SocietyGuardian.co.uk - voluntary sector

Charities and communites must think about what they need from local businesses before asking them for support

From Cancer Research UK and Tesco to Save the Children and GlaxoSmithKline, there are lots of well-known partnerships between charities and some of the biggest corporates in the country.

However, there are also an increasing number of successful partnerships evolving between charities and community groups and local, smaller businesses. Jan Levy, managing director at Three Hands, which helps link businesses and community organisations, says there are a number of reasons that small companies are becoming increasingly interested in engaging with charities. He says often it is driven by the personal interests of the staff or chief executive at the company, rather than being purely strategic.

"Another big reason is if they are providers to large companies they are often asked what they are doing towards corporate social responsibility," he says. "It could help them to get more business and also not lose business."

How can charities go about finding these small companies to link with, and, when they do, how can they build a beneficial relationship?

Identifying small businesses to partner with can be quite hard, says Levy, but he says that one effective way to do so is through an intermediary such as a chamber of commerce or a business connector. "I think smaller charities have

to be determined to see and be seen," he says. "Make sure you are visible and building a profile."

Once one is identified, it is important that charities know what they want from the business. "There's always this tension between having a simple menu of opportunities and the scope for a tailored relationship," Levy says. "From the beginning, if charities are clear about what a business could do, that is very helpful. For some charities, that can be quite hard to put together."

Graham Willmington, chief executive of Community Matters, agrees that it is important that charities and communities think carefully about what they need from local businesses before asking them for support. "If you're going to encourage a local business to help your charity, think about what you could usefully ask them to do," he says. "There needs to be a proper dialogue between the two to ensure that what's being offered by the business is what is needed."

Sometimes these dialogues are helped along by an intermediary. One such organisation is City Action, a volunteering brokerage programme linking City-based businesses with community organisations, run by City of London Corporation. Noa Burger, corporate responsibility project manager, says the broker can act as a "translator" between the two sectors. "If you have access to a broker, it definitely helps," she says. "You don't have to cold call. We're already working with businesses that are open to the idea."

She says that, once a relationship has been brokered, communication is key, and charities should be creative in how they keep a business interested in the partnership. "The worst thing is when momentum is lost," she says.

"Businesses are used to having emails responded to within 24 hours. If you can't do that, be upfront about it and explain why and how quickly you will be able to get back to them."

Good communication with corporate partners has been vital to the small arts education charity CraftSpace in its long-term relationships with local businesses, according to its director, Deirdre Figueiredo.

She says it is important that staff from local companies they have partnered with continue to visit the project as the partnership progresses. "Where they remain remote and don't see some of the outcomes it's hard to keep them engaged," she says.

She also says that getting beneficiaries to share their stories directly with corporates can help. "When we do that well, that's when the business stays engaged," she says. "That's when they are on the phone to me the next day saying, 'That was fantastic. What can we do next?'"

One of the charity's most successful partnerships has been with the local sewing machine company VSM: the relationship began in 2006 and is still working today. Figueiredo says this relationship came about through an introduction from an artist who had worked with the company. "We made an appointment with the managing director and didn't go with a package. It was an open conversation to find out what we were both interested in and if we shared any objectives," she says.

She says it is important not to be too prescriptive about what the partnership should entail, but instead have an open conversation. "Businesses like the fact that we can be very flexible," she says. "It helps if there's a mutual benefit.

"It's never a one-way thing. It's been about negotiating a relationship and finding out how we can meet their objectives and how they can meet ours."

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the voluntary sector network, click here.

• Community action
• Voluntary sector network blog
• Voluntary sector
• Charities
• Communities

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Join us from 1-3pm on Thursday 30 May to discuss voluntary sector organisations and data

Being data literate has never been more important to charity professionals. Whether you work in fundraising, finance or communications, understanding how to collect and communicate data is now a significant part of the job.

Minister for Civil Society Nick Hurd recently said that data has the "potential to help [charities] do more of what they do, and to do it better."

NPC's Tris Lumley recently wrote on the network that "the social sector seems to have woken up to the promise of data. Open data and big data are trending online, in conferences, in debates and in conversations. People are trying to work out how to harness the power of data for social good."

However, some charities are still confused by the concept of 'big' and 'open' data, and how it could help them to achieve their strategic aims. With that in mind, our live discussion will cover:

• Why data is so important to charities

• How to use data in daily working life

• Where to find the best information and training

If you'd like to be on the expert panel, please contact Abby Young-Powell, and if you'd like to leave a question, please email or write in the comments section below.

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the voluntary sector network, click here.

Expert panelDavid Kane, NCVO

David is a research officer at National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO), leading on the quantitative analysis of data for NCVO's work on the size and scope of civil society, and is an author of the UK Civil Society Almanac from 2008 to 2013, the State and the Voluntary Sector and the UK Voluntary Sector Almanac 2007. David leads NCVO's involvement in research to classify voluntary sector organisations and in open data. He is also on the steering group of the voluntary sector studies network.

James Noble- New Philanthropy Capital (NPC)

James Noble is a professional social researcher with 15 years experience across a range of settings. He has worked as an evaluation consultant to charities and public sector organisations, and conducted a range of primary research projects on social policy issues. James is currently managing a year long project for the National Offender Management Service to help charities working on reoffender rehabilitation get the most from their use of evidence.

Lucy Chambers, Open Knowledge Foundation

Lucy Chambers is head of knowledge at the Open Knowledge Foundation. Her work includes coordinating the school of data, OpenSpending, Spending Stories and the foundation's data-driven-journalism activities. She has run numerous workshops, code and content sprints, and training events around the world and was co-editor of the Data Journalism Handbook.
Twitter: @lucyfedia

Loren Treisman, Indigo Trust

Lauren is executive of Indigo Trust, a grant-making foundation which funds technology driven projects which bring about social change in Africa, with a particular focus on transparency, innovation and citizen empowerment. She has expertise in international development, Open Data and uses of technology for social change.
Twitter: @indigotrust

Richard Craig, Charity Technology Trust (CTT)

Richard joined CTT as chief executive in 201. He has extensive experience working in technology and data, with positions including chief executive of digital entertainment company, Neos, professional services director at CDC Software and project manager at MVI Technology, specialising in business intelligence and management information systems. Richard also worked at Metals Industry Competitive Enterprise, a not-for-profit consultancy where he analysed data to improve quality, cost and delivery.
Twitter: @richardacraig, @charity_tech

Ian Shenstone, Real Systems

Ian is the development manager for Real Systems. We are a social enterprise, donating all profits back to our parent organisation, Broadway Homelessness and Support. I started work in the Investment Banking sector, specialising in trade data and reconciliation. This gave me a strong foundation in VBA and SQL and allowed me to develop skills in statistical analysis. At Broadway I have become qualified in salesforce.com and have customised a number of systems for the not-for-profit sector.
Twitter: @RealSystems1

Keisha Taylor, TechSoup

Keisha works for TechSoup's Global Data Services Programme, as senior manager, business planning and research. TechSoup Global helps charities globally get and use technology to heighten their impact. She has also studied and wrote about the use of data for development and data privacy, particularly within Internet governance and ICT policy circles. Most recently she was selected as an internet society fellow to the OECD Technology Foresight Forum, which focused on Harnessing Data as a new source of growth. She writes weekly digests for TechSoup's NetSquared blog featuring the top 5 data posts of relevance to the charity sector.
Twitter: @taylorkeisha, @techsoup

Paul Smith, Open Fundraising

Paul is head of data at Open Fundraising. Twelve years hands-on experience in the charity sector, the last three on the agency side following stints at UNICEF and AOHL (formerly RNID). Used data to underpin strategic and tactical decisions; advising on channel choice through to personalisation of communications.

Mike Thompson, MySociety

Mike is a senior consultant at mySociety and a visiting lecturer at University College London.

• Impact and effectiveness
• Voluntary sector network blog
• Big data
• Transparency
• Voluntary sector
• Charities

Abby Young-Powell
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Charities should get advice before they start trading or social enterprise activity – and think commercially

Recent research found that as charities start to see traditional sources of income dry up they are taking bold steps to try new ways of raising revenue and becoming self-sustainable.

The "Managing in the 'new normal' - adapting to uncertainty" report, released in March by the Charity Finance Group, the Institute of Fundraising and PricewaterhouseCoopers found that 55% of charities had increased trading or social enterprise activity since the start of the downturn.

This activity covers a range of industries, from retail outlets to nursery provision. But how easy is it for charities to start trading, and, when they do, how can they ensure success?

Craig Carey, head of operations at Social Enterprise UK, says charities should build on their core strength. "The most effective trading arms are from charities that do that rather than trying something very different to what they've done before," he says.

A strong business model is also important: charities should ensure there is a demand for their product or service; that the financials stack up; and that they have the right team in place, he says. "One common problem is when looking to set trading up people get fixated on the legal structure but actually the business model is more important," he says.

When it does come to regulations and legal aspects, one of the first to consider is whether or not to set up a separate trading company. Charity Commission CC35 guidance says charities can trade in carrying out their charitable purpose, for example a museum charging admission, without paying tax. This is often referred to as primary purpose trading.

However, according to commission guidance, non-charitable trading is classified as commercial. Charities can only do small-scale commercial trading under HMRC rules. For example, a charity whose total income is £20,000 or more can only earn up to a quarter of this, with a maximum of £50,000, from commercial trading.

"If a charity wants to carry out non-charitable trading beyond these limits, it will need to set up a trading subsidiary so it does not become liable for income and corporation tax," says Neal Green, senior policy adviser for the commission.

Green says charities should also look at operational risk when deciding whether to set up a trading company. "If it could go horribly wrong you may want to ring-fence it in a different company," he says. "The charity would take the hit if it didn't work out and a separate company was not set up. If it was ring-fenced you would have some protection against that."

He says one mistake charities sometimes make with trading is bailing out the trading company rather than letting it sink if it goes wrong. "The purpose of the charity is to meet its charitable objects," he says. "The purpose of the company is to make money. Their interests are not the same. That's why it's important for trustees to not be identical."

Jane Tully, head of policy and public affairs at the Charity Finance Group, warns charities against trading with high overheads, and instead recommends keeping non-primary trading "quite light touch". "Once you have a subsidiary you have to do two of everything, like accounts and another board," she says. "It's the admin that can become quite cumbersome."

She says it is important for charities to get advice on trading before they start. "We get a lot of questions about trading," she adds. "We are seeing the development and growth of a more entrepreneurial spirit."

One of these increasingly entrepreneurial charities is South London-based Caysh, which provides support, advice and accommodation for vulnerable people. As part of its housing provision, the charity provides a "concierge" service – a caring security team that checks on the people living there out of hours.

Kathryn Uche, chief executive of Caysh, says that a couple of years ago it was approached to deliver this service for other housing providers. It now delivers it for two of them, with plans for two more by October. "We are in the process of setting up a community interest company which will oversee this work," says Uche. "That will run separately to the charity but feed back all its profits."

Because the trading is at an early stage, Uche cannot provide figures for how much it is turning over, but says it is exciting "to think the charity could sustain itself in the long-term future without funds from things like grants".

She says one of the biggest challenges has been for the charity to think in a commercial way. "I've worked very closely with a group of entrepreneurs and chief executives of small- and medium-sized businesses to learn that way of thinking," she says. "We don't have to mimic commercial business but we have to understand the mechanics that make a business a going concern with a profit margin."

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the voluntary sector network, click here.

• Finance
• Voluntary sector network blog
• Voluntary sector
• Charities

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Dame Mary Marsh outlines the findings of a government review into skills and leadership among charities and social enterprises

Social sector organisations are aware of the need for continued development and taking on new ways of doing things to ensure we continue to deliver the high standards our beneficiaries deserve.

Over the past six months I've been leading a government review into social sector skills and how charities and social enterprises can attract, train and retain the high level of talent needed for the sector to perform at the highest possible level. We've engaged with the sector and other stakeholders through an online discussion forum open to all and consultation events.

We have shared online the findings from our short review into the sector's most vital needs – but, to summarise, here are eight critical areas where we think the social sector can try to improve:

Strengthen governance

Boards can lack the skills they need for the radically different challenges they face today. Lack of diversity remains a serious issue, sometimes limiting breadth of thinking and debate, and can create a real gulf between us and the beneficiaries we seek to serve.

This is not a new issue, but boards need to invest time in reviewing themselves against the sector's Code of Good Governance.

Attract and develop leaders

The quality of leadership is at the heart of success in the social sector. This includes aspiring and emerging leaders across all levels and positions, not just those at the "top" of organisations. Leadership is something that is learnt by doing it and by reflecting on the outcomes.

Funders should support the development of leadership capacity when considering investments, and simply widening access to mentoring and coaching skills could make a huge difference.

Routes into and through the social sector

There is a challenge for the social sector actively to attract and recruit more young people. Trainees leaving full-time education, apprentices and graduates should all have clear, supported pathways to join us. While there are good examples of best practice in some areas, generally getting a foot in the door is very hard.

We should appoint more people for their potential and provide clearer routes forward for them.

Skills sharing

There is huge benefit in relationships whereby time, expertise and resources are shared by people and organisations in the social sector as well as with those in the public and private sectors. We would all benefit from much more of this at all levels, not just among senior leaders and managers.

A key part of success is effective brokerage that helps make the connections, often at a local level. We should invest in this to both support and replicate it more widely.

Digital fluency

Increased digital fluency is an absolute necessity for the social sector if we are to engage effectively with our beneficiaries, supporters and other stakeholders

We must be ready to disrupt our ways of working to take advantage of the benefits of new technology, including social media, and not remain detached. We must be open to mentoring and skills sharing with digital natives, and this applies in particular to those in senior leadership positions.

Data-informed social change

The ability to gather, manipulate, learn from and share data will inform and drive the most effective social organisations of the future as is also the case elsewhere in the public and private sectors.

We need rigorous evidence to demonstrate our impact and inform our delivery. We must invest in data skills, be robust about the integrity of all our data and learn the value of being open with it.

Enterprise capability

The finance available to social sector organisations is changing significantly. There is a proliferation of new sources of revenue, strategic grants and capital for which we need to have the skills to identify with confidence what is relevant, make compelling cases for funding and manage such finances responsibly.

Funders could support the development of this capability as part of an investment relationship.

Collaboration in the social sector

Good collaboration rarely leads to merger. It can allow flexible working in horizontal structures and the complementing of respective strengths to yield greater value. It is highly dependent on attitudes, evidence and facilitation/negotiation skills which should form part of all leadership development.

Dame Mary Marsh led a government review into skills and leadership in the social sector, the details of which can be found at www.leadingsocial.org.uk. She is also founding director of the Clore Social Leadership Programme.

This content was brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the Guardian Social Enterprise Network, click here.

• Social enterprise blog
• Voluntary sector network blog
• Social enterprises
• Charities
• Voluntary sector
• Ethical business

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Does a historical lack of demand for data in the social sector reflect a lack of genuine problem-solving?

Recently, the social sector seems to have woken up to the promise of data. Open data and big data are trending online, in conferences, in debates and in conversations. People are trying to work out how to harness the power of data for social good. Open data will allow us to share useful data in ways that others can remix, mash up and harness for their own requirements.

Big data represents a new scale and complexity that might be achieved by combining massive datasets and analysing them to extract insight for charities and social purpose organisations. The Justice Data Lab has already been launched by the Ministry of Justice, working with NPC to explore how charities can use data on reoffending to assess the outcomes of their programmes.

Everyone is suddenly excited by the word data and that's fantastic. I couldn't be happier that there's a wave of interest in data and what it can do for the charity sector. What I think deserves a second look is why this is only happening now. If data has the potential to transform the understanding that charities, funders, policymakers and investors have of impact, why has there not been greater demand for data before now?

Earlier in my career I was a management consultant, working with big businesses to implement huge systems to capture data, store it, and conduct analysis. These projects were expensive, disruptive and took an age to implement. However, the businesses went through with them because they had critical problems to solve. They had to figure out the most profitable service line, how to minimise the level of working capital needed and how to maximise the efficiency of their supply chain.

I've written about businesses, data and social impact before, but now I want to make a different point. Businesses need data because they're trying to solve business problems. Of course, the data that businesses need is generally much easier to collect than in the social sector, often they're tracking transactions, sales or costs, rather than not customer experiences and outcomes.

What I've been wondering is whether the reason that impact data hasn't been in huge demand in the charity sector is that few organisations have genuinely been working towards solving social problems.

That might sound ridiculously inflammatory and critical, but bear with me. I'm not trying to make a big claim about the sector lacking purpose, I'm just thinking something through that's been gnawing away at me.

Any person or organisation genuinely trying to solve a social problem will become a total geek about data on impact. Just look at Bill Gates and his most recent annual letter – he has a thirst for data that will help him test and improve the strategies he's employing to, for example, eradicate polio.

But if you're running a charity that you feel you know is making a difference to those you're trying to help, and your funders aren't pushing you to work out whether your approach is really providing a solution, do you really need data? Can you get by on anecdote and the experience of your staff in their interactions with clients?

What if you're on the other side of the fence, providing funding through grants or contracts to charities or social enterprises? In my experience, most funders work out which issues they want to focus on, then try to fund good projects, but not actually to solve social problems. There are exceptions, funders that focus single-mindedly on achieving a specific goal, but most have broader aims. That could mean they don't really need data to shape, refine and adapt their strategies.

You could argue that you can only really aim to solve social problems if you have huge resources to deploy, as Bill Gates does. For most charities, and most funders, it's simply not possible. That's absolutely right, of course. While one response to having far too limited resources actually to achieve one's goals is to set more limited goals, another is to collaborate with others to achieve shared goals.

My hypothesis is that you only need data if you're trying to solve problems, and a historical lack of demand for data in the social sector might reflect a lack of genuine problem-solving. I really hope I'm wrong. I hope that the apparent lack of demand for data up to this point has been a reflection of the lack of awareness of the possibility of collecting useful data, or the difficulty of collecting it, rather than genuine lack of demand.

You might ask why I'm even asking these questions. If there's demand for data now, does it matter why there wasn't before? I think it does. If the current interest in data is a fad, inflated by hype rather than real demand, we're heading for a trough of disillusionment. And we need to work out how to navigate that as soon as possible, avoiding a backlash against data, so that we can capitalise on the current window in which data is cool, people are interested, and we become better at solving social problems as a result.

Tris Lumley is head of development at New Philanthropy Capital.

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the voluntary sector network, click here.

• Impact and effectiveness
• Voluntary sector network blog
• Voluntary sector
• Charities

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Britons are more likely to donate to campaigns that help people survive, than thrive. Christain Aid explains its decision to concentrate its new ad campaign on the upside

Over the past few days, television viewers in the UK might have caught a glimpse of an ad shot by Christian Aid to mark our annual week-long fundraising drive. The campaign, filmed on location in Sierra Leone, depicts the difference a solar freezer could make to the life of a local fisherman, helping him not only feed his family, but then market his catch and maybe even open a small restaurant.

Instead of grinding poverty, the ad features smiling faces, energetic children and upbeat music – our attempt to tell the true story of positive intervention. However the fact remains: UK-based NGOs, seeking donations from the British public for development and aid work overseas today, face something of an obstacle course in presenting the case that urgent need still exists.

In choosing to tell the true story of a positive intervention made through one of our partner agencies in the life of the York Island community, Christian Aid has had to walk a delicate line, leaving viewers with the sense that an end to poverty is possible – some of the world's fastest growing economies are in sub-Saharan Africa – but that real needs still exist that Britons can help to alleviate. But the million dollar question is how.

My team recently conducted research involving groups most likely to support Christian Aid. The findings suggested that while people were perfectly willing to donate to help people survive, they were more reticent to put their hands in their pockets to help people thrive. Any footage showing a poor person with a mobile phone – or colour television – would be counterproductive, we were told. That response rang true recently when I gave a talk using one of the case studies for Christian Aid Week that features a mobile phone project. There was an audible gasp from the group on first mention of phones.

It was only when we'd watched the film together and discussed the project in detail that they could see for themselves the usefulness of mobile phones in delivering early warnings to communities exposed to extreme weather events as a result of climate change. We don't have that luxury with a television advert. It has to do the job of announcing Christian Aid Week, support our army of volunteer collectors and motivate people to give. All in just 30 seconds.

We would never resort to an advert that portrays people living in poverty as people without their own dignity. The question for us was whether we could move away from a Christian Aid Week advertising message that had been fairly simple – 'sending money over there' – to a more complex message about food security, hope and independence.

It's an age-old question, the dissonance between rhetoric and reality in advertising, can we talk about our work and world view without depressing income? The potential supporters we discussed it with said yes. That was enough to take the risk and make the ad.

So far, the advert has been well received by the public and our volunteer collectors. Perhaps more importantly still, our colleagues and the community in Sierra Leone like the film. As someone said to me on Twitter: "This is an ad you can be proud to show your beneficiaries".

Proof of how successful we have been will come when we discover whether this year's fundraising week has reached or exceeded the target of £12.7m. That's the hard reality: if the film changes perceptions but doesn't support the donations that are urgently needed then we'll need to think again.

The challenges that we and other agencies face in tapping into the generosity of the British public start at home. As this newspaper recently remarked, the economic climate today is much tougher than it was eight years ago when Make Poverty History galvanised public opinion and G8 leaders at Gleneagles delivered on trade and debt, or said they would.

Africa too has changed. Once the graveyard of good intentions, it is fast changing its image. The former UN secretary-general Kofi Annan announced in an annual progress report last week that there was "good reason to be optimistic". Nearly half of the countries there have been identified as resource rich by the IMF, and have "sustained high growth and improved their citizens' daily lives".

It is not all good news though. The same report goes on to say that in many African countries, rising inequality is slowing the rate at which growth reduces poverty. "Countries across Africa are becoming richer, but whole sections of society are being left behind," it warns.

This is the complexity we need to get across in our stories. While there will always be a need for advertising that emphasises desperation – in response to natural disasters for instance – we think it's time to try and present aid and development in a different way.

In our ad, the sun may be shining, and the participants – all local villagers - may look buoyant. But more than 60% of Sierra Leoneans live below the poverty line, the average life expectancy is 48, and malnutrition ranks among the world's highest, with acute malnutrition at or above the emergency level of 15% of children under five years old.

Helping alleviate poverty is not simply about feeding the hungry, it's about enabling communities to help themselves. That is the message that needs to come across loud and clear.

Steven Buckley is head of communications at Christian Aid. You can follow him on Twitter @stevenbuckley

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To get more articles like this direct to your inbox, sign up free to become a member of the Global Development Professionals Network

• Fundraising
• Communications
• Aid
• Advertising
• Fundraising
• Charitable giving
• Charities
• Voluntary sector

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Charities and social enterprises should follow TeachFirst and Frontline in creating opportunities for young ambitious graduates

Charities and social enterprises must do more to open up the career paths for young people looking to move into the social sector, the leader of a government review says today.

Dame Mary Marsh, who was asked to examine skills and leadership in the social sector, has said that trainees, apprentices and graduates should have entry routes make clearer and more available to them.

"This is a critical time for charities and social enterprises, which need to develop their skills and leadership to enable them to deal with challenges and respond to opportunities," said Marsh, who also runs the Clore Social Leadership Programme. "We must ensure we open up positive opportunities for young people to start their working lives in rewarding roles where they can contribute to social action and change."

Marsh's comments reflect a key recommendation made in the review – that the non-profit sector should implement a national graduate development programme and establish a TeachFirst equivalent for young graduates looking to move into the social sector. The review states that "getting a foot in the door of the sector can be tremendously hard" and that "career pathways are incredibly unclear".

The recommendation represents a trend of different professions looking to TeachFirst as a model to attract graduate talent. Frontline, a new programme designed to encourage graduates to move into a career in children's social work, will begin recruiting 100 graduates from September 2013.

The national graduate development proposal is only one of many in the review. It highlights "eight critical areas where there are skills and leadership needs", with recommendations on how both the sector and the government could respond. Three conclusions connect these areas. They are:

• Each of us has an individual personal responsibility to contribute actively to our own continuous development.
• Responsibility for developing and "growing" people and making the most of potential has to be led from the top of organisations of all sizes, and should include organisations' governance.
• There are some urgent specific skills gaps, many of which come from recent radical shifts in opportunity and the changed financial context.

The eight critical areas where charities and social enterprise can enhance skills included the need to improve the digitally fluency of social sector workers. In a survey of the UK's top 100 charities, 61% said that levels of digital literacy within their organisation are not very good, poor or very poor.

"As we shift towards an increasingly connected world, digital is becoming the preferred means of engagement by the mainstream"' said Richard Tyrie, a member of the working group and founder of Good People.

He added: "In a time of significant resource constraints, digital offers am opportunity for major efficiencies and increased donor engagement which could yield up to £7bn per annum by 2017. However, a failure to embrace digital opportunities could pose risks for social sector organisations, as they become increasingly disconnected from the expectations of stakeholders".

Dame Mary Marsh and her team have published a full response on a new website which will be maintained by Skills-Third Sector. Keith Mogford, Skills-Third Sector's chief executive, emphasised that the response highlighted how important it was to retain talent within the sector, rather than solely attracting new faces.

"The challenge now," he said, "is for organisations to work in partnership to develop practical, well-grounded solutions, like the Skills Clubs that we're currently developing with employers, where staff, experience and knowledge can be shared between organisations to help develop the talent that will ensure a strong and robust sector. This will ensure that we are not only encouraging new entrants into the sector, but also that we retain and support the talent that already exists."

This content was brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the Guardian Social Enterprise Network, click here

• Social enterprise blog
• Start up & scale up
• Career choices
• Social enterprises
• Ethical business
• Charities
• Voluntary sector

Joe Jervis
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Randeep Ramesh (Society, 15 May) highlights the conflict for charities between campaigning against the outrageous injustice of the government's policy of imposing caps, cuts and council tax on poverty incomes and also being paid by the same government to deliver the policy. He describes the vulnerability of charities' government funding when Tory ministers, "scarred by battles with campaigners", start a "bout of creative destruction". The political activities of charities are also limited by the charity commissioners, who might take exception to trustees engaging in mass civil disobedience against such damaging oppression of the poorest citizens.

The effect is to weaken the already vulnerable position of the poorest individuals and families, for whom none of the parliamentary parties makes a convincing stand. The poorest are a minority and rarely vote. All of which calls for enough decent people, who understand the injustice being done, to fund politically independent lobbying organisations, which are not charities, whose sole purpose is the eradication of income poverty, the introduction of fair taxes and the provision of decent housing.
Rev Paul Nicolson
Taxpayers Against Poverty

• Your article on voluntary groups (Society, 15 May) shows the growing demand for their services from the most vulnerable in society. While many groups have seen their income from government and other sources dwindle, the National Lottery's contribution has steadily increased. Lottery players raise over £30m each week for good causes. While this is an adjunct to, not a substitute for, public funding, it provides a vital lifeline to groups operating in some of our most deprived neighbourhoods. In fact, all the projects highlighted by Mary O'Hara have received Lottery funding. Whether it's a centre giving advice on employment, a support group for carers, or a social club to reduce isolation for older people, Lottery players should feel proud that they are making such a difference.
Vicki Kennedy
Director, National Lottery Good Causes

• Charities
• Voluntary sector
• Poverty
• National Lottery

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

The recent announcement from the justice secretary, opening up probation work to the private and voluntary sectors, may help to rebuild lives

St Giles Trust believes charities can play a bigger role in future criminal justice services. We welcome justice secretary Chris Grayling's announcement last week that supervision for prisoners sentenced to less than a year will be extended. A snapshot of offending history into 165 very vulnerable women using our resettlement services showed that they had an average of 32 previous convictions each. We employ specially trained, carefully managed, reformed ex-offenders. Their credibility means we can reach the most disengaged individuals who are caught in a vicious cycle of prison, homelessness and reoffending – and help to rebuild their lives in a way that anyone who has not been in prison would struggle to do.

The new reforms will open up more than 70% of probation work to the private and voluntary sectors, as part of a rehabilitation plan for prisoners leaving jail, giving us and others an opportunity to reach more people who need our support.

Some say the reforms are overshadowed by the payment-by-results (PBR) Work Programme and its legacy. Yet lessons seem to have been learned on issues such as cashflow, appropriate payment and "creaming and parking", which didn't make the £5bn Work Programme a viable option for us. The most important lesson for all of us is that new services must look to reach the complex clients.

There are many valid questions about PBR models. We know that the most difficult clients reduce their reoffending over time – not overnight. This needs to be accommodated.

Prime contractors need quality subcontractors, and there are plenty in the third sector that, when partnered fairly, can bring real value. For any organisation that believes it is one of these, I strongly recommend capturing the evidence of your impact. We have had a number of independent evaluations carried out on the impact of our services, and each has shown that they have a real impact on reoffending rates. Furthermore, ensure that you are aligning yourself with providers that share your values. We have recently formed a strategic alliance with Stonham, the care and support arm of Home Group, and believe that a fusion of our skillsets and expertise will strengthen our ability to grow and deliver more for our clients.

St Giles Trust is proud to be part of the first ever social impact bond. Known as the One Service and managed by Social Finance, it supports short-sentenced prisoners leaving Peterborough prison. We have been working with some of the most chaotic, needy offenders under this programme since 2010. Initial results will be published next year. The key to the One Service's approach has been working in partnership.

This type of collaboration is crucial in any future delivery of criminal justice. We will talk to anyone from any sector – public, private and voluntary – who shares our aim of reducing reoffending and preventing future victims. Ultimately, this is work with complex individuals whose lives need careful and patient untangling. We hope the reforms will give us the opportunity to do this, and that we will be free to approach it in the way that we know works best.

• Prisons and probation
• Voluntary sector
• Charities
• UK criminal justice
• Chris Grayling

Rob Owen
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Storytelling is an important tool for charity communicators, but it must be done creatively

With an increasing number of charities joining the social media space to compete for supporters' attention, the importance of providing engaging content and meaningful experiences has become paramount.

As the third sector attempts to keep pace with the power of social media, it's interesting to witness the diverse ways digital and social tools can be used to tell stories, grow reach, response and value for charities.

Whether the goal is awareness, fundraising or volunteer recruitment, telling your story online requires clarity, brevity and creativity. This isn't easy and it can be hard for your message to stand out above the noise. However, huge opportunities exist for creative storytelling online making this an exciting time to be working in the voluntary sector.

Storytelling through social media

Whether you use images or infographics, video or Vine, promoting your cause using digital storytelling methods means you're not just relaying information, but making that information come to life.

Dry, text-heavy web pages are a thing of the past as users expect more easily-digestible content in a medium that compliments the subject matter. Even highly-complex issues can be succinctly delivered through effective digital storytelling. One good example of this is the girl effect, a simple but high-impact video which injects a new urgency into the issue of global child poverty.

Whatever message you're trying to communicate, social and digital tools provide creative ways to get it across. Whether you're asking walkers to donate their old boots to get them thinking about the wear and tear effect they have on Scottish mountains or promoting specialist skills in your organisation social media provides a targeted and concise way to communicate digestible information which helps drive awareness.

Reaching diverse audiences

Every organisation, whether commercial or charitable, deals with diverse stakeholders who often have competing priorities. A family planning their next day out expects a very different experience from a charity like the National Trust for Scotland when compared to a passionate horticulturalist. However, the social space allows non-profits to communicate clearly on a range of aspects of their work. Instead of restricting our messages to events news or membership offers, we're able to introduce our conservation principles to visitors before and after their visits, which help to raise the profile of aspects of the organisation which they may be unaware of.

Our social media audience expects varied content which is multifaceted and multi-disciplined. We cover everything from gardening tips and holiday accommodation, to the plight of rare breeding seabirds on St Kilda. This could be construed as having too many competing messages, but by keeping a consistent tone of voice we're able to bring messages together under one brand voice and promote wider issues important to our cause.

As a heritage organisation, our social following may come to us for one reason, but through these social media we're able to expose them to the diversity of our work, which ultimately furthers our cause and builds our brand personality online. Non profits have to ask themselves: Are our social communications accurately reflective of the spirit and importance of our cause?

In organisations with wide-ranging audiences it's not easy to create one-size-fits-all content to deliver a clear message, so a huge importance is placed on clear messaging.

Creativity is key

In a time of low - or no - budgets, creativity is key to raising your cause above the digital noise to connect with supporters, funders and volunteers. Working in the heritage sector there's a wealth of expertise and specialist skills which have a committed and dedicated global audience, and digital media provides the means to engage with these groups for the benefit of your cause, so what are you waiting for?

Adam Coulson is digital marketing executive for the National Trust for Scotland. Adam is speaking about the National Trust for Scotland's social media strategy at Social Media for Social Good at the Albany Centre in Glasgow on 17 May. Tickets available here.

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the voluntary sector network, click here.

• Voluntary sector network blog
• Voluntary sector
• Charities
• Social media
• Digital media

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Manchester and Salford left without a single emergency shelter after Welsh legal ruling blocks funding from housing benefit

The only emergency night shelter in Manchester and Salford has been forced to close, leaving the area's homeless people with little choice but to sleep on the streets.

Narrowgate night shelter in Pendleton was left with a massive funding gap after it was told by Salford City Council it could no longer accept housing benefit – its main source of income. As a result, the 28 men and women who use the shelter have been left without accommodation, while five staff have been laid off.

Salford council insists it has no say over the decision, which was taken following a legal case involving a shelter in Anglesey, Wales. In that case, a judge ruled that housing benefit was not payable to a night shelter because the way the accommodation was set up meant it could not be classed as a 'home'.

Councillor Gena Merrett, assistant mayor for housing and environment, explained the closure of Narrowgate: "It is a legally binding ruling which applies to all councils – we must obey the law. We are now exploring different options with the charity to try and help and are keeping a careful eye out for any increase in rough sleepers in the city. The court's decision has had a deeply regrettable impact on the charity's excellent work."

Alan, who has been homeless for six years and relied on Narrowgate for accommodation and support, was informed via text message that the shelter had closed. "At the end of the day it's a place where we all used to go, we all used to meet up," he explains, at a breakfast drop-in Manchester city centre.

Alan says the shelter put him in contact with the alcohol and drugs service, which is helping him overcome his addiction to alcohol. But since Narrowgate's closure, he has been sleeping on a friend's sofa.

Mark Cloherty is head of the Boaz Trust, a local charity that helps refused asylum seekers. Since Narrowgate closed some of the people his organisation works with have been forced to sleep rough. "It's had a big impact on us because our winter night shelter recently shut," he says. "We sent two people to Narrowgate unaware that it had closed and they were forced to sleep on the streets that night."

135 organisations across the city have referred 2,200 people to Narrowgate for emergency overnight help, of which 865 people have been found permanent accommodation. For Graham Ridge, a support worker at Manchester-based homeless charity Barnabus, the current situation with Narrowgate — which was the only night shelter in Manchester and Salford, following the closure of the Salvation Army hostel in 2011 — has had a "drastic" impact on the city's young homeless population.

"Narrowgate was particularly important for under 35s, as we can't get them in emergency B&Bs for this group due to housing benefit restrictions," he says, adding that he has spoken to a few individuals who have been forced onto the streets since the closure of the shelter.

"There's one lad who I'm trying to get into supported accommodation. He's been accepted, but there are no vacancies at the moment and there may not be for a couple of weeks or so. So in the meantime he's obliged to sleep rough."

Those who sleep on the streets are vulnerable to being attacked. Ridge says the person who he was looking to get into supported accommodation came to his office on Tuesday and told him that his bag and personal papers had been stolen when he was sleeping rough.

In a statement, Phil Brown, the manager at Narrowgate, insisted that an emergency night shelter was desperately needed in Manchester and Salford and said that both he and Manchester City Missions, the charity which ran the service, are looking at alternative ways to fund the shelter.

He said: "As a faith-based Christian organisation, we do not undertake fundraising activities among the general public. However, if individuals, companies or organisations would like to explore ways of assisting us to provide emergency help and longer term hope for homeless people, I would be very happy to talk to you."

A spokesman from the charity Homeless Link said it was not yet clear how other local authorities would interpret the tribunal judgement over the Anglesey case, but warned of the danger if "services are forced to close without alternative emergency accommodation in place".

The spokesman said: "It is not yet clear how the tribunal judgement will be interpreted across the country but there appears to be some confusion. Currently decisions are dependent on interpretation locally, and we know of several councils that appear to be interpreting differently the recent ruling in Anglesey.

"The danger is if withdrawal of housing benefit happens, and services are forced to close without alternative emergency accommodation in place, this could result in people sleeping rough. These services are sometimes the only form of emergency accommodation for homeless people and their loss can have a significant impact."

• Salford
• Greater Manchester
• Manchester
• Homelessness
• Social exclusion
• Housing
• Housing benefit
• Communities
• Benefits
• Charities
• Voluntary sector

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Public servants have shown innovation and inspiration to deliver public services in spite of the government's cuts

Massive spending cuts are threatening the future of public services. There is every chance that many may not survive in their present form. Courage and creativity will be required to deliver services with less money in innovative and inspirational ways, drawing on the experience of clients and the skills of experts working in a variety of different fields. Already, parts of the public sector are preparing to spin off into mutuals, others are being co-produced with local residents, and new technology is being employed to create different methods of delivery.

It is against this backdrop that the Guardian Public Services awards 2013 are launched today. The awards, which are run in partnership with Hays, are in their 10th year and have become the byword for excellence.

They are designed to recognise innovation and measurable impact as well as brilliant ideas and techniques that, if replicated, could help to mitigate the impact of the government's austerity agenda.

A new category, HR excellence, has been added to this year's awards, acknowledging that finding and retaining talent is tougher now than ever. It will applaud employers who have motivated and promoted their star performers at all levels across their organisations, and whose approach is easily replicable.

Derrick Anderson, chief executive of Lambeth council, whom his peers voted public leader of the year in 2012 for turning London's "worst" council around, says: "Winning the award was a personal honour and an affirmation of the hard work that so many people have put into improving Lambeth and the leadership shown at all levels of the organisation."

The public leader category has now been renamed leadership excellence.

For Cindy Hunt, 56, a school support youth worker for Carmarthenshire youth service, who was voted public servant of the year in 2012, the award came at a crucial time. "It has put youth work on the map after a tough period of cuts, when I lost a lot of colleagues. So getting this recognition is very important. Everyone now knows my face. I have become an ambassador for all youth workers."

She adds: "Youth workers don't usually blow their own trumpet because it's all about the young people. But there was lots of media coverage right across Wales. I also received a letter of congratulation from the Welsh assembly. That was hugely significant because it provides local authority funding."

Entries are open until 12 July 2013 and the awards ceremony will be held in central London on 12 November 2013.

Last year's overall winner, GeniUS! York, has transformed the way York city council engages with residents, businesses and community groups by creating a virtual world where they can brainstorm council challenges and, together, come up with ideas for potential solutions. The project is a joint venture between the council and business-support provider Science City York. Since it launched 15 months ago, it has attracted more than 300 registered users to the website. The council has invited ideas around five main challenges, including how to better exploit underused council assets, how to improve local authority procurement from small businesses, and how to make York a more dementia-friendly city. As a result of ideas and workshops that developed out of the dementia challenge, a film is now being made of interviews with local people living with the condition, and their carers, to be show in all of the city's secondary schools from September.

Heather Niven, SCY innovation specialist, says: "The Guardian accolades gave us credibility at a crucial early stage; they have validated our concept of open, city-wide innovation, and communicated our project far beyond the reach of our city."

Other UK councils have been knocking on GeniUS! York's door and the team has just come back from Cape Town, South Africa.

"We know York has untapped potential that we could be exploiting for the greater benefit of all its citizens," says council leader James Alexander. "GeniUS! has given us a chance to share and act upon new approaches and creative solutions to some of our long-term challenges."

• Alison Benjamin is editor of Society Guardian. She is a judge for the 2013 awards

Award categories

Digital excellence

Communications excellence

Financial excellence

Partnership excellence sponsored by Civica

HR excellence

Measuring excellence

Grassroots excellence

Leadership excellence sponsored by Carillion

Society Guardian public servant of the year

Overall winner sponsored by Hays

More on how to enter at guardian.co.uk/publicservicesawards

• Guardian Public Services Awards
• Voluntary sector
• Charities
• Public services policy
• Local government
• Social care
• Health

Alison Benjamin
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Charities need to be careful about the way they ask for legacies

Stark warnings were issued in March following an inquiry by the House of Lords that the UK is in no position to cope with an expected explosion of older people by 2030. The inquiry heard that between 2010 and 2030 there is likely to be a 50% increase in people over 65.

So what are the likely implications of this ageing population on legacy fundraising?

Meg Abdy, director of Legacy Foresight, says that its research has indicated that at present, the legacy market has slowed in part because the number of deaths is falling each year. But she says that in the coming years, the ageing population should change this.

"If you look to 2018-20 you see the number of deaths starting to increase as the baby boomer population gets older," she says. As this is an affluent part of the population, this should have a positive impact on the legacy market from 2020. "The fact that people are living longer is important, but more important than that is this generational change and how likely they are to leave money to charity," she says.

Abdy says that although this generation is relatively affluent, they also have a new set of financial issues to think about, which could have an impact on legacies. The fact that many of them will be living into their 80s and 90s, she says, will mean they may need to pay for longer term care and, because of current economic uncertainty, they may feel they should leave more money to their children and grandchildren.

"I think charities have to be conscious of the way they communicate with their supporter base," she says. "Over the next ten years, boomers will be dominant. They tend to want facts and evidence and they want to know their money will be spent well."

Rob Cope, director of Remember a Charity, agrees that charities need to be careful about the way they ask for legacies from a generation that will be increasingly conscious about what they are leaving for their children and grandchildren.

"Don't position it as family versus charity," he says. "Encourage the donor to think about their family but leave a bit for the charity that they've always supported, too. That's going to be very important with this generation."

He also believes there is going to be increasing competition in the legacies market as more arts and higher education organisations, hospices and local charities start to compete. He says that in the face of this competition, although charities need to be careful about their fundraising approach, they should not continue to be so quiet about legacies. "I would like to see charities be a bit more confident: if you don't ask, you don't get," he says.

He adds that it will be increasingly important for the sector to work together to increase the market overall and achieve a step change in both donor attitudes and in the behaviour of people who write wills.

Others agree that this is vital. "It's really important that both as a sector and as an individual charity we show people we will be stewards with the money that they have worked so hard to accrue," says Claire Routley, head of legacy giving at the Bible Society and chair of the Institute of Fundraising's legacy and in memoriam special interest group.

Because we are in quite cynical times at the moment, she says charities are going to have to work quite hard to do this. "The challenge is for organisations to think beyond the basics and to think strategically as a sector," she says. "These are very financially savvy people and they want to be reassured that their gifts are going to make a difference."

She says that another issue for charities to start thinking about as the death rate increases is the fact that more people will be likely to make a donation to charity in memory of someone. "In-memorium giving is something charities need to start thinking about now, and many already are," she says. "Probably a lot more money than you realise is coming from that already."

And there are also warnings that charities are going to need to be more sensitive with their fundraising because of all these changes. Richard Radcliffe founder of the legacy fundraising consultancy Radcliffe Consulting, says that as people live longer and worry about the support their children may need, they are not so happy to make long term decisions and want more financial flexibility.

"It's a matter of subtlety and frequent mentions of it in a nice way in, for example, newsletters," he says. "I think charities need to be careful with this."

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the voluntary sector network, click here.

• Fundraising
• Voluntary sector network blog
• Voluntary sector
• Charities

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Charities need to be careful about the way they ask for legacies

Stark warnings were issued in March following an inquiry by the House of Lords that the UK is in no position to cope with an expected explosion of older people by 2030. The inquiry heard that between 2010 and 2030 there is likely to be a 50% increase in people over 65.

So what are the likely implications of this ageing population on legacy fundraising?

Meg Abdy, director of Legacy Foresight, says that its research has indicated that at present, the legacy market has slowed in part because the number of deaths is falling each year. But she says that in the coming years, the ageing population should change this.

"If you look to 2018-20 you see the number of deaths starting to increase as the baby boomer population gets older," she says. As this is an affluent part of the population, this should have a positive impact on the legacy market from 2020. "The fact that people are living longer is important, but more important than that is this generational change and how likely they are to leave money to charity," she says.

Abdy says that although this generation is relatively affluent, they also have a new set of financial issues to think about, which could have an impact on legacies. The fact that many of them will be living into their 80s and 90s, she says, will mean they may need to pay for longer term care and, because of current economic uncertainty, they may feel they should leave more money to their children and grandchildren.

"I think charities have to be conscious of the way they communicate with their supporter base," she says. "Over the next ten years, boomers will be dominant. They tend to want facts and evidence and they want to know their money will be spent well."

Rob Cope, director of Remember a Charity, agrees that charities need to be careful about the way they ask for legacies from a generation that will be increasingly conscious about what they are leaving for their children and grandchildren.

"Don't position it as family versus charity," he says. "Encourage the donor to think about their family but leave a bit for the charity that they've always supported, too. That's going to be very important with this generation."

He also believes there is going to be increasing competition in the legacies market as more arts and higher education organisations, hospices and local charities start to compete. He says that in the face of this competition, although charities need to be careful about their fundraising approach, they should not continue to be so quiet about legacies. "I would like to see charities be a bit more confident: if you don't ask, you don't get," he says.

He adds that it will be increasingly important for the sector to work together to increase the market overall and achieve a step change in both donor attitudes and in the behaviour of people who write wills.

Others agree that this is vital. "It's really important that both as a sector and as an individual charity we show people we will be stewards with the money that they have worked so hard to accrue," says Claire Routley, head of legacy giving at the Bible Society and chair of the Institute of Fundraising's legacy and in memoriam special interest group.

Because we are in quite cynical times at the moment, she says charities are going to have to work quite hard to do this. "The challenge is for organisations to think beyond the basics and to think strategically as a sector," she says. "These are very financially savvy people and they want to be reassured that their gifts are going to make a difference."

She says that another issue for charities to start thinking about as the death rate increases is the fact that more people will be likely to make a donation to charity in memory of someone. "In-memorium giving is something charities need to start thinking about now, and many already are," she says. "Probably a lot more money than you realise is coming from that already."

And there are also warnings that charities are going to need to be more sensitive with their fundraising because of all these changes. Richard Radcliffe founder of the legacy fundraising consultancy Radcliffe Consulting, says that as people live longer and worry about the support their children may need, they are not so happy to make long term decisions and want more financial flexibility.

"It's a matter of subtlety and frequent mentions of it in a nice way in, for example, newsletters," he says. "I think charities need to be careful with this."

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the voluntary sector network, click here.

• Fundraising
• Voluntary sector network blog
• Voluntary sector
• Charities

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Despite a supposed voluntary sector-friendly public policy environment, the NCVO warns that income to the sector could drop 15% by 2017-18

David Cameron's urbane riposte to Margaret Thatcher was: "There is such a thing as society, it's just not the same thing as the state." In opposition, Cameron envisaged social welfare taken back to the future: instead of the Brownian state agents poking the poor into action, the Notting Hill set saw a Victorian revival with social welfare in the coming decade increasingly localised, voluntary and intimate.

However, the latest report from the National Council for Voluntary Organisations offers a bleak assessment of charities' future prospects under the coalition. Despite a supposed voluntary sector-friendly public policy environment with the Open Public Services white paper, Localism Act, growing social investment market, Work Programme and now probation being outsourced, the NCVO warns, in Counting the Cuts, that income to the sector could drop 15% by 2017-18 to £11.3bn from £13.4bn in 2010-11.

Of course, the government might argue that other revenue streams might be found. This is unlikely. With the economic gloominess unlikely to dissipate, it's hard to see funding from individuals rising from its £16.5bn peak. And the failures of the private sector to subcontract to the third sector on a large scale means the shortfall is unlikely to be made up there.

This is a missed opportunity. With the big society shrunk to insignificance and the coalition fixated by the deficit, the Tories – and their Liberal fellow travellers – have no one to champion the spark and vim of voluntarism and charitable entrepreneurship. While many charities have undergone painful downsizing, they fear that their operating model won't survive the relentless cheeseparing the government is indulging in. It's true that Big Society Capital is a step forward – but loans need to be repaid, usually with interest, so charities cannot replace this cashflow for the loss of government contracts.

In private, many ministers say this is no bad thing. New Labour accelerated a trend that saw charities become a vital part of welfare provision, particularly where people have very complex needs. However, Tory ministers, scarred by battles with campaigners, have taken to bashing the third sector, saying it was too dependent on state welfare itself. The solution, they see, is a bout of creative destruction to purge the sector of flabby players.

The coalition, especially its bluer bits, champion charities that are smaller and perhaps more censorious. The third sector, they reason, should deliver services that produce results and affect change in people's behaviours. This is a return to the past. Looking back to Beveridge, it was his work that proved that a monolithic state-run system offered simplification, social justice and substantial savings in administrative costs from the proliferation of friendly societies and their idiosyncratic procedures. The Whitehall mandarin administered welfare according to bureaucratic rules, not some subtle judgments about character. There was an economic cost to being judgmental in welfare too. In the interwar years, Britain's maze of local, mutual insurers did not help labour mobility. But Beveridge did not think the state was the complete answer. He wanted voluntary agencies to implement his proposals. That is what New Labour were mimicking.

So where do the coalition's politics – which seek charitable action without the means to pay for it – leave us? Welfare in the future will be more arbitrary and judgmental, a shift away from universal ideas of entitlement. As public attitudes harden, we are arriving at a policy that distinguishes between those seen as more or less deserving. This is a more discriminatory welfare state. It is not one I suspect that charities, steeped in the language of poverty relief, want to hear.

• Voluntary sector
• Charities
• Liberal-Conservative coalition
• Conservatives
• Liberal Democrats

Randeep Ramesh
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Spending cuts are forcing community organisations that offer vital services to vulnerable people to close their doors

Since October 2012 I have been travelling the country interviewing people at the sharp end of austerity, including the volunteers and staff at community-based voluntary groups. I am documenting the findings in a series of online multimedia reports for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and Locality, a national network of community-led organisations. During this project, people from all over the UK spoke of the toll the cuts were taking. They told of struggling to feed their children, of how they were reeling from job loss or were anxiety-ridden by fitness-for-work assessments and benefits sanctions, of how the prospect of the bedroom tax or fear of homelessness was driving them to despair.

Across the 18 locations I visited everyone talked about the dread and uncertainty they felt as it became clearer with each passing week that multiple changes to the benefits system were to be introduced within months, and that local government cuts were going to affect services they regard as vital. In some instances, people cried as they talked – including the chief executive of one inner-city voluntary organisation coming to terms with having to reduce services to vulnerable clients.

But if rising apprehension about cuts and welfare changes was unmistakable, so, too, was the extent to which people in many communities rely heavily for support on often very small neighbourhood organisations that are battling to survive as grants dwindle and local government contracts either vanish or go to private firms. A man from Ladywood in inner-city Birmingham summed up many people's feelings about the importance of local charity Birmingham Settlement: "It's more like a core family. If it's not there it's like part of your life, part of your family, has gone missing. If funding is taken away … it kind of has a backlash effect on everything, from mental wellbeing to getting people outside and into the community." A woman described how she would be lost without Birmingham Settlement's advisers.

The chief executive of Birmingham Settlement, Martin Holcombe, says that, while people in Ladywood, long classified as one of England's most deprived districts, continue to need advice and support, there has been a massive increase in people coming through the doors as austerity policies have begun to take their toll. So far, the organisation has managed to cope, often with the help of small grants.

It was a similar story in Rhondda, in south Wales, in communities that have had high levels of deprivation since the 1980s recession. At Arts Factory, a small voluntary organisation offering services such as employment training for marginalised young people, service users spoke about how much they valued the organisation. One 17-year-old doing work experience selling collectable books at a small social enterprise run by the charity says it has boosted his confidence when other things failed. "I don't know where I would be without it," he says.

Elwyn James, chief executive of Arts Factory, says it has been coping as best it can with the inexorable rise in demand, but he fears things will get much worse in the months ahead. Its turnover has already fallen by 20% after losing local authority contracts.

At the Goodwin Development Trust in Hull, marketing manager JJ Tatten says that, on top of the loss of major contracts, which has put a limit on what the organisation can provide, there has been a "tsunami of demand" for its "food poverty service", increasing pressure further. "We are feeding more than the proverbial 5,000 through 75 different organisations that have approached us for donations of surplus food, and we could easily double that figure," he says.

The stark picture painted by the small grassroots groups I visited is replicated all over the UK, according to the latest Counting the Cuts report, published today by the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO). It concludes that, with the economy showing few signs of recovery, and with cuts and austerity set to continue into the foreseeable future, smaller, local voluntary organisations are being affected disproporti*onately.

As overall funding continues to shrink (one estimate predicts the voluntary sector will be worth 10% to 15% less in 2017-18 than in 2010-11), the authors warn that many smaller local organisations will go to the wall. "It may be smaller community organisations that receive funding from local authorities that experience disproportionate cuts," they conclude.

Yet while almost all the small voluntary organisations I visited were facing unprecedented challenges, they had something else in common – an extraordinary capacity for innovating to keep afloat. One of the best examples was in Lynemouth, Northumberland. The closure of the Rio Tinto Alcan aluminium smelting plant in 2012 resulted in thousands of jobs disappearing across a region already characterised by high long-term unemployment and low wages, but social enterprise Lynemouth Community Trust has been supporting local people, despite limited finances. With the help of seed funding from the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, the trust set up a small chocolate factory on its premises, employing a few local people. One of the employees, Dawn, says she is "absolutely passionate" about what they managed to do.

According to Locality chief executive, Steve Wyler, the many threats to the future of local voluntary organisations – including fierce competition from private companies bidding for large government contracts – are borne out by the NCVO report. What is harder to illustrate, he says, is the unique place they have within communities to meet head-on the difficulties austerity policies create. "These organisations tend to know their communities intimately," he says. "They can respond effectively to local needs. They can be agents of change. There is a sense right now, however, that they are struggling on many fronts – just as the people they work with are struggling."

The issues raised by service users were varied and reflected local circumstances. At the Tuesday Club on the Thornton estate near Hull city centre, a group of retired people who meet fortnightly to socialise and exercise on premises provided by the Goodwin Development Trust were keen to talk about their fears of losing community wardens, who help them feel safe. "We've been fighting like mad to keep the community warden, but the future is uncertain," one woman said.

In Newhaven, East Sussex, teenagers who have been homeless and can't find work volunteer at a local charity, Newhaven Community Development Association. They talked eloquently about how the younger generation is affected. "I think you don't understand the severity of the situation until you're in the situation," said an 18-year-old. "I'd say I'm homeless, but I can't get a job because I don't have any experience so I can't get the money to be able to live somewhere. You can say to someone as much as you like, 'This is what's happening', but you have to be there to fully understand it."

What was clear everywhere is that vulnerable and marginalised people wrestling with a combination of drastic cuts to services and far-reaching welfare changes will be in much worse circumstances if the organisations they turn to are no longer able to help.

• Voluntary sector
• Poverty
• Charities
• Social exclusion
• Benefits
• Welfare
• Austerity

Mary O'Hara
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

It's not as expensive and time-consuming as some people may think to demonstrate social impact

More or less everyone involved in social enterprise agrees that demonstrating your impact is really important but not very many are actually doing it.

This is particularly true in the case of the UK government's impact measurement framework of choice, Social Return On Investment (SROI). According to nef: "Social Return on Investment is an analytic tool for measuring and accounting for a much broader concept of value, taking into account social, economic and environmental factors."

SROI is commonly used to come up with figures for the social value (or social impact) generated by products and services, such as the example quoted by nef that: "£1 invested in high-quality residential care for children generates a social return of between £4 and £6.10."

In 2010, the Demos report Measuring Social Value recommended that: "Given that the principles behind SROI are sound, but for many SROI is an extremely ambitious goal, there ought to be a more achievable social value measurement target set for the third sector as a whole."

The Department of Health's Social Enterprise Investment Fund (SEIF) was a prominent recent example of organisations not using SROI in large numbers. Despite the fact that one of the conditions of SEIF was that funded organisations used SROI to measure the impact of that funding, most had other ideas. As I reported last year, by the time the fund was evaluated, only 30% of funded organisations were using SROI. According to researchers from Third Sector Research Centre (TSRC): "Whilst some organisations were aware that SROI was part of SEIF funding requirements, their interest in it 'fizzled out'. This was often due to the practical constraints of undertaking SROI, including time, resources and money constraints."

A previous TSRC report, The Ambitions and Challenges of SROI, highlighted the cost issues noting that: "Gordon (2009) found that smaller SROI projects would cost between £12-15,000 each with larger ones rising to £40,000. Lyon et al. (2010) found SROI studies ranging in size from £4,000 to several hundreds of thousands of pounds."

It's clearly true that measuring impact, whether using SROI or one of the many other approaches available can be expensive and time consuming but this is neither inevitable nor a good reason to avoid doing it.

The SROI Network, a group of SROI practitioners, recently published SROI, Myths and Challenges – as an attempt to tackle "a variety of misunderstandings" about their approach.

While much of the document is taken up with responses to the objections of think tank experts and academics, delivered in a slightly exasperated tone, it also provides some useful hints as to what SROI is actually for: "If you get a group of people to consider what questions they would need to ask in order to know how much of a difference they have made, they generally come up with things like: who has been affected or changed? What were the effects or changes? How did we decide which effects or changes to account for (and so manage)? How much change occurred that can be attributed to our activities? What common measure will we use in order to aggregate the difference and so start discussions about how we can make more of a difference Who answered these questions?"

Whether or not your social enterprise is in a position to measure its impact using SROI and/or to publish an annual social impact report such as those carried out by FRC Group – or HCT Group – you can and do have time to work at what you're trying to do and to decide how you'll judge whether or not you're being successful.

As part of the new programme of impact investment – Nesta have developed Standards of Evidence for Impact Investment – our-approach-to-impact-and-evidence/our-standards-of-evidence – showing five different levels of impact measurement.

These range from Level 1, where an organisation able to explain what their product or service does, and provide a logical explanation as to why it might have a positive social impact, to Level 5 where a product or service can deliver a proven social impact at scale while remaining financially viable.

Different approaches will be suitable for different social enterprises but there's no excuse for not measuring your impact in some way. The growth in social investment and the introduction of the Public Services (Social Value) Act means that some social enterprises will be under increasing pressure to demonstrate their social impact to other funders and commissioners but that's only part of the point.

The key issue is that, as social enterprises, we need to know what we're trying to do and whether it's working. If we, as people running social enterprise don't have the time and resources to work out what we're doing and how it's making the world a better place, we probably don't have the time and resources to run an organisation at all.

David Floyd is managing director of Social Spider CIC and blogs on Beanbags and Bullsh!t

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the Guardian Social Enterprise Network, click here.

• Social enterprise blog
• Start up & scale up
• Voluntary sector network blog
• Social enterprises
• Ethical business
• Voluntary sector

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Six months after resigning as DG, Entwistle joins the Public Catalogue Foundation, which has a partnership with the BBC

George Entwistle, the former BBC director general who resigned after just 54 days in the job at the height of the Jimmy Savile scandal in November and walked away with a £450,000 payoff, has quietly moved on with an unpaid role at an arts charity.

Six months after his abrupt exit from the BBC, Entwistle has re-emerged as an unpaid trustee at non-profit organisation the Public Catalogue Foundation. But he has not completely left the BBC behind, as the London-based PCF has a partnership with the corporation.

The PCF runs a "joint initiative" with the BBC that "aims to show the entire UK national collection of oil paintings, the stories behind the paintings, and where to see them for real". The paintings have been digitised and put online via the BBC and PCF's Your Paintings website.

Entwistle has experience of the Your Paintings project as he worked on it during his time at the BBC and attended its launch in 2011.

PCF director Andy Ellis told staff in an internal announcement: "George brings to the PCF a wealth of broadcasting and media experience.

"As the BBC's controller of factual commissioning, he was a great supporter of the Your Paintings project from the day the PCF approached the BBC with the concept. He is a passionate believer in improving the public's access to art."

Entwistle said: "I'm very pleased indeed to have been asked to serve as an unpaid trustee for the PCF, the charity behind the project, and I hope I can be of help to them in developing Your Paintings in the future."

The BBC was heavily criticised for agreeing to Entwistle's severance deal, which included a £450,000 payoff – double the six months' pay he was contractually entitled to – and the continuing payment of four additional benefits, including private medical insurance, for a year after his departure.

Entwistle's successor, Tony Hall, recently announced he will consult on proposals for a redundancy and severance pay cap of £150,000 from September 2013 for all BBC senior managers.

• To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email media@guardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000. If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication".

• To get the latest media news to your desktop or mobile, follow MediaGuardian on Twitter and Facebook.

• George Entwistle
• BBC
• Television industry
• Charities
• Voluntary sector
• Art
• Museums

Tara Conlan
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Practical tips for voluntary sector leaders who want to improve the effectiveness and motivation of their colleagues

The effect of the recession on organisations in the voluntary sector has been well documented over the past few years. As donations have dropped by as much as 20%, costs have risen and demands for services have increased. In short, charities are struggling to deliver more with fewer resources.

But what receives less attention is the effect of this working environment on employees in the charity sector.

"Resilience" can be defined as the level of grit that you have available to handle situations that need more drive, focus and resolution than usual. Resilient employees continue to complete tasks steadily and achieve their goals even when, for example, budgets are cut, or the demands upon them suddenly increase. While it is in difficult times that resilience is harder to maintain, it's also when it is most important.

Our research among over 30,000 leaders shows quite clearly that resilience is linked most strongly to feelings of efficiency and effectiveness; the more effective you feel, the better placed you are to continue to deliver in tough circumstances.

Motivation is also part of the answer to resilience; employees that lack motivation will be unable to respond effectively to a challenging working environment.

Maintaining resilience

So in practical terms, how can leaders in the voluntary sector help to improve feelings of effectiveness and motivation and thereby maximise resilience in their organisations?

• Proactive coping – Proactive coping is having the means in place to deal with stressful situations when they arise unexpectedly. On an organisational level, this comes from having the built-in systems to react. Employees should be involved in the development of these strategies, for example, by identifying eventualities that need to be planned for, what resources might be needed, and what contingencies the organisation should be aware of.

• Remember that challenges are not necessarily bad – The only way to develop resilience is to be challenged. The US sociologist Glen Elder found that children growing up in the Depression were much more resilient than people who faced their first testing time in life later on. It is important for employees to remember that previous scenarios where success has been achieved against the odds will help in the future.

• Focus on strengths – All too many job appraisals and performance-management systems concentrate on what's wrong rather than assessing what people are good at. This can be facilitated by asking employees to identify strengths of colleagues and assessing how these link to their roles, and help them to perform well.

• Make sure staff and management take breaks and stay healthy – Loehr and Schwartz, who have conducted extensive research into athletes, argue that balancing stress and recovery is critical. On a practical level they recommend that you take a break or change focus every 90 to 120 minutes. Health is also important. The more healthy a person is, the more resilient to stress they will be. Pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline, for example, claims that its Team Resilience Programme has reduced work-related mental illness by as much as 60%, has seen a 10%-16% cut in fatigue and frustration levels and a 21% increase in job satisfaction.

Conclusion

In difficult times, it is easy simply to try and browbeat management and employees into meeting difficult goals. Yet this rarely succeeds, and is never sustainable. Resilience and motivation are not "nice-to-have" – they are essential for charities trying to weather the recession effectively .

Jessica Pryce-Jones is joint founder and partner of the iOpener Institute for People and Performance.

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the voluntary sector network, click here.

• Impact and effectiveness
• Voluntary sector network blog
• Voluntary sector
• Charities

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Citizens Advice is taking a greater role in consumer protection, but does it have enough resources to step into the advice gap?

Consumers will increasingly have to turn to Citizens Advice as it takes on a growing role in consumer protection – but concerns remain over whether the charity has sufficient resources to cope.

Last April the organisation, which is best known for its advice bureaux staffed by volunteers, took over the Consumer Direct helpline.

It has since taken on extra roles previously operated by other organisations such as the Office of Fair Trading, and is now the lead body for "consumer advocacy". From 2014, it also takes on energy and postal services, albeit through a separate body that will be called Consumer Futures.

The highly-regarded charity, which used to receive £20m a year from the taxpayer, is getting an additional £10m a year to fund the new work, but will it be able to respond to the extra workload? Citizens Advice offices have, in many areas, struggled to cope with demand from people seeking help with significant problems including debt, housing and benefits changes – a demand that has only increased during the economic downturn.

They have also seen their own funding cut by local authorities struggling to budget their own books.

Consumer minister Jo Swinson said she is determined to make sure consumers get access to the right information and the best deal possible. "Publication of a consumer map and the availability of consumer information through the Citizens Advice service, will be a real boost to supporting the rights of consumers," she added.

Citizens Advice chief executive Gillian Guy says: "We help with over a million consumer issues a year and use our evidence to voice the problems faced by consumers – from PPI cold-calling to problems with energy bills. We look forward to furthering this work by bringing together the expertise and insight of Citizens Advice and Consumer Futures."

But Richard Lloyd, executive director at the consumer group Which?, has expressed concern over Citizens Advice funding. He said: "It is crucial that consumer protection does not suffer as publicly-funded consumer organisations, like Citizens Advice, are required to do more. We hope they will be able to take on this additional responsibility whilst also maintaining local advice services which are currently more in demand than ever."

When Money this week tested the Citizens Advice consumer hotline (08454 04 05 06, Mon-Fri 9-5pm) seeking help on common problems readers have with firms, we were generally impressed with the quality of the answers – and calls were picked up fairly quickly. But it was a different picture at local bureaux, where calls were left unanswered.

• Consumer rights
• Consumer affairs
• Voluntary sector

Patrick CollinsonMiles Brignall
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds