£18,066perhead.TheoverallObjective1 programme target for additional jobs was 14,42510. With a total allocationofabout£350millionthisequatesto£24,263perjob.Thereare some complications around counting job outcomes due to way data was collected and the definitions of jobs created and additional jobs. However, in general terms these figures would suggest that the voluntary sector has provided significant value for money on the job creation outputs.

• Withseveralmonthsdeliverystillleftforsomeprojects,voluntaryandcommunity organisations are well on track to exceed their targets and outcomes on the co-financing schemes. The JCP and LSC figures both show that in a number of areas the sector has considerably exceeded its output targets.

5.4 Size of the sector

Wehavecompiledadatabaseof2,959uniquevoluntaryand•communityorganisations.Thisisatthewidestdefinitionandincludescharities,smallcommunitygroups,sportsclubs,socialenterprisesandothervoluntarynot-for-profitorganisations.Weexpectthatwewillnothavecapturedeveryorganisationin•Cornwall,sotherealsizeofthesectorisprobablywellover3,000organisations.Thisrepresentssignificantgrowthonpreviousreportsin1998and2003thatsuggestedatotalofaround1,89411.Thedistrictbreakdownisasfollows:•

10 Objective1ProgrammeforCornwallandtheIslesofScilly2000-2006SingleProgrammingDocument(December2005)-page249.

11 LearningandSkillsCouncil:ResearchingtheVoluntarySector-page7.

Number of Voluntary and Community Groups By District

Kerrier458

Restormel464

North Cornwall498

Carrick740

Isles of Scilly21

Caradon328

Penwith450


• Inachievingadatasetofnearly3,000organisations,wesuspectthatwe have been able to compile a more comprehensive database than previous researchers so estimating actual growth in the size of the sector is difficult.

• Thesheernumberoforganisationsmeansthatissuesofduplicationmust exist. The Charity Commission reports that 78% of charities have no joint working arrangements with other charities12. However, 45% of charities said they were too specialised to work with others13.

5.5 Nature and work of the sector

Thebreadthofworkiswide;thefollowingchartshowsthe•breakdown of organisations’ single most important area of work:

12 Ibid-page2.

13 Ibid-page34.


18

Mai

n fi

ndin

gs5

Culture /Arts6%

Welfare8%

Environment9%

Education6%

Health8%

Support and Resources for

Community Groups21%

Youth Work7%

Sports5%

Housing or Homelessness

2%Domestic Violence1%

Employment or Unemployment

1% Heritage6%

Other7%

Social Care12%

Volunteering1%

% Breakdown of Single Most Important Area of work

75%declaredthemselvestobeindependentlocalorganisations.•24%werepartofanationalorganisation.Charitiesarethemostcommonlegalstructureinthesector.75%•oforganisationsinoursurveywerecharities.Inthefullvoluntaryand community sector population we found that two thirds of organisationswerecharities.


• Thegraphabovestartstoshowthebreadthoftheimpactofthevoluntary and community sector’s work. The sector is active in many fields. There is also much crossover activity, e.g., youth work in the field of arts or sports.

• Thehighnumberoforganisationsinthecategory“Supportandresources for community groups” includes village halls and community centres which, although not usually defined as ‘infrastructure agencies’, do provide venues and meeting spaces for other voluntary and community groups.

• Thereisasurprisinglylownumberoforganisationsthatsaytheywork in the field of unemployment/employment despite the extensive engagement of the sector with Objective 1 and its success in getting people into jobs. It would appear that organisations define themselves more through their objectives and field of work than by the outcomes they achieve.

5.6 Income and resources of the sector

Incomeinthevoluntarysectorgrewfrom£331milliontoa•conservativeestimateof£390millionbetween2003and2007–c18%growth14.10%ofthesectorgeneratesaround90%ofthisincome.•AnalysisofGuideStarUKData(justcharities)showsthemedian•incomeisapproximately£7,00015.Overhalfoforganisationsinthesectorreportanincomeofunder•£10,000.Thefollowinggraphshowsthenumbersoforganisationsandthe•total income:

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

£0-10k

£10-50k

£50-100k

£100-500k

£500-£1m

£1m-£5m

£5m+

Income Band

Nu

mb

er o

f O

rgan

isat

ion

s

£0

£20

£40

£60

£80

£100

£120

£140

£160

£180

Inco

me

£mill

ion

Number ofOrganisations

CombinedIncome £m

14 Wehaveestimatedtheincomeat£390millionbyusingGuideStardata(knownincomefiguresforcharities)andbygrossingupfortheremainingorganisationsusingdatafromourtelephonesurvey.The£331millionfigurein2003istakenfromtheLearningandSkillsCouncilreport:ResearchingtheVoluntarySector-page8.

15 2007GuideStarUKdataprovidedunderlicencetoPerfectMoment.


19

5


• TheCharityCommissionincomegrowthfigurefor2003-2006nationallywas 30%16. At 18%, growth in Cornwall has been at a significantly slower rate.

• Objective1fundingaccountsforsomeofthisincomegrowth,althoughthe Objective 1 timescale is 2000-2006 and ours is 2003-2007.

• Thehugeturnovergeneratedbyasmallnumberofverylargeorganisations is the common scenario in the voluntary sector across the country. The Charity Commission’s own analysis17 shows that 60% ofallcharitieshaveunder£10,000incomeperannumandthattheseorganisations generate 1% of the total income of the sector.

• ThelowmedianfigureintheGuideStardatashowsthatthereareveryhigh numbers of small charities in Cornwall.

5.7 Staff

In2007therewereapproximately17,120peopleworkinginthe•voluntaryandcommunitysectorinCornwall.Thisisaround7%ofthetotalworkforceinCornwall• 18.Thisincludesfull-time(42%),part-time(40%),freelance(9%)and•casualstaff(9%).Thegendersplitis76%womento24%menoverall.•Approximately45%ofsectororganisationsemploynostaff.•


• The17,120figureindicatesthatthesectorhasgrownby7%sincetheLSC research in 2003. Unfortunately, the figures in the 1998 Prosper19 research for staffing were calculated under a different methodology, so there are problems with comparisons. Nationally, growth in voluntary sector in the same period was around 9%20.

16 FigurestakenfromCharityCommissionwebsitewww.charity-commission.gov.uk.

17 FigurestakenfromCharityCommissionwebsitewww.charity-commission.gov.uk.

18 242,500economicallyactive,accordingtoNOMIS,March2007,ONSAnnualPopulationSurvey.

19 ValuingtheSectorinDevonandCornwallforPROSPER1998reportedinLSCResearch2003-page22.

20 NCVOUKVoluntarySectorWorkforceAlmanac2007-page7.

• Thevoluntarysectorworkforceat7%ofthetotalcompareswith4%in the Creative Industries, 9% in Food and Drink; 5% in Agriculture, 10% in Medical and 12% in the Tourism sector21.

• TheNCVO’sUKVoluntarySectorWorkforceAlmanac200722 estimates the voluntary sector to be around 2.2% of the national workforce.

• Thepart-time/full-timesplitissimilartothenationalfigure-NCVOreports that 39% of staff are part-time23.

• ThegendersplitinCornwallismorebiasedtowardswomenthanisthecasenationally.UKwidefiguresshow69%ofemployeesinthesectorare female24.

5.8 Volunteers

Weestimatethat34%• 25 of the adult population do some kind of volunteering.28%oftheadultpopulationvolunteerforupto10hoursaweek;•6%volunteerformorethan10hoursaweek.37%ofvolunteersweremen;63%women.•Wefoundthat3%ofallvolunteersareDisabledpeople,6%ofall•volunteersareunder25,40%ofallvolunteersareover60and1%ofallvolunteersarefromaBlackorMinorityEthnicCommunity.Around34%ofvolunteerswereunemployed.•Thefollowinggraphshowstheperceivedbarrierstounemployed•volunteersgettingjobs:

21 SectoremploymentfigurestakenfromCornwallCountyCouncil’sLINC‘SectorProfiles’.

22 NCVOUKVoluntarySectorAlmanac2007-page7.

23 Ibid-page9.

24 Ibid-page27.

25 Weaskedorganisationsabouttheirtotalnumberofvolunteersinourtelephonesurvey.FromthisfigureweestimatethetotalnumberofvolunteersinCornwalltobe133,840.ThisisverysimilartothefigurefromtheCornishStrategicPartnership’sQualityofLifeSurvey2007,albeitwithadifferentmethodology.Theadult(over18)populationinCornwallis396,266(Census2001).


20

Mai

n fi

ndin

gs5

8%

11%

20%

21%

21%

22%

25%

35%

35%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

No appropriate courses

Inconvenient TrainingTimes

Distance to Travel

Cost of Travel

Cost/Lack of Childcare

Other

Motivation

Loss of benefits

Lack of employmentopportunities

Main barriers for unemployed volunteers going on to get training or employment - % of response


• The133,840peoplewhovolunteergaveaconservativeaverageof5.8 hours a week each. Based on the 2007 average Cornish wage,26 thisisworththeequivalentof£387millionayeartotheCornisheconomy. This must be treated as a rough estimate, but it is clear that volunteering makes a considerable contribution to Cornwall’s economy. It should also be noted that volunteering is not ‘cost free’ as recruiting, training, managing and supporting volunteers all require time and money.

• Wefoundthat66%oftheadultpopulationdonotvolunteer.The2007 Quality of Life Tracker Survey for Cornwall Strategic Partnership (November 2007) found that 64% of adults did not volunteer27.

26 ThemeangrossweeklypayinCornwallis£355or£9.59perhourfora37hourweek-AnnualSurveyofHoursandEarnings2007-OfficeNationalStatistics.

27 CornwallStrategicPartnership:QualityofLifeSurveyTracker(Nov2007)-page51.

• TheQualityofLiferesearchalsofoundthat31%ofadultsvolunteerupto 10 hours a week over the year, compared to our 28%, and that 4.3% volunteered for more than 10 hours a week, compared to our 6%28.

• Allowingformarginoferror,thefiguresinbothreportsarecloseenough to indicate that a figure of about 30% of adults volunteering is accurate. The Quality of Life Tracker surveyed individuals and we asked organisations. From either perspective, the percentages are very similar.

• TheQualityofLifeTrackersurveyfoundthat22%ofunder25’svolunteered. They had a very small sample size of under 25’s with a wide margin of error. This may account for the marked difference from our figure of 6%.

• TheCensus2001indicatedthat26%ofthepopulationinCornwallwas over 6029. This means that older people make up a much higher percentage of the number of volunteers than is the case in the general population.

• StrategyandAction-theeconomicdevelopmentstrategyforCornwall- highlights the need to ensure that an ageing population still benefits the economy of Cornwall30. There is an opportunity to engage high numbers of older people living in, and moving into, Cornwall in voluntary work and therefore the economy.

28 Ibid-page51.

29 OfficeNationalStatistics-Census2001.

30 StrategyandAction:TheEconomicDevelopmentStrategyforCornwallandtheIslesofScilly2007-2021-page51.


21

5

5.9 Workforce development issues

Thefollowinggraphhighlightstheamountspentontrainingper•head:

Training Spend Per Head

Access free training from others

28%

Over £5004%

£50 - £1008%

Under £5012%

£251 - £50013%

£101 - £25017%

None18%

Nearly half of all organisations spend no money on training for their •workforce;only4%spendover£500perpersonperyear.Theaveragetrainingbudgetofthosethatdeclaredanamountis•approximately£212perhead.Whereapplicable,andofthosewhoanswered,54%of•organisationshadatrainingbudget.Keytrainingneedsinclude:•

MarketingandPR.o

Fundraising.o

Computer/IT.o

Management.o

HealthandSafety.o

FirstAid.o


• Thespendingontrainingataround£212perheadislow.Thenationalaverageinthevoluntarysectoris£375perheadaccordingtotheChartered Institute for Personnel and Development31. At a national level,thisishigherthanthepublicandprivatesectorsat£250and£273perheadrespectively.

• Belowaverageinvestmentintrainingisworryingwhenthevoluntarysector is expanding to take on delivery of public sector contracts and is looking to become more involved in strategy and policy development in the county. The sector needs to be investing more in its own workforce.

• Nationally,85%ofvoluntarysectororganisationshaveatrainingbudget32. The Cornish voluntary sector needs to think about how it can invest more in training its own workforce. Full-cost recovery33 can help with this. Project budget models need to consider all the training requirements for an organisation’s successful development and management.

• CornwallInfrastructurePartnership’s‘TrainingMatters’schemeisan important development which aims to provide a single reference point for training for - or by - the voluntary and community sector in Cornwall34. Our research highlights the need for continued investment into this kind of strategic approach to training issues.

31 CharteredInstituteofPersonnelandDevelopment:LearningandDevelopmentSurvey2007-page30.TheNCVOresearchintothesectorfoundamedianfigureof£279peremployee(page45ofthe2007WorkforceAlmanac).

32 Ibid-page30.

33 TheAssociationofChiefExecutivesofVoluntaryOrganisations(ACEVO)definesfullcostrecoveryas:“Recoveringthefullcostsofaprojectorservice.Inadditiontothecostsdirectlyassociatedwiththeproject,suchasstaffandequipment,projectswillalsodrawontherestoftheorganisation.Forexample,adequatefinance,humanresources,management,andITsystemsarealsointegralcomponentsofanyprojectorservice.”-www.fullcostrecovery.org.uk.

34 Seewww.cornwallvcs.org.uk

Valuing the Voluntary SectorM

ain

find

ings

5

22

5.10 Issues for organisational development

Thefollowinggraphhighlightstheimportanceofcertainissues:•

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Developing Trustee Management Skills

Developing Staff Management Skills

Developing IT skills

Negative publicity/unpopular cause

Appropriate office or w orkspace

Appropriate places to carry out activities

Availability of trained staff

Not enough staff time

Availability of suitable volunteers

Funding/Fund-raising

Very Important Quite Important Not That Important

Importance of Issues for Organisational Development

Themainissuesidentifiedbyrespondentswithregardsto•organisationaldevelopmentwere:fundingandfund-raising,availabilityofsuitablevolunteers,availabilityoftrainedstaffandnotenoughstafftime.Otherissueslistedwere:•

Lackofmarketing.o

Needtoincreasemembership.o

Keepingupwithlegislation.o


• Thereareclearlytwooverridingissuesthatareimportantfororganisational success: availability of suitable volunteers and funding issues. Most infrastructure organisations provide help in these two areas which would suggest continued support for this kind of capacity building is much needed. Our evidence suggests that where infrastructure works well, the voluntary sector is influential and plays a vital role in service delivery, policy development and engaging individuals in civic life.

• Continuedfundingforskillsdevelopmentinthevoluntarysectorisclearly vital alongside promoting the need for training budgets in funding bids and core cost/full-cost recovery calculations.

• Theissueofmarketingtheworkofthesectorisalsosignificant.Smallto medium scale charities need to market themselves more effectively if they want to develop, or even survive, in some cases.

Valuing the Voluntary Sector Strategy level findings

23

6

Thethirdsectorhasanextraordinaryabilitytoengageindividuals.

EdMilibandMP,June2007,MinisterfortheThirdSector


24

Str

ateg

y le

vel f

indi

ngs

6

6 Strategy-level findings

Strategy-level research consisted of desk-top research of various relevant documents plus consultation in the form of 25 hour-long face-to-face interviews with:

Voluntarysectorstaffanddirectors.•GOSWofficers.•RDAofficers.•Objective1Partnershipofficers.•Localauthorityofficers.•Localcouncillors.•LSCandJCPstaff.•

6.1 The strategy for engaging the voluntary sector

Therewasamixedresponsetotheissueofstrategyandengagementofthevoluntarysector.Theresponsesfromthevoluntarysectorindicatedagreater dissatisfaction with the strategic approach than the answers from thepublicsector.Therewasasmallmajorityofresponsesthatindicatedthatstrategicengagementwasgenerallygood.Engagementwiththevoluntary sector came in several forms:

ThroughtheIntegratedAreaPlans(IAPs).•ThroughdiscussionswiththePartnershipOfficeandGOSW.•Directlythroughtheco-financingorganisations:JobCentrePlus•(JCP)andLearningandSkillsCouncil(LSC).ThroughtheCommunityFuturesTaskForce.•WithothertaskforcessuchasCulturalIndustries,Heritage,and•LearningandSkills.

ThevoluntarysectorwasmostdirectlyengagedthroughtheCommunityFuturesTaskForcewhichhadaremitto:

MakelinkstoIAPs.•Tofostersocialinclusionandcommunityregeneration.•Tobuildcapacitytoengageintheregenerationprocess.•

Todeveloppartnershipsthatsharedlearningandbestpractice• 35.

Thereweresomeissuesandquestionsraisedaboutrepresentationonthese task groups and that this favoured larger organisations that were alreadyengagedwithpre-existingfundingprocesses.However,itiseasytounderstandwhyObjective1soughtactiveandvisibleorganisationstobecomeinvolvedindiscussions.

SomerespondentsfeltthatObjective1seemedtorespondtowell-writtenbidsandgoodprojectsratherthansetaclearstrategyforwhatitwantedtofund.Therewasasensethatengagementwasbetterinsomeareas- Penwith in particular - due to a more coherent voluntary sector being pluggedintotheIAPprocess.ThisispossiblydowntothenetworkingandcommunicationofserviceslikeInterlinkinthewestofthecounty.

Therewasahighnumberofresponsesthatindicatedthattherewasalackof support to connect with the process or that voluntary sector capacity wasnotsufficienttoengage.Somepeoplefeltthatthereshouldhavebeenmorehand-holdingforthemostdisadvantagedgroups.Someinthevoluntarysectorfeltthat,althoughguidancewasavailable,thisdidnotreallyconstituteastrategicresponsetothevoluntarysector’sneeds.

Therewasagreatdealofconfusionabouttheco-ordinationandrepresentationofthevoluntarysectorintheearlydays.Itwasfeltthat:

Itwasunclearwhowasrepresentingthesector.•Thesectorwasnotwellrecognisedbythepublicsector.•Therewasalackofpartnershipworkingandco-ordination.•

Thereweresomeissuesaboutthemanagementofexpectationsatthebeginningoftheprogramme.SeveralrespondentsfeltthathopeswereraisedandthatitwasnotclearwhatObjective1couldorcouldnotfund.Withhindsight,therecouldhavebeenmoreclarityaboutthenatureoftheprogrammeandwhatitwouldorwouldnotfundattheoutset.

OpiniononthesuccessofIAPswasmixed.Ononehand,manypeoplefelt

35 ObjectiveOnePartnership:CommunityFuturesTaskForceStrategy-page1.


25

6

that they were a useful process for aligning local priorities with those of Objective1andthattheywereagoodvehicleforengagingthevoluntarysector.Onthenegativeside,severalrespondentsfeltthattheywereineffectiveandthattheywerenotconsistentlygoodacrossthecounty.ItwasalsofeltthattheIAPsgotboggeddownwithprocessesandthatthisstifleddeliveryinsomecases.

Therewasageneralconsensusthatthereseemedtobelittleco-ordinationwithotherfundersatastrategiclevel.Thiscausedconsiderableproblemsforsomevoluntarysectorprojectsthathadseveralpotentialfunderswhodidnottalktoeachotherandhadconflictingtimescales,deadlinesanddifferinglegalrequirements.Inoneextremecase,13differentfunderswereinvolvedinsupportingasingleproject.

6.2 The relationship between the voluntary sector and Objective 1

TherelationshipbetweenthevoluntarysectorandObjective1wasmixed.Ononehand,relationswiththeofficersatGOSWandthePartnershipOfficewereuniversallypositiveyet,ontheotherhand,manyfeltthatitwasnotclearwhotoseekadvicefrom,thattheschemewas‘handsoff’and that relationships were driven more by funding requirements and werenotintheinterestsofstrategicvoluntarysectordevelopment.Therewasasensethatengagementgrewandgotbetterastimewenton.Relationshipswiththedifferenttaskforces,PriorityManagementGroups(PMGs)andIAPsweregenerallypositive.

6.3 Co-financing

Mostrespondentsfeltthattherelationshipbetweenthevoluntarysectorandtheco-financingorganisationswasexcellent.Alargemajorityofrespondentsfeltthatco-financingwasagoodthingandthatiteasedthepressuresoffindingmatchfunding.Thesinglepointofcontactwasfoundtobehelpfulandmadeapplyingforfundingmuchsmoother.

Somepeoplemadecriticismsoftheco-financingtenderingprocess.Inparticular,itwasfeltthatmoretimewasneededforpartnershipdevelopmentatthestartoftheprocess.Also,somepeoplefeltthatit

washardforthevoluntarysectortodeliveronalargescale.Thelackofanappealsprocessforrejectedtenderswasmentioned.TherewasaperceptionbysomethattheLSC’srelationshipwiththecollegesmadeengagementwiththevoluntarysectordifficult.

JobCentrePlus’sapproachandattitudereceivedverypositivecomments.ManyinthesectorcommendedJCPfortakingbolddecisionsthathelpedthesectortogrow.VoluntarysectorrespondentsfeltthatJCPhadaverygoodunderstandingofdisadvantageinCornwall.

ItwasfeltbysomethatalthoughtheLSCwasslightlyslowerindevelopingarelationshipwiththevoluntarysector,itdiddeliversomevaluablesupport.AkeyturningpointinthedevelopmentofthesectorwastriggeredbythedecisionoftheLSCtorejectseveralbidsunderonetenderastheyappearedtobecompetingwitheachother.Thismadethesectorcometogethertodiscussjointworkingandsharingresources.

Theco-financersandotherpublicsectoragenciesfeltthatthevoluntarysectorwasverygoodatengagingwithlearners,findingbeneficiariesand providing mentoring and support to keep people engaged with the programmesinwhichtheyweretakingpart.Therewasaperceptionthatwhilst some voluntary sector organisations were very good at achieving joboutputs,somewerelesssuccessful.Aswehaveseen(intheimpactsectionofthisreport)asawholethesectorwasveryeffectiveatproducingjoboutcomes.Thiswasfelttobeakeypointandthatfutureprogrammesneed to recognise this and encourage strong partnership working between thevoluntarysectorandemployers,trainingorganisationsandcolleges.TheLearningPartnershipwasrecognisedbymanyasakeybrokerofserviceswithintheco-financingschemes.

6.4 The value of voluntary sector involvement in the programme

Therewasacknowledgementfromallpartiesthatthevoluntarysectorplayedacrucialpartinsupportingthehardesttoreach,mostdisadvantagedcommunitiesinCornwall.Respondentswerekeentopointoutthatthesecommunities and their lack of economic prosperity were the very reason thatCornwallwasgivenObjective1statusinthefirstplace.Respondents


26

Str

ateg

y le

vel f

indi

ngs

6

recognised that without the voluntary sector the programme would not havereachedthosemostinneed.

Thepublicsectorrespondentsappreciatedthevoluntarysector’sabilitytoprovideexpertiseincertainfieldsandwithdifferenttypesofbeneficiaries.Inageneralsense,peoplerecognisedthatthevoluntarysector:

HelpedtheObjective1programmeconnectwithcommunities.•Hassignificantcommunityplanning/consultationexpertise.•Hasvaluableexpertisewithcertainclientgroups.•Supportspeopledisengagedfrommoreformallearningschemes.•EnabledLocalAuthoritiestobemoreconfidentindevelopingand•deliveringprogrammeswithvoluntarysectorexpertise.HelpedObjective1tosuccessfullydeliveritsoutcomes.•Helpedpeopleengageinciviclife.•Hasanabilitytodeliversofteroutcomes.•Helpedgetlocalissuesraised.•Hasexperienceofemployabilityissuesandprovidingrouteways•backtoworkforunemployedpeople.

Inclusivitywasastrongthemeintheresponseswithmanyrecognisingthat the voluntary sector adds a non-threatening human face to an otherwisecomplexprogramme.Theco-financingorganisationsclearlyrecognisedandappreciatedthevoluntarysector’sabilitytofindandretainbeneficiaries.

Thepublicsectorrespondentsfeltthatthevoluntarysectorhadinfluence(andprobablymoreinfluencethanthevoluntarysectorrespondentsfeltthattheyhad)overthedirectionoftheprogramme.Thevalueofstrategicengagementbythesector,ratherthanonaproject-by-projectbasis,wasalsoseenasimportant.

6.5 Gaps in support and delivery

People’sviewsongapsinObjective1’sdeliveryvaried.Thevoluntarysector respondents generally felt that they had a clear understanding of theeconomicnatureoftheprogramme,butthoughtthatthefocusonthe

‘economy’missedavitalsocialcomponentofeconomicdevelopment.People considered that more work was needed on how issues such as housing,healthandothersocialmattersaffecttheeconomy.

Therewasaviewthatsomeareasofthecountymissedout,themostcommonlymentionedbeingNorthCornwall.ItwasalsothoughtthatmoreshouldhavebeendonearoundtheCamborne,PoolandRedruthareaandthatsomeotherhotspotsofdeprivationweremissed.

Thepublicsectorrespondentsalsofeltthatmorecouldhavebeendonetosupportthedevelopmentofsocialenterprisesinthecounty.Sustainabilitywasanareathatmanythoughthadnotbeentackledproperly.Manyrespondents took the view that investment into capacity building and social enterprisedevelopmentcouldhelpwiththis.

Some concerns were raised about how the cross-cutting themes of EqualOpportunities,EnvironmentalSustainabilityandInformationCommunicationsTechnologywereimplementedintheprogramme.Respondentsfeltthattheseseemedtohavebeenaddedintothefundingcriteria rather tokenistically and that they had not really been assessed effectively.Althoughmanyprojectstackledthelasttwothemes,somethoughtthatequalitiesissueswerenotsupportedproperly.PeopleconsideredithearteningtoseethattheLSChadsetspecificequalitiesoutputsinitstendersforConvergence.

6.6 Major issues for delivery

Therewasarangeofdifferentissuesthatcameupinthecourseofdeliveringprogrammes.Themostcommonissuerelatedtodeliveringoutcomesontheprogrammes.Onthenegativeside,somefoundtheoutcomes too rigid and economically focused and thought that it was difficulttogetsocialoutcomesrecognised.Thatsaid,respondentswerequicktopointoutthatObjective1wasprimarilyaneconomicprogramme.Some people also said that there had been a lack of learning and little sharingofexperiences.

Onthepositiveside,severalpeoplereportedthatthefactthat


27

6

disadvantaged people were able to attend training from voluntary sector organisationswasagoodthing,thatsofteroutcomeswereimportantandthat,onthewhole,theoutcomesandprogrammesweregoodforCornwall.Bothpublicandvoluntarysectorrespondentsthoughtthatthevoluntarysectorwasverygoodatdeliveringoutcomes.

Someofthespecificissuesimpactingondeliverywere:

Negative Positive

Lackofvenuesfordelivery•Transportissues•Lackofinnovation•Guidancecouldhavebeenbebetter•Electronicsystemnothelpful•Sustainabilitydifficult•

Goodbroadbandservices•Some good rural work•Ability to refer people was useful•Communication from funders good•Motivationofstaffgood•Flexibilityuseful•

Thereweresomecommentsaboutperceivedbureaucracy,but,onthewhole,fewpeoplefoundthatthesystemswereoverlycomplex.

Therewaspraiseforpartnershipsallround-especiallywithreferralsbetweenprogrammesororganisations.Linkswithcollegesandemployerswereseentobeimportantandwereoftenpositive.TheLSCandJCPhighlighted the importance of partnerships that enabled clear routeways intowork.

6.7 The impact of Objective 1 on the voluntary sector

TheimpactofObjective1wasfelttohavebeenimportantinthefollowingkey areas:

Partnership Development and Co-ordination

PublicandvoluntarysectorrespondentssaidthatObjective1fundinghadmadeasignificantcontributiontoimprovingco-ordinationofthevoluntarysector.Partnershipswerecreatedorstrengthened,collaborativeworkingpracticesweredevelopedandcollectiveco-ordinationincreased.ChangeUp(nowCapacityBuilders)-aspecificinfrastructuredevelopmentscheme-wasconsideredtohavehadasignificantimpactinthisareaalso.

Capacity

Anumberofresponsesindicatedthat‘capacity’inthesectorhadbeenbuiltasaresultofObjective1funding.Thereisavarietyofdefinitionsof‘capacitybuilding’,butatitsbroadest-andinavoluntarysectorcontext-we take this to mean a combination of:

Human resources development,• e.g.,enhancingskills, understandingandknowledgetoimproveperformance.

Organisational development,• e.g.,elaborationofmanagement structures,developmentofpoliciesandprocedures,improved governance and better relationships with other organisations and sectors.

ResponsesindicatedthatthesectorhadbenefitedfinanciallyfromObjectiveOneandthatjobshadbeencreatedwithinthesectoritselfthusbuildingcapacity.Growthinseverallargevoluntarysectororganisationshadbeensignificant.Wehaveseenthatactualfundingforinfrastructureorganisations was limited so that the improvements in capacity were unplanned,butclearlydesirable,outputs.

Voice/Profile

ThevoiceandprofileofthesectorwasfelttohaveimprovedmarkedlyduringtheperiodofObjective1.Severalresponsesindicatedthatthesectorwasinamuchstrongerandmoreinfluentialpositionthanpreviously.Itwasalsofeltthatthesector’scredibilityandreputationhadincreasedasaresultofbetterpartnershipsandsuccessfuldeliveryofprogrammes.Thepublicsectorrespondentsalsofeltthatthevoluntarysectorwassignificantlybetterplacedandwasmuchmorestrategicinitsapproach.Theyvaluedthesector’sexpertiseanditsabilitytodeliver.

Professionalism

SeveralrespondentsfeltthatObjective1helpedthesectorbecomemoreprofessionalbothexternally(initsmarketingandPR)andinternally(withimprovedaccountability,managementandgovernance).

SkillsandKnowledge

Therewasgeneralacknowledgementthatskillsofstaffwithinthesectorhaddevelopedandthatknowledgeandunderstandinghadincreased.

28

Photo: Sailing at StithiansCourtesyofSouthWestLakesTrust

Valuing the Voluntary Sector Case studies

29

7

Objective1galvanizedthevoluntarysectorandensuredthatithadacollectivevoiceandimpact.

PhilMcVey,DirectorofEuropeanProgrammes,SouthWestRDA


30

7C

ase

stud

ies Cornwall Neighbourhoods for Change(CN4C)isacharitablecompany

that aims to improve the quality of life in disadvantaged neighbourhoods inCornwall.Theorganisationhasafocusonsupportingpeoplelivinginpublicandsociallyrentedhousing.CN4Creceivedaround£3.2millioninLSCandJCPgrants.CN4Chelpedwellover1,000peoplegetjobsandnearly2,000peopletogetqualifications.CN4Chasbecomeanessentialproviderofservicesinmanysocialhousingestatesacrossthecounty.IthashavedevelopedconsiderableexpertiseinmanaginganddeliveringESFcontracts.

TarnLamb,CEOofCN4C,said:“Objective1hashelpedCN4Cgrowintoone of the most important organisations delivering services for hard to reachcommunities.Wehavebeenabletomakearealdifferencetothelivesofpeopleandfamilieslivinginsocialhousing.Tacklingdisadvantageand poverty must remain a top priority to make Cornwall a prosperous placeforeveryone.”

Gotowww.cn4c.org.uk for more information about the organisation anditswork.

Pentreathofferstraining,advice,workexperienceandemploymentopportunities to people in Cornwall who are recovering from mental ill health.Pentreathreceivedaround£2.9millioningrantsfromDirectbids,LSCandJCP.ItsprogrammesunderObjective1werediverse-includingworkincommunityandchildren’scentres,horticulturaltrainingschemes,trainingandsupportforwomen,hospitalbasedwork,runningasocialenterprisemagazineanddevelopingtheirofficeandtrainingcentre.MuchofthisworksawpeoplegainaccreditedqualificationsandPentreathhasalso helped employers be more aware of mental health issues for their workforces.

LouiseKnox,DirectorofPentreath,said:“Objective1allowedustotakesomerisks,bemoreinnovativewithourdeliveryandreallyaddvaluetotheworkwedo.WithoutObjective1wewouldn’thavedeliveredsuchabreadthofexcitingservicesthatreallymakeadifferencetopeople’slives.”

Visit www.pentreath.co.ukformoreinformationaboutthecharity.

7 Case studies


31

7

Cornwall Arts Centre Trust (ACT)isacharityandoneofCornwall’skeycreativeindustriesdevelopmentagencies.ACTreceivednearly£6millioningrantsfromObjective1.WiththisfundingACTranthesuccessfulCreativeSkillsprogrammeandtheCornwallArtsMarketingcampaigns.

Creative Skills is the professional development scheme for artists in Cornwall which provides advice on business and skills development and investment to help people in the creative industries undertake training in all aspectsoftheirwork-bothcreativelyandinabusinesssense.

CornwallArtsMarketing(CAM)workedtoraisetheprofileofCornwall’screative industries and invested in a large number of partners to improve thequalityoftheirartsprogrammingandtheirmarketingpractices.CAMransomeveryhighprofilecampaignsincludingpromotingCornishculturethroughTheGuardiannewspaperandmountingexhibitionsofKurtJackson’spaintingsandCornwall’sWorldHeritageStatusatPaddingtonStationinLondon.ACTalsoreceivedfundstobeginthedevelopmentofKrowji-aflagshipclusterofcreativebusinessesbasedintheoldgrammarschoolatRedruth.ACTsupportedover3,000peopleand500companieswithObjective1funding.

RossWilliams,DirectorofACT,said:“TheObjective1programmehastransformedtheculturalandartisticlandscapeofCornwall.WithObjective1’shelp,ACTsupportedmanycreativepeopletodeveloptheirbusinesses.WehelpedtoturnthecreativesectorintoakeycomponentoftheCornisheconomy.CornwallisoneofthemostcreativeplacesinEuropeandwearelookingforwardtoabrightfuturewithKrowjiatitsheart.”

Gotowww.actcornwall.org.uktofindoutmoreabouttheorganisation.


32

7C

ase

stud

ies Penwith Community Development Trust(PCDT)isacharitybased

inPenzance.Itworkstoachievesustainableregenerationinthearea.PCDTisakeymemberoftheCornishInfrastructurePartnershipandhostsimportantinitiativessuchastheWestCornwallHealthyLivingCentre,PenwithVolunteerBureau,CarryonLearning,PenwithYouthandCommunityProject,WestCornwallCommunityNetworkandCornwallInter-link.

PCDTreceivednearly£200,000fromObjective1tohelpcreatethePenwithCentreinPenzance.Thecentreprovidesoffices;meeting,trainingandconferencerooms;andotherservicesformanyvoluntaryandcommunitygroupsinthearea.ThisinitiativeinPenzancehashelpedimprove the capacity of many organisations and greatly increased co-ordinationofthesector.

SueGuard,ChiefExecutiveofPCDT,said:“Objective1’sinvestmentintothePenwithCentrewasasignificantpointinPCDT’shistory.Itenabledus to be more sustainable and meant we could deliver a wide range of successfulprojects.ThecentreitselfisavibranthubthatprovidesafocusforthevoluntaryandcommunitysectorinPenwith.PCDThasgrownconsiderablywiththehelpofObjective1andIthinkthatthiskindofinfrastructure can make a real difference to economic prosperity for all in Cornwall.”

Visit www.pcdt.orgtofindoutmoreabouttheworkoftheTrust.


33

7

The Silvanus Trust is a charity committed to regenerating the woodlands intheSouthWest.TheTrusthasbeenworkingforover20yearstopromoteandincreasethepotentialofwoodlandsforthebenefitoflocalcommunities,businessesandtheenvironment.OneoftheTrust’saimsis to inspire and involve communities to use woodland to support greater ruraleconomicactivity.

TheSilvanusTrustreceivedaround£800,000fromObjective1.ThroughitsWoodworksandTreeclaimschemestheTrusthelpedsmallbusinessescreatejobsbyprovidingtraining,networkingopportunities,businesssupportandbespokecourses.Oneimportantaspectwastoprovidetraining in environmental sustainability which can provide direct economic benefits.TheWorkingWoodlandsproject,withaprivatesectorpartner,providedfinancialassistance(e.g.throughcapitalgrants)andbusinesssupport to woodland owners and businesses involved in the timber industryinCornwall.Thisenabledessentialwoodlandmanagementtobeundertaken,investmentstobemadeinspecialisedmachinery,theinstallation of wood fuelled heating and new markets to be researched and developedfortimberproducts.TheTrustwasalsoabletorefurbishandupgradeasawmilltoprovidecapacitytoprocesslocallygrowntimber.

SarahVaughan,DirectoroftheSilvanusTrust,said:“Thewoodlandsectormakes a vital contribution to the economy of Cornwall and it is crucial thatourwoodlandsaremanagedsustainably.WithObjective1’shelp,theSilvanusTrusthashelpedbusinessesthroughoutCornwallsurvive,growanddelivertangibleeconomic,socialandenvironmentalbenefits.”

Visitwww.silvanus.org.uktolearnmoreabouttheworktheTrustdoes.


34

8C

oncl

usio

ns a

nd r

ecom

men

dati

ons

Thevoluntarysectorisinamuchmorepowerfulpositionthaniteverwasbefore.

EricBrooke,Sept2007,CornwallCountyCouncillor,PortfolioHolderfor Community Services

Valuing the Voluntary Sector Conclusions and recom

mendations

35

8

8. Conclusions and recommendations

8.1 Concluding remarks

ThevoluntarysectorhascomealongwaysincethestartofObjective1.IthasgrownconsiderablyandemploysalargesectionoftheCornishworkforce.Thereislittledoubtthatthesectorismuchmoreco-ordinatedandinfluential.Objective1,alongsidefundingfromsourcesliketheLotteryandChangeUp,hashelpedraisethesector’sprofilehugely.WehavealsofoundthatformanysmallercommunityorganisationsObjective1simplywasnotrelevantorappropriate.

WefoundthatthevalueoftheinvestmentintothesectorfromObjective1at£45millionwasaround13%ofthefundscommitted.ThiswasmorethantheCountyCouncil,DistrictCouncilsandasmuchasFurtherEducationCollegesreceived,althoughthemoneywasgiventoawiderangeoforganisations.WehaveseenthattherewashugediversityintheprojectsthatObjective1fundedandthatthismultiplicityisoneofthesector’sgreatstrengths.Italsobringsdifficulties:acollectionofsmallerorganisationswillfindithardertohaveavoicewithpolicymakersandfundersthanmajorinstitutions.Thishighlightstheimportanceofcontinuingto develop a strategic infrastructure that can effectively represent voluntary groups’interestsinfuturepolicyandprogrammedevelopment.

Objective1’sproject-by-projectfundingapproachwascriticisedforbeingun-strategic and we now know that Convergence will be much more targeted.Thisnewfundingregimemustretainsomeflexibilityinitsstrategiestorespondtonewpoliciesandissuesastheyemerge.Thevoluntary sector itself also needs to understand the economic as well as thesocialandenvironmentalpillarsoftheLisbonAgenda36 and recognise theeconomicfocusofthenewprogrammeifitwantstobeinvolved.

36 FromEuropeanUnionwebsite:http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/lisbon_strategy_en.htm:“[TheEuropeanCouncilmetinLisbonin2000and]launcheda“LisbonStrategy”aimedatmakingtheEuropeanUnionthemostcompetitiveeconomyintheworldandachievingfullemploymentby2010.Thisstrategy…restsonthreepillars:1.Aneconomicpillar…forthetransitiontoacompetitive,dynamic,knowledge-basedeconomy.…2.AsocialpillardesignedtomodernisetheEuropeansocialmodelbyinvestinginhumanresourcesandcombatingsocialexclusion;and3.Anenvironmentalpillar[torecognise]thefactthateconomicgrowthmustbedecoupledfromtheuseofnaturalresources.”

Voluntaryandcommunityorganisationshavedeliveredcompetently,professionally,accessiblyandcost-effectively.Theimpactofthefundinghasbeensignificantbothonthebeneficiariesandonthesectoritself.Therewasanunexpectedlevelofengagementwithprivateenterprisesandaninteresting‘thirdsector’hasbenefitedwhichengagesacrosspublic,privateandvoluntaryfieldswithagreatdealoffreedomandanabilitytobrokerpartnershipsandinnovate.

Newcontextsareemergingtoshapethepolicyarenaforthesector.Inparticular,thedrivetodeliverpublicservicesprovidesopportunitiesbutalsopotentiallythreatensthesector’sindependenceandvalues.Manyinthe sector feel passionately that they need to retain their values and that theyshouldnotbecomeanarmofgovernmentoranewpublicsector.Environmentalissuessuchasclimatechangewillshapepoliciesforalongtime to come and organisations will need to develop coherent responses tothesechallenges.

Theresearchhasshowntheimportanceofvoluntarysectorinfrastructureand that where this is well developed the sector is much more involved at theheartofpolicymakingandfundingdecisions.Partnershipdevelopment,continued co-ordination and clear representation of the sector will also help keepitengagedwherenecessary.Asacaveattothis,partnershipsandco-ordinating bodies must have a clear rationale for their existence and be transparentintheirdecisionmaking.

Therearesomeworryingtrends-thelackofspendingontrainingforstaffneedsaddressing.Issuesfororganisationaldevelopmentsuchasfunding and the availability of suitable volunteers still exist and these areasneedrobustpoliciesanddevelopmentworktoberesolved.Linkedtothis,marketing,businessplanningandmanagementallneedtobecontinuouslyenhanced.Thesectoralsoneedstoexploreitspotentialtoearnmoremoney,takecalculatedriskswithloansandre-connectwithold fashioned methods of fund-raising - this will bring more autonomy throughunrestrictedincomeandlessrelianceongrantsfromafew,heavilyover-subscribedsources.Amixedeconomyofrevenuestreamssuchasstatutorygrants,earnedincomeandmoneyfromotherdiversesourceswillhelpmakethesectormoresustainable,healthierandindependent.


36

8C

oncl

usio

ns a

nd r

ecom

men

dati

ons Aboveall,thesectorneedstoconfidently,professionallyandpassionately

assert itself with funders and set the agenda with policy formers and decisionmakers.Voluntaryandcommunitygroupshaveexpertisethatthepublicandprivatesectorneeds,theyknowtheycandeliverandtheyshouldpromotetheirsuccessesforalltohear.

8.2 Recommendations

Strategy and Philosophy

Thevoluntaryandcommunitysectorneeds:

AbetterunderstandingoftheLisbonAgenda.•More equal engagement with public, private and college•sectors.Tomarketitselfmoreeffectivelytomakeothersmoreaware•ofitsexpertise.TomakesurelinkageswithLocalAreaAgreementsareclear.•Tokeepitsvaluebaseandpassionandavoidbecominganew•publicsector.Continued partnership development to remain well co-•ordinatedandinfluentialatahighlevelwiththepublicsector.Totakeastrategicapproachtotrainingitsstaffandvolunteer•workforce.To shareexpertise andbest practisewith awider rangeof•‘thirdsector’non-profitmakingorganisations.

Structures There needs to be a clear and transparent rationale for•partnerships.Future programmes should invest in infrastructure•organisations and this should sit alongside Capacity Builders andtheBigLotteryFund’sBASISscheme.

Themes More work is needed in the mainstream voluntary sector•to get a better understanding of Social Enterprise and itspotential.Voluntary sector organisations should have policies on how •to minimise their impact on the environment and climate change.Continue to engage hard to reach•Capacitybuilding,particularlyaroundissuessuchasbusiness•planning, funding, marketing, management and IT, needscontinuedinvestment.Support for volunteering initiatives will help overcome one of •thekeybarrierstoorganisationaldevelopment.

Sustainability and Funding

The sector needs to earnmore income, be less reliant on•grantsandcreateamorediversefundingbase.Funders need to develop longer term programmes that•recognisethetruecostofsupportingdisadvantagedpeople.Commissioningforpublicservicedeliverywillbringincome,•butthismustbeonafull-costrecoverybasis.Thesector’sassetbasecouldbeexpandedtoprovidemore•securityandpotentialincome.The Convergence programme (and other funding streams)•needs to retain flexibility within strategic delivery and ensure that a targeted approach does not unfavourably prejudicesmallervoluntaryorganisations.

Skills The sector needs to ensure that it has dedicated training•budgetsforitsworkforce.Theseshouldbeembeddedwithinanyfull-costrecoverymodel.Priorities for training include:•

Funding and fund-raising (including increasingo earnedincome).MarketingandPR.o Managementandleadership.o Businessplanning.o

8.3 Further work

WethinkthatthereisscopeforfurtherresearchintothevoluntarysectorinCornwall.Inparticularthefollowingpointswereraisedasimportantbothby public and voluntary sector respondents:

Furtherexplorationofthelinksandeconomicvalueofthevoluntaryand• thirdsector’sengagementwiththeprivatesector.Thisresearchshould investigatethepotentialforeconomicgrowthindevelopingtheselinks.

Giventhetrainingissues,thefeasibilityofadedicatedtraining • organisationfortheCornishvoluntarysectorshouldbeexplored.

Moreresearchisneededintoinnovation,productivityand • competitivenessinthesector.

Valuing the Voluntary Sector Appendices

37

Appendix A: Direct grants

Mainstream Voluntary Sector Direct Grants

Organisation Status Amount Measure Fund

All Saints Church Community Centre

Church Community Centre

£71,760 4.1 ERDF

ArtsCentreTrust Charity £788,831 5.1 ERDFArtsCentreTrust Charity £2,923,963 5.1 ERDFArtsCentreTrust Charity £160,823 3.2 ESFArtsCentreTrust Charity £280,744 1.7 ESF

ArtsCentreTrust Charity £286,673 3.2 ESF

ArtsCentreTrust Charity £329,950 3.3 ESFArtsCentreTrust Charity £209,409 3.7 ESFArtsCentreTrust Charity £85,000 5.1 ERDFBeacon Community Regeneration

Charity £96,207 4.1 ERDF

Beacon Community Regeneration


BTCV Charity £92,771 3.4 ESFBTCV Charity £134,103 3.1 ESFBTCV Charity £64,327 3.4 ESFBTCV Charity £417,631 3.1 ESFCaradon CAB Charity £41,800 4.8 ERDFCelticFilm&TelevisionFestival Charity £113,107 1.2 ERDFCommunityEnergyPlus Charity £30,075 1.6 ERDFCommunityProjectsTrust Charity £7,500 1.6 ERDFConstantineEnterprisesCompany


Cornwall Sustainable Building Trust

Charity £155,700 3.2 ESF

CornwallWildlifeTrust Charity £22,500 5.2 ERDFDevonandCornwallHousingAssociation


DevonandCornwallHousingAssociation


DiscoveryQuayEnterprisesLtdTradingArmof Charity

£1,635,000 2.2 ERDF

EastCornwallCAB Charity £255,700 3.4 ESFFarmCrisisSouthWest Charity £17,929 4.6 EAGGFGaiaTrust Charity £300,000 1.6 ERDFLooeHarbourCommissioners Charity £136,962 4.7 FIFG

Organisation Status Amount Measure FundLooeHarbourCommissioners Charity £109,225 4.8 ERDFLooeHarbourCommissioners Charity £80,822 4.7 FIFGLooeHarbourCommissioners Charity £24,465 4.7 FIFGLooeHarbourCommissioners Charity £19,660 4.7 FIFGLooeHarbourCommissioners Charity £19,148 4.7 FIFGLooeHarbourCommissioners Charity £15,000 5.2 ERDFLooeHarbourCommissioners Charity £9,210 4.7 FIFGLooeHarbourCommissioners Charity £8,062 4.7 FIFGLooeHarbourCommissioners Charity £5,697 4.7 FIFGLooeHarbourCommissioners Charity £4,995 4.7 FIFGMevagisseyHarbourTrustees Charity £61,073 4.7 FIFGMevagisseyHarbourTrustees Charity £25,000 5.2 ERDFMevagisseyHarbourTrustees Charity £4,501 4.7 FIFGMidCornwallCreditUnion CreditUnion £63,513 4.8 ERDFMiracleTheatreTrust Charity £21,791 5.1 ERDF

MotherEarth98LtdTradingArmof Charity

£23,878 4.6 EAGGF

MountHawkeYouthGroup Charity £335,000 3.6 ERDFMullionYouthClub Charity £101,052 4.8 ERDFNational Childminding Association


National Childminding Association


NationalLobsterHatchery Charity £17,500 5.3 ERDFNationalMaritimeMuseumCornwall


New Connection Charity £103,469 4.1 ERDFNew Season Charity £57,232 4.6 EAGGFNewlynArtGallery Charity £1,206,858 5.5 ERDFNewquay Zoo Charity £10,000 5.2 ERDFNorthCornwallCreditUnion CreditUnion £51,415 4.8 ERDFPendeenParishMembersInstitute


Pentreath Charity £47,418 4.2 ESFPentreath Charity £56,637 3.4 ESFPentreath Charity £22,854 4.2 ESFPentreath Charity £164,095 3.4 ESFPentreath Charity £52,374 3.3 ESFPentreath Charity £139,275 3.4 ESFPentreath Charity £19,586 3.4 ESFPentreath Charity £212,000 3.5 ESF


38

App

endi

ces Organisation Status Amount Measure Fund

Pentreath Charity £426,907 3.4 ESFPentreath Charity £998,854 3.4 ESFPentreath Charity £120,045 3.5 ESFPentreath Charity £169,018 3.3 ESFPentreath Charity £16,328 4.8 ERDFPenwerris Neighbourhood Pride Charity £52,987 4.1 ERDFPenwith Community DevelopmentTrust


PenwithHousingAssociationHousingAssociation

£316,872 4.2 ESF

PenwithHousingAssociationHousingAssociation

£95,797 3.1 ESF

PolperroHarbourTrusteesOtherVoluntary

£14,453 4.7 FIFG

PolperroHarbourTrusteesOtherVoluntary

£6,635 4.7 FIFG

RobertOwenCommunities Charity £93,415 3.4 ESFRocheFamilyLearningCentre Charity £63,008 4.8 ERDFSECCURE CreditUnion £48,700 4.8,2.2 ERDFSelfDirectionCommunityProject


SilvanusTrust Charity £245,600 4.6 EAGGFSilvanusTrust Charity £100,000 3.2 ESFSouthWestLakesTrust Charity £310,000 4.8 ERDFStAustellChinaClayMuseum Charity £299,871 5.2 ERDF

StIlloganParochialChurchCouncil

Church Community Centre

£122,432 4.1 ERDF

StithiansResourceCentre Charity £170,000 4.8 ERDFTheEdenProject Charity £12,896,000 2.1 ERDFTheEdenProject Charity £1,750,000 1.1 ERDFTheEdenProject Charity £1,006,892 2.1 ERDFTheEdenProject Charity £375,444 1.3 ERDFTheEdenProject Charity £258,362 4.6 EAGGFTheEdenProject Charity £68,000 5.2 ERDFTheEdenProject Charity £70,000 4.6 EAGGFTheEdenProject Charity £53,337 4.6 EAGGFTheNationalTrust Charity £308,000 5.2 ERDFTheNationalTrust Charity £141,913 5.2 ERDFTheNationalTrust Charity £80,894 4.6 EAGGFTheNationalTrust Charity £75,000 5.2 ERDF

Organisation Status Amount Measure FundTheNationalTrust Charity £37,610 4.6 EAGGFThePrince’sTrust Charity £589,360 1.5 ERDFThePrince’sTrust Charity £144,925 3.1 ESFTheSoilAssociation Charity £465,891 4.6 EAGGFTheSouthWestLakesTrust Charity £31,152 5.2 ERDFTheYoungBuildersTrust Charity £891,427 3.1 ESFTrebahGardenTrust Charity £540,223 5.2 ERDFWestCountryRiversTrust Charity £744,531 4.6 EAGGFTotal £37,421,280

Non Voluntary Sector Organisations Significantly Supporting the Voluntary Sector Direct Grants

Organisation Status Amount Measure FundRestormelDistrictCouncil DistrictCouncil £564,627 4.1 ERDFPenwithDistrictCouncil DistrictCouncil £450,767 5.2 ERDFCornwall County Council County Council £273,000 5.5 ERDFCornwall County Council County Council £83,793 5.2 ERDFCornwall College College £200,894 3.4 ESFCornwall College College £224,504 3.1 ESFCamborne,PoolRedruthSuccessZone

County Council £39,086 4.2 ESF

Cornwall College College £145,857 3.5 ESFUniversityofExeter University £700,441 5.4 ESFTotal £2,682,969

Third Sector or Not-for-Profit Direct Grants

Organisation Status Amount Measure FundCreativeKernow ThirdSector/Not-for-Profit £172,841 5.1 ERDFMediaCentreforCornwall

ThirdSector/Not-for-Profit £21,568 1.6 ERDF

RezolveKernow ThirdSector/Not-for-Profit £408,200 4.1 ERDFMevagisseyActivityCentre

CommunityInterestCompany

£252,222 4.8 ERDF

DigitalPeninsulaNetwork


Blisland Community Association


Cornwall Sustainable Tourism


KeskerdhKernow ThirdSector/Not-for-Profit £95,000 5.1 ERDF

Valuing the Voluntary Sector Appendices

39

Organisation Status Amount Measure FundCornwallWasteWorkingGroup


CornwallWasteWorkingGroup


CornwallWasteWorkingGroup


CornwallMarineNetwork


SouthWestScreen ThirdSector/Not-for-Profit £914,058 1.2,1.6 ERDF

SouthWestForest ThirdSector/Not-for-Profit £110,2274.4,4.5,4.6

EAGGF

SouthWestTUC Union £163,835 3.3 ESFSouthWestTUC Union £248,096 3.3 ESFEquity Union £5,000 5.1 ERDFCornishFishProducersOrganisation

ThirdSector/Not-for-Profit £704 4.7 FIFG

CornishFishProducersOrganisation

ThirdSector/Not-for-Profit £10,679 4.7 FIFG

CornishFishProducer’sOrganisation


CornishFishProducer’sOrganisation


CornishGuildofSmallholders

ThirdSector/Not-for-Profit £9,410 4.6 EAGGF

ClayTAWC ThirdSector/Not-for-Profit £41,650 4.1 ERDFTotal £4,437,636

Appendix B: Learning & Skills Council grantsMainstream Voluntary Sector LSC Grants

Organisation Status Amount Measure

ArtsCentreTrust Charity £52,365 1.7




Cornwall Neighbourhoods for Change Charity £200,000 3.3

Cornwall Neighbourhoods for Change Charity £415,369 3.1

Cornwall Neighbourhoods for Change Charity £110,000 Unknown

CommunityServiceVolunteers(CSV)Media Charity £100,000 1.7

Gwellheans Charity £45,623 3.4

Gwellheans Charity £40,000 Unknown

MountHawkeYouthGroup Charity £81,400 3.4

Pentreath Charity £50,000 Unknown

RedruthCommunityAssociation Charity £100,000 3.1

TownfieldTrust Charity £174,630 3.4

Victim Support Charity £214,000 Unknown

YWCA Charity £77,364 3.5

ConstructionIndustryTrainingBoard Charity £290,913 3.7

Total £2,482,902

Non-Voluntary Sector Organisations Significantly Supporting the Voluntary Sector LSC Grants


Connexions Government £178,344 3.2

Connexions Government £254,500 3.2

Cornwall College College £150,000 4.2

Cornwall College College £260,500 Unknown

Cornwall College College £100,000 3.4

Cornwall County Council LocalAuthority £369,519 3.8



EKOSLtd Private £16,967 3.4

LizardPathways NonProfitPartnership £70,000 Unknown

Total £1,833,680


40

App

endi

ces Third Sector or Not-for-Profit LSC Grants


LearningPartnership Not-for-Profit £250,000 3.2




















LearningPartnership Not-for-Profit £1,425,000 3.8

TUCLearningServices,Cornwall Union £36,000 3.3

Total £8,703,809

Appendix C: Job Centre Plus grantsMainstream Voluntary Sector JCP Grants

Organisation Status Amount

BritishTrustforConservationVolunteers(BTCV) Charity £88,835

Cornwall Neighbourhoods for Change Charity £183,960




Cornwall Neighbourhoods for Change Charity £1,099,507

CommunityServiceVolunteers(CSV)Media Charity £48,201

EastCornwallCitizensAdviceBureau Charity £20,519

Enable Charity £91,500

Pentreath Charity £30,763




Penwith Volunteer Bureau Charity £62,100

RealBase Charity £192,100

SilvanusTrust Charity £167,860



YouthHostelAssociation Charity £60,584

Total £3,760,488

Non-Voluntary Sector Organisations Significantly Supporting the Voluntary Sector JCP Grants


TruroCollege College £120,648

Cornwall College College £218,401

Total £339,049

Third Sector or Not-for-Profit JCP Grants


RuralEconomicPartnership Not-for-Profit £238,310

Total £238,310

valuing the voluntary sector · 2017-02-22 · arts centre trust, pentreath, silvanus trust,...

Documents