A view from the Turret on Connections

/by

The Simplest of Connections are often the best

 This week I have seen examples of how the simplest of connections often provide the most value to individuals within communities. The first was a trip to Northamptonshire MINDs new hub – a great space packed with passionate and skilled staff and volunteers. They talked to me about their various projects, and how they were keen to connect individuals to services, largely around the subject of health and wellbeing but not exclusively. And boy is it needed….

I have said this hundreds of times over the past 3 months but it’s worth saying again. COVID19 has exacerbated an already frightening story of mental ill – health: 21.3% of adults over the age of 18 have clinical signs of psychological distress. Depression amongst adults has nearly doubled over the past 24 months, and with a cost-of-living precipice around the corner these statistics will worsen. The current economic crisis is an inconvenience for the affluent, it’s a worry for those who work and its frightening for the most vulnerable and disconnected. The hub that MIND have will enable those individuals to seek support and solace over a cup of tea, and I have committed to supporting them with volunteering advice and signposting moving forward. I wish them every success. From these small connections I am hopeful that individuals within our communities can gain back some self-esteem and aspiration.

In a similar vein, VINs veterans’ coffee morning brought together those with an armed forces background: One story stuck in my head: Two veterans sat next to each other over a cup of tea and realised that not do they live in the same building, but on the same floor, yet have never spoken or passed the time of day. They now plan to visit and support each other on a regular basis.

Simple connections are what the VCSE is excellent at forging: It will be a fundamental part of the new Integrated Care System that such small connections continue and grow to help arrest some of the health inequalities we currently face: It goes beyond copious pages of strategic development and policy formulation which communities often struggle to understand and engage with.

Never underestimate the power of small.

 And if you are interested in volunteering for MIND they have several opportunities, from Peer Support Volunteers through to Volunteer Counsellors. If you are interested, please contact enquiries@northamptonshiremind.org.uk

As they say, whether you have 2 hours or 10 hours per week to spare, they would love to hear from you.

 

A View from the Turret on Bank Accounts

/by

So you want to open a bank account?

That seems like a simple thing that most charities would want to do at some point in their organisational journey. You would think that the banking industry would welcome charities with open arms (large and small) as it provides good business, makes perfect and logical sense and is potentially philanthropic by its very nature and the connections it could create. How wrong could you be?

Everyday I hear of the struggles which charities are experiencing in both opening and maintaining a working bank account. This applies across the UK as equally as it does in Northamptonshire.

NAVCA, NCVO and others have been surveying community-based organisations about their banking experience and have highlighted four key themes which I recognise only too well.

Services that charities need are increasingly unavailable.

Services that are available are not suited to the way that charities operate.

Charities often encounter poor customer service.

Online banking is not designed for or accessible to charities.

Speaking from VINs own personal experience of the last two years, we have made at least 4 complaints against our well know high street bank for poor systems and shocking customer care. Whilst we have received compensation on nearly every occasion, they don’t seem to improve or even appear to want to.

If any organisations in Northamptonshire are struggling to open or maintain a working bank account, please let us know at info@voluntaryimpact.org.uk placing Banking in the subject line. We will forward your concerns to NAVCA as they open negotiations and debate with the banking industry.

A view from the turret on the ICS

/by

A way in which the ICS and the VCSE may come together?

Sitting largely in West Northamptonshire as VIN does, I am watching with interest the many and various developments within the ICS.

West Northamptonshire has taken 600 pages of NHS and Government Guidance and kindly distilled these into 10 workable ambitions. The North are likely to follow suit, with some sovereign differences.

The West Northamptonshire strap line is Live Your Best Life, and the high-level ambitions are these:

  • Thriving Childhood
  • Access to the best available education and learning
  • Opportunity to be fit, well and independent
  • Employment that keeps them and their families out of poverty
  • Housing that is affordable, safe, and sustainable in places which are clean and green
  • To feel safe in their homes and when out and about
  • Connected to their families and friends
  • The chance for a fresh start when things go wrong
  • Access to health and social care when they need it
  • To be accepted and valued simply for who they are.

It strikes me that within these 10 high level ambitions could be the key for how the VCSE will embed and work with the ICS. These ambitions are Thematic in nature, but they will allow for the VCSE voice to be connected to service delivery in its widest sense, at both a Locality (or Local Area Partnership Level) and at the point of Sub Place. The Assembly already works along some of these Thematic lines, and these Thematic areas could be expanded to ensure more VCSE organisations can help influence the decision-making process. Not every VCSE organisation will sit at every table. That is frankly impossible and unworkable. But there could be a clear rationale based upon these ambitions which allows for the right VCSE representation, in the right place and at the right time. VIN is applying for Health Equality Grant Funding which will help broker who sits where and why.

And I also have a plea: If you are not part of an Assembly Thematic Group join one. Beyond the Collaboratives it’s the best way of remaining connected and understanding the impacts of the ICS. Contact Kerri Marshall – Duckett at kerri@vcseassembly.org.uk for more information on the Thematic Groups and how you can join.

Joining up care for people and populations

/by

Seamless Health and Social Care at a point of Place is the subject of much debate and discussion at present. While progress has been made in many different areas, the system remains fragmented and too often fails to deliver joined-up services that meet people’s needs. The goals of different parts of the system are not always sufficiently aligned to prioritise prevention, early intervention and population health improvement to the extent that is required. Look at the latest Government Paper on building better health, tackling unjustifiable disparities in outcomes, and ensuring the sustainability of the NHS and other public services. Read the full white paper here.

Place-based boards and the integrated care system

/by

NHS England recently published the Joining up care for people, places and populations white paper. It sets out plans for Place Boards in Integrated Care Systems, building on the Thriving Places guidance published jointly with the Local Government Association in September 2021.

Place as a concept is going to be hugely important, not just for people and communities, but for the VCSE who regularly work at a point of place and are perhaps best placed to talk about the issues of place, and possible solutions. It is also where people are likely to feel the impact of Integrated Care.

The paper sets out that Place Boards will need to be established by spring 2023 and aim to bring together partner organisations to make joint decisions, plan, and pool resources. They are expected to “think housing and community” as they develop and include a focus on early intervention and prevention. However, in stark contrast to previous NHS integrated care guidance, there is worryingly little direct reference to the role of the VCSE sector.

The Government is seeking responses to the paper by April and NAVCA intends to respond in consultation with members. As VIN is a member of NAVCA we will be attending the question-and-answer session on the 23 of March 2022 between 11am and 12.30pm. I am inviting organisations to read the hyperlinked documents contained herein and if they have questions, please let me know at Russell.rolph@voluntaryimpact.org.uk by close of play on the 21st March 2022. I can then pose these at the session and report back.

It’s worth noting the content remains subject to the Health and Care Bill passing into law, and the breadth of areas for consultation suggest there’s still a lot of planning (and debating) to take place before that happens.

A View From The Turret On The ICS

/by

Integrated care systems (ICS) will be formalised as a structure from July of 2022. Their reason for being is simple: To create a better system of health and care where the patient or service user receives more timely and efficient care, delivered seamlessly across organisations and sectors. The focus is on reducing health inequality, putting citizens, patients, and carers at the centre, and moving services ‘upstream’ to focus more on prevention.  This policy shift speaks very strongly to the voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) sector (LevPedro Consultants).

The ICS Framework emphasises the need for Health Care Systems to work with the VCSE, in all its component parts:

  • It sets out the benefits of working with the sector, encouraging ICS leaders to value their knowledge and expertise and invest in grassroots groups.
  • It points to the value of local VCSEs, rather than focusing solely on the work of larger providers and refers to some of the challenges the sector faces, including the substantial resource required to engage strategically with the new structures.
  • It requires integrated care boards (ICBs) to have a formal agreement in place for engaging and embedding the VCSE sector in system-level governance by April 2022.
  • It focuses on VCSE alliances as the mechanism to develop this and to build on what already exists, including local VCSE infrastructure (explained below).
  • It notes the importance of the role of the VCSE sector at place and neighbourhood, and the need to join these together across an ICS area, and to work with what already exists.
  • It notes the need for a coordinated system approach to social prescribing and engaging the VCSE in multi-disciplinary working via primary care networks.
  • There is a brief reference to the expectation that provider collaboratives operating at the ICS or supra-ICS level should continue to involve the VCSE sector, noting the innovation the sector brings to the design and delivery of services.

This framework provides the VCSE with a great opportunity but also a huge list of challenges. Ensuring that the VCSE sector is an equal partner is hampered by the sheer width and breadth of what we do, and our number. Unlike the NHS Provider Sector (which is usually a handful of large NHS Foundations Trusts) our sector has thousands of organisations and finding a role for all is going to be difficult. That’s why VIN is hosting 2 workshops on the subject – the first in Northampton on 28 March 2022  and the second in Kettering on 9 May 2022.

The VCSE sector in all 42 ICS areas is currently being supported to develop a VCSE Alliance. This can:

  • provide a unified ‘voice’ for the sector  (I would argue that this is the VCSE Assembly and would urge organisations to join) For more information about the VCSE Assembly, click here.
  • manage competing interests (always difficult given the nature of the Marketplace).
  • provide a ‘front door’ to the sector for external stakeholders (again I would argue the VCSE Assembly construct for this).
  • amplify the voices of the most vulnerable and unheard (The Assembly once again).
  • provide a platform for the sector to work towards being a proactive, independent, and well-organised sector, with its own agenda and strategies.
  • enable the sector to have a stronger voice and more coherent relationship with other stakeholders, such as local and devolved regional government, the corporate sector, and the bigger and more strategic grant funders (LevPedro Consultants).

The main challenge is that, in many of the ICS areas, the VCSE sector has not needed to organise at this geographic level before, and so new relationships and working arrangements are needing to be formed.

Of course, another big challenge is how the sector is resourced to create and maintain leadership and representative structures. These roles, to be done properly, require a significant time commitment. If we truly want a representative and level playing field across our sector then some thought needs to be given to this, quite simply, because the more resource you have the more you can build strength from within. I think the current collaboratives which work with the ICS directly are doing an immense piece of work, but there are only a limited number of organisations from our sector within it. We need to build from this base and ensure that we organise ourselves as best as we can to maximise engagement and networking for all.

A penny for their thoughts

/by

I recently completed the latest Restore Survey from NCVO. This Survey has been highlighting the key themes for Charitable Organisations (of all shapes and sizes) over the past 12 months. The latest Survey focussed in a large part on Funders, and the relationship our Sector has with them.

I think my concern about funders (of all types) is their short term view on providing support. Anyone who has ever worked in Communities or Community Development understands that Real Impact takes time: It cannot be achieved in 12 months or less, particularly when you realise how left behind (A nice new piece of Jargon)
some areas are: What you actually achieve in 12 months or less is a series of unsustainable Quick Wins. If like me you have worked in Neighbourhoods which have been subjected to a series of Quick Wins over the years, you understand how that approach begins the process of social action and re-engineering and then cuts its throat before its even had a chance to live and breathe. What I want to see from funders is a real commitment to 3 or 5 year Change Programmes which mean something. Nearly everyone I talk to across the Sector says the same thing, yet the change has not come. I therefore challenge Funders to come to Northamptonshire and meet our VCSE sector and explain their thought processes. I think that might help.

I have a further gripe though: Now is not the time for Funders to close their Programmes, Reprioritise or take 6 months to Make a Decision. What we now want from Funders is less Red Tape, and a more intuitive approach to grant giving which helps our organisations to help the most vulnerable (and there will be many more after the latest Energy Cost Rise and the Removal of the Universal Credit Uplift). I wonder how many organisations have gone out of business whilst awaiting a funding decision?

Funders and our VCSE want the same thing ultimately which is strong and vibrant communities. I sometimes fail to understand why a more level playing field cannot be established. Looks like I will be writing to all of our National Infrastructure Bodies again next week.

A view from the Turret

/by

If like me you subscribe to a whole host of other organisational emails you can occasionally become irritated by how quickly your Inbox fills. However, to me it’s important as it tends to reflect life outside of the Microcosm which is often Northamptonshire. Take the latest NCVO Research for example: Entitled Respond, Recover and Reset, it looks at the experiences of 371 VCSE Organisations over the period of the Pandemic, month by month. What started as a series of negative themes about whether the sector was actually going to survive or not has gradually moved it would seem to a more positive note 15 months on.  Some of the Headline themes are interesting:

Of the 371 that responded, 74% had an employed and salaried workforce: 27% reported a deteriorating financial position, whilst 26% noted improved finances, and 45% reported a relatively stable financial position: 27% reported a decrease in services since March of 2020, whilst 48% stated that they have had to increase services to meet demand. Underlying these monthly soundbites though is the outlook, which is far more worrying. Of those surveyed, 66% expect COVID19 to have a negative effect on their organisation overall, whilst 9% stated that they are unlikely to be operable within the near and foreseeable future. These figures tend to correlate still with the very early GAP Analysis that VIN undertook 3 months into the pandemic: And as a further point I guess you could argue that the latest monthly survey was only completed by 371 organisations across the UK, those probably with the resource and capacity to complete the questionnaire in the very first instance. I still have genuine concerns for the VCSE in Northamptonshire, especially those smaller organisations who have very little inbuilt resilience, but deliver fantastic and often imperative services to their beneficiaries.

And that brings me to the second piece of reading from the County Councils Network (or CCN). The report, entitled Councils and Communities in Partnership, highlights how county authorities helped to protect local charity and volunteer groups during the early stages of the pandemic where fundraising was largely being prevented. It finds that smaller and medium-sized charity groups have been most likely to look to their local authority for support during that period.

Produced by the County Councils Network, the study finds that from North Yorkshire to Kent, county authorities offered support to keep these organisations afloat. Help included immediate grants followed by further hardship allowances to ensure their survival, rent holidays for any group in council-owned buildings, and increases in fees paid to groups who deliver public services such as those in social care.

CCN says that county authorities have shown themselves to be at the heart of their communities: Helping to co-ordinate the mass volunteer efforts that sprung up in the early months of the pandemic, by signposting people and helping  groups to start.  The report says that this is another example of how county authorities can deliver locally, and at the countywide and strategic level.

But looking ahead to the recovery period, the report finds that the infrastructure for smaller and medium sized charity groups in many local areas is patchy, despite the best efforts of Councils for Voluntary Services and other organisations. I think patchy could be the mother of all understatements.

All of this demonstrates to me that the best way of ensuring a true civic society, where people within communities can realise their aspirations, have access to well defined and co-produced services, and have a voice in that production process  is clearly and undeniably the way forward. Personally, I am not sure that Northamptonshire over the past 15 months has mirrored the CCN Report in entirety although I may be wrong, and if I am please tell me. All of this intelligence is useful ahead of our  preparation for VINs  State of the Sector Survey in early 2022.  Please contact me directly on Russell.rolph@voluntaryimpact.org.uk with comments, thoughts or experiences.