This is our monthly policy briefing for July 2021. Each week we gather all the news, commentary and events from across the sector, then tie it all together each month. If you would like to get this in your inbox each week you can sign up to Tiny Letter.
Policy debates can often be dominated by the voices of some groups at the expense of others. And too often, those who are key to a policy succeeding, or are most impacted by them, are those whose voices are neglected. This month, the Law Family Commission on Civil Society published a policy note arguing that civil society's vital role in creating an environment that allows other sectors to thrive is often ignored. It makes the case for civil society to sit alongside government and business in public policy debates. And a report by the Institute for Community Studies claimed that current approaches to regeneration and economic transformation in the UK are not working for the majority of local communities, due to a lack of meaningful community involvement with the power to influence decisions.
There are a range of ways that these missing voices can have a meaningful impact on the policy debate. Perhaps the most obvious starting point is simply listening to what those people have to say. A blog published this month reflects on a partnership between the Centre for Public Impact and Changing Lives to explore 'deep listening' during the Covid-19 pandemic, which examined ways of understanding the view of service users whose voices are seldom heard.
Better data can help too. For example, a report for the All-Party Parliamentary Group for ‘left behind’ neighbourhoods brought together a range of socio-economic data to provide an understanding of the strength of community in ‘left behind’ neighbourhoods, in comparison to other deprived areas and England as a whole. Whatever the means of doing so, including the views of those often left out of policy debates is vital, not least because it should lead to better policies.
The last month has also seen a range of reports on impact bonds around the world. The International Network for Data on Impact and Government Outcomes (INDIGO) published the first edition of their biannual Impact Bond Insights report. It provides headline insights and analysis based on the INDIGO Impact Bond Dataset (the most comprehensive publicly available dataset on impact bond projects), offering an accessible overview of the global impact bond landscape. The first Insights report examines the countries leading the way in impact bonds across a number of categories, provides an overview of international impact bonds, and presents an in-depth set of visualisations on projects from the UK Government's Life Chances Fund.
Speaking of the Life Chances Fund (LCF), this month also saw the publication of two reports from the GO Lab’s evaluation of the Fund on gov.uk. The first interim report from the multi-year evaluation of the Kirklees Better Outcomes Partnership presents insights into a historic fee-for-service arrangement, providing services to vulnerable adults, which preceded the LCF Social Impact Bond (SIB) project in Kirklees. The report identifies four challenges that the services faced under the fee-for-service arrangements, and lays out the rationale for using an impact bond approach. Meanwhile, a report on seven Life Chances Fund social impact bonds in children’s social care investigates the justifications and alternative SIB design approaches adopted by local authority commissioners to support children and families ‘on the edge’ of (or already within) the statutory care system.
And in the US, a brief from the Urban Institute detailed the fifth and final assessment of the Denver Supportive Housing SIB’s housing stability payment outcomes and the program’s impact on the number of days participants were in jail. Getting a better understanding of the evidence behind impact bonds will be crucial to understanding the contribution they might make to ‘building back better’ from the pandemic around the world, as Tanyah Hameed explores in this blog on the lessons from impact bonds for COVID-19 recovery.
In the wider world of results-based financing (RBF), the challenges of procuring these innovative financing mechanisms are often overlooked. A blog from the authors of a new guide to contracting for RBF discusses some of these typical challenges involved in the approach, and best practices to help address them. Another stumbling block for innovative social programmes can be implementation. In an article for Philanthropy Impact Magazine, Deborah Ghate and Tom Jefford reflect on the importance of implementation science and practice, and call for more investment into the field to ensure programmes can more effectively move from design to impact.
Last but not least, GO Lab economist Mehdi Shiva reflected on the added pressure to secure value for money (VfM) following the impact of COVID-19 on public finances. He highlights the challenges involved in securing VfM, particularly in outcomes-based contracts (OBCs), and previews an ongoing partnership between the GO Lab and CIPFA to develop a VfM toolkit for OBCs.
Sign up to our weekly policy briefing here. And if you missed a briefing, you can find it in the archive here.