Election pledges DSC wants to see from political parties

The Directory of Social Change believes in an independent voluntary sector at the heart of social change. Through the support we provide to over 20,000 voluntary sector organisations every year we have a clear perspective on the issues currently affecting a very diverse range of groups.

Over the last three years we have seen huge changes in how government interacts with and funds the voluntary sector, but the next government – whoever wins the next election – will have to address serious challenges. Tighter resources and increased efficiency, coupled with the public’s demand for greater honesty and transparency, will come up against increased demands from those citizens in the greatest need.

There is unlikely to be further funding available for top-down ‘whole sector’ policy initiatives during the next parliament and contrary to what may be heard from other parts of the sector we think that is no bad thing. We think it’s time to simplify the real-life relationships between statutory bodies and the organisations they engage with, and just make them better.

Time for government to increase understanding of what it is doing, which starts with recognising and addressing the asymmetry of power that has evolved in the relationship between statutory bodies and the voluntary sector.

That’s why we’ve produced this list of pledges that we think can make a real difference.  There is no call for funding here, in fact most of them would be free or low cost, and would offer huge returns to both the voluntary sector and government. They are achievable without creating any new body or administrative organisation, they would benefit tens of thousands of organisations immediately, and they are sustainable.

Pledges

1. Play fair

Make the terms and conditions of grants and contracts available to applicants before they apply. Astoundingly, 46% of statutory grant funders do not make the terms and conditions of their funding available until they have been awarded funding.  Contractual terms are routinely hidden from view until the tendering process is well advanced.  Making terms more transparent will make them better, will save time and effort on both sides, and should enable fair and open negotiation.

It is a common condition of government funding that the rights to intellectual property developed with any funding remain with the Crown.  Routinely prohibiting us from using information we’ve developed with funding after the funding relationship ends just makes achieving lasting change more difficult, and it leads to a situation where government has to keep funding the same projects over again.  Government should allow us to keep (or at least share) intellectual property we develop with grant funding and contract income.

2. Simplify

Improve consultation by using existing guidance. The recommendations outlined in guidance drawn up by Involve (and funded by OTS) entitled ‘Better Together: Improving consultation with the Third Sector’ provide all the guidance needed for a good consultation. There are too many ‘nonsultations’ - phony consultations where no real effort is made to engage anybody other than the same tiny pool of organisations that always respond, and where the final policy is announced within days of the consultation process closing. No consultation is better than a sham consultation.

3. Inform yourself

Capture and publicise raw data on statutory funding for the voluntary sector.  Such information should form a core part of policymaking, but the partial or outdated statistics that are routinely gathered are not effective in enabling broader understanding of trends. Making it a requirement of all statutory funders to report basic awards data at the end of the grant award process in a consistent way would provide that information quickly and at minimal cost.

4. Think local

Voluntary activity is local.  Most relationships between the sector and government bodies are local.  The perceived ‘efficiency’ savings of awarding large national contracts are greatly outweighed by the long term costs to the local voluntary sectors and their beneficiaries. Providing funding through centralised arrangements may present seductive economies of scale, but it reduces the diversity and independence of organisations delivering services on the frontline.

Despite its faults, the grantmaking function of the Lottery is invaluable to local groups. Start learning from the Lottery’s experience and evidence, and stop meddling with its programmes and funding.  Enable it to develop its grantmaking practice and maximise its responsiveness to need by enhancing its independence in law.

5. Stop the collateral damage

Too much of the voluntary sector’s campaigning is based on trying to undo and remake government policy and legislation that have dire unintended consequences. The Office of the Third Sector (OTS) needs to be more than a funder of the sector and an owner of commitments from the Third Sector Review; it needs sufficient power and capacity to effectively influence other departments where policy is causing confusion, damage and waste.  

A parliamentary committee, composed of MPs with real experience of the sector, could perform a useful role by scrutinising relevant legislation, regulation and policy for its impact.