30 May 2012 Belfast Castle

Philip McDonagh

Chair

Bill OsborneBuilding Change Trust

The Building Change Trust is

a 10 year £10 million charitable fund

endowed by the Big Lottery Fund

to support change and transformation in the Northern Ireland Community and Voluntary sector

Our vision

“A strong, vibrant, independent

and relevant community and

voluntary sector in NI”

CENI - one of the 5 original Trust bid partners along with CFNI, RCN, BITC and VNOW

CENI - significant work on outcome and impact

Measuring Up – identifying needs

Making Reporting more Effective

Use of Quality Standards

Measuring Change approach piloted with BIG, Belfast City Council and Neighbourhood Renewal

Trust actively considering its further and future

role with respect to impact measurement

May appear an esoteric and abstract issue

but

Our vision of a strong, independent and

relevant sector that changes people and places

for the better requires that:

• More cvs organisations are helped to focus on impact

• Cvs organisations understand and use

appropriate tools to set out achievements

Context is

• Evidence based policy making and outcomes based commissioning

• Identification of and investment in what works

• Organisations are striving to make best use of limited resources for maximum benefit

Anticipate continuing to work with CENI

• Exploring use of impact measurement process with government

• Will also be working in partnership with NPC and others to bring benefits of Inspiring Impact to NI

Plan to invest some resources focusing on impact in order to support change for positive development in sector

Not something we can do alone and want to work with government and the sector to take this initiative forward

Keen to hear your views on what action needs to be taken here.

In the first instance contact Trust Administrator, Nigel McKinney

info@buildingchangetrust.org

Visit our website

www.buildingchangetrust.org

Twitter

@changetrust

Will HairePermanent Secretary, DSD

Challenges and issues: a UK perspective from the Inspiring Impact programme

Tris Lumley, Head of Development, NPC

Collaborating on Outcomes: Funders and the Sector Working Together30th May 2012

What’s the context for impact measurement?

• Charities and social enterprises under pressure to demonstrate impact• What should they do to improve?• Driven by funders or for own benefit?• What’s proportionate for them?• Working in isolation, reinventing the wheel

• Funders may want to help• What should they do to support improvement?• Who should pay to increase charities’ capacity?• How should funders think about their own impact?

And impact’s not just about measurement…

If impact measurement is driven by funders…

…it will probably fail to become embedded and really help charities learn and increase impact

We need structural solutions to structural barriers

Why am I here?

• NPC trying to help create structural solutions:• Inspiring Impact—10 year collaborative programme

• Focusing on barriers, solutions and incentives

• At this conference:• To share a UK perspective on impact

• To be part of discussion in NI context

19

What are the barriers to progress?

Providers

Incentives weak (with few penalties for poor impact reporting).

Cultural resistance (at leadership and frontline)

Insufficient resources (money, expertise and capacity)

Technical challenges (don’t have skills and systems to measure; lack of consensus on indicators, methods etc)

Practice (inability to attribute (or predict) an organisation’s contribution to outcomes with confidence)

Funders

Incentives highly variable (and often inconsistent and poorly communicated)

Cultural resistance (to prioritise impact, to spend money on measurement)

Insufficient resources (money and capacity for them and provider)

Technical challenges (skills and systems to identify high impact providers, and collect and synthesise learning and evidence)

Practice: (challenge of building the evidence base over the long term)

Commissioners

Incentives skewed (towards outputs and ‘cost to serve’. Focus on accountability over evidence / learning.)

Cultural resistance (cuts are both a positive and a negative factor)

Insufficient resources (money and capacity for them and provider)

Technical challenges (skills and systems to identify high impact providers, and collect and synthesise evidence)

Practice: (inability to use impact data to drive cost reduction / budget reallocation)

Cross-cutting barriers

What are Inspiring Impact’s solutions?

• We’ve identified five key strands of work

• Leadership and culture

• Coordinating support

• Data, tools and systems

• Shared measurement

• Funder, commissioner & investor practice

Charities & social enterprises

Our initial focus for charities and social enterprises…

What does good practice look like?What’s proportionate?

How do we stack up?How can we improve?

What approach is right for us?Which tools/systems should we use?

How do others do it?What works in our field?

Answers to key questions

What does good practice look like?What’s proportionate?

How do we stack up?How can we improve?

What approach is right for us?Which tools/systems should we use?

How do others do it?What works in our field?

Code of Good Impact Practice

ImpactDiagnostic

Coordinated resourcesMarketplace for tools/systems?

Shared measurement

Concrete deliverables

And for funders themselves…

Capturing different ‘types’ of funder impact

Strategic impact

Practice impact

Funding impact

Strategy for deploying resources to achieve impact

How behaviour as a funder impacts on grantees

The impact on beneficiaries and the community achieved through funding

Plans with funders will emerge dynamically

• Working group of foundations• Identify key aspects

• Explore potential research, actions

• Scope out plans and campaigns for short and medium term

What’s next for Inspiring Impact?

We’re just getting started

• Programme launching June 2012• Establishing links/partnerships across UK• Building advisory groups for key projects• Gathering intelligence on existing initiatives

• Want to hear from you about things we should be aware of and opportunities to engage…

Get in touch…

Tris Lumley, Head of Development, NPC

tlumley@philanthropycapital.org020 7620 4883

Questions for Speakers

Brendan McDonnell

Director CENI

Collaborating on Outcomes

Introducing

‘Measuring Change’

Recent CENI research shows that:

existing systems focus on counting activities and ensuring financial

probity - not designed to measure outcomes

approaches not standardised so difficult to aggregate diverse project

outcomes to show overall programme impact

prohibitive cost of comprehensive, robust outcome

measurement systems can ‘crowd out’ resources

.

Climate of austerity and increasing social need - challenge for public

funders and projects to measure the outcome of their interventions.

Concordat and PAC report - need for collaboration between Govt & Sector

Context

What are the things you want to Change?

Outcomes

Where are you starting from? Baseline

What difference has been made? Change

Measuring Change

Practical, robust and cost-effective approach to capturing

the hard-to-measure qualitative outcomes of

community-based programmes.

Two distinct but connected components:

1. Developing an overarching framework of programme-

level outcomes

2. Applying an innovative data collection method to

measure project baseline and change against these

outcomes. Underpinned by involvement of both programme and

project stakeholders in a collaborative process

facilitated by CENI.

How it Works

Key Elements

Strategic Focus: Facilitated sessions with Funder to

rationalise a ‘theory of change’ for the programme and

articulate specific change outcomes.

Structure/Themes: Identify key themes which give shape

and structure to an outcomes framework - common format

to locate diverse project-level outcomes.

Stakeholder Involvement: Process informed by input

from both projects and programme funder - fosters shared

ownership of the outcomes framework.

Develop Outcomes Framework

Theme Change Outcomes

People • Enhanced Individual Capacity• Educational Development• Better Healthy lifestyle Choices• Positive Mental Health• Improved Family Cohesion• Improved Personal safety

Community • Better Engagement with Hard to Reach Groups • More Active Involvement in the Community • Enhanced Volunteering • Improved Access to Community Facilities

Organisation • Better Partnership working• More Strategic influence• Enhanced Practice development

Relationship • Better Bonding• More Bridging• Improved Linking

Sample Programme Outcomes Framework

Multiple Perspectives: involves stakeholders (partners,

management, staff, volunteers, users) in a facilitated ‘Expert

Panel’ - maximises involvement and enables ‘triangulation’ of

evidence.

Facilitation: CENI evaluator as a ‘critical friend’ ensures

equality of input across all stakeholders, challenging and

testing their evidence.

Measurement Scale: uses the Rickter numerical scale (0 - 10)

to rate project baseline position and change. Scale helps

neutralise contentious debate and reach consensus.

Critical Debate: facilitates candid discussion and critical peer

review - challenges stakeholders to prioritise what outcomes

are

important and be realistic about their contribution to change.

Data Collection: ‘Nominal Group Technique’

1. Baseline – panels rate their project on each outcome at the start

2. Change – panels rate their project’s progress on each outcome (after

a set time)

Panel discussion is recorded to give context and rationale for the scores

Projects can also rate importance and difficulty of achieving outcomes

Putting a Metric on Qualitative Change

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Low High

An effective way of extracting large amounts of data from

diverse perspectives within a project and distilling this into an

agreed estimate.

Applied systematically across multiple projects it enables the

generation of robust evidence in a standardised format.

This can be analysed:

Horizontally: to baseline and measure the progress of

individual projects against the

programme outcomes

Vertically: to indicate overall programme impact by

aggregating data from individual projects

Data Analysis

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

A B C D E F G H I J

Baseline

Change

Projects

Baseline and Change Scores for Funded Projects

Big Lottery Fund - support grant holders to baseline and measure change.

Neighbourhood Renewal Programme - identify and baseline Community Renewal outcomes.

Belfast City Council - inform review of strategic outcomes and help support change management.

Measuring Change has been successfully piloted by CENI across a number of funding programmes including:

Case Studies

Still a work in progress – ‘Another Tool in the Kit’

Successfully piloted – case studies

Flexible – readily transferable to variety of situations (Age NI, IFA)

Provides mechanism to aid collaboration in both identifying and measuring outcomes

Contribute to wider body of knowledge on evaluation and outcomes measurement

Shift from Counting Activities to Measuring Change

Conclusion

Big Lottery Fund Norrie Breslin

Neighbourhood Renewal Alison Chambers

Belfast City Council Catherine Taggart

Measuring Change Case Studies

Norrie Breslin,

Head of Policy and Learning

Big Lottery Fund NI

Supporting grant holders to

baseline and measure change

Mission and Values

Our Mission

• Bringing improvements to communities and the

lives of people most in need.

Our Values

Making best use of lottery money

Using Knowledge and evidence

Being supportive and helpful

Funding approach

Strategic programmes

Outcomes funder

Partnerships

Working across outcomes

2 stage application process

Development grants

Self evaluation

5 year projects

Programmes

Live and Learn 17 Projects, totalling over £16.2million

Learning and well being

Safe and Well 18 Projects, totalling nearly £17million

Safety and well being

Wide range of projects and beneficiaries

Across geographic and specific communities

The Issue

Varied response to self evaluation

Support for grant holders

Demonstrate impact

Move from programme specific evaluation

The Journey

Change matrix

Communicating to grant holders

Communicating to staff

Encouraging participation

The Outcome

Participation 27/35

Impact on grant holders

Involving wider staff team

NI Committee

BIG UK wide

Next steps

Neighbourhood Renewal

Identify and Baseline

Community Renewal Outcomes

Alison Chambers

Neighbourhood Renewal Neighbourhood Renewal

Strategy launched 2003

36 Neighbourhoods

Over 102,000 households - around 280,000 people

Neighbourhood Partnerships established in each area

Representative of public/private/political and voluntary and community sectors

Neighbourhood Action Plans developed detailing the priority issues to be addressed in each area

NEIGHBOURHOOD RENEWAL – NEIGHBOURHOOD RENEWAL – STRATEGIC OBJECTIVESSTRATEGIC OBJECTIVES

• Community Renewal developing confident communities

• Economic Renewal developing economic activity

• Social Renewal improving social conditions

• Physical Renewal creating attractive, safe environments

Key Outcome Areas

Community Development

Worklessness

Demography

Education

Health

Crime

Physical

Community Renewal

Mid Term Review findings

Lack of Definition and Baseline Position

Inputs, activities, outputs no outcomes

Community Renewal

CENI – Social Assets Research

Outcomes Framework

Measuring Change

Community Renewal

14 outcomes – 5 themes

3 Areas

Expert Panels

Community Renewal

Programme Evaluation

Profile Areas

Next Steps

Capacity Grant: reviewing outcomesCate Taggart

Community Development Manager

Context

• BCC Investment programme• Economic Environment• BCC Community Development Framework• RPA – planned transfer of Regeneration function• Pilot – single CD fund for city

Community Grant Programme

• BCC more than just a grant administrator: both financial and officer support

• Programme across 6 grant categories:- Advice & Information

- Capacity Support- Revenue Support for Community Buildings- C&YP: summer schemes and Ur City 2- Project grants- Community Chest

• £2.6m across 412 grants last year

Service grant programme

Small grants: community development projects Grants for Summer schemes appropriate for children & young people aged 5-

14 years Community chest grant (in support of, for example, small scale seasonal

activity)

Large grants:• Advice services: core funding to cover revenue and other operating costs;

supplementary funding (with DSD) for advice outreach costs• Revenue (financial support towards running costs of community buildings)

• Capacity building (grant funding to support the building of skills and knowledge of community organisations and local people).

Capacity Building Grant recipientswith Neighbourhood Renewal areas

Community Development Framework

• define needs, issues and solutions for their community; and

• influence or take decisions about issues that matter to them and that affect their lives;

• take action to help themselves and make a difference.

Community development activity is the main means by which we can be better engaged with local people and support their involvement in improving the city and its neighbourhoods. It enables people to come together to:

It is a long-term, value-based process which targets positive social change.’

66

Community Development Strategy

Align our resources to achieve new vision and strategy

• Core Community Development work

• Engagement that works

• Building Effective Partnerships

• Shared Service Design & Delivery

CENI pilot (& beyond .........)

Capacity Building Grant elected to pilot the application of the Measuring Change model within a funding programme designed to build the assets of local communities

Ambition to review and agree the strategic outcomes of the programme in light of the CD framework and

To develop an outcomes framework based on Social Assets

To inform the design of related assessment criteria (for a future version of the programme)

To inform the design of a performance management framework (compliance and change)

68

Capacity Review

1. Link supported grant activity to identified programme outcomes

2. Produce Standard Framework of Programme Outcomes;

3. Apply Standard Measurement Tool to:

• Baseline projects against programme outcomes

• Evidence individual contribution to programme

• Enable comparison or relative change across projects, themes

• Aggregate to demonstrate programme impact

4. Support Projects to Use Framework and Measurement Tool

Why ................

Funder Funded organisation

Demonstrate the services we commission are having a positive change on individuals and society and therefore strengthen the case for renewed funding.

Demonstrate potential to funders, board, user groups, recipients .....

Monitor performance / compliance Know project / service is on track

Identify and disseminate practice learning

Contribute to an evidence base of practice

Communicate impact of investment Raise profile (communications)

Motivate staff, elected members, ... Motivate staff and volunteers

69

How...............

• CENI trawl of current applications to list outcomes as stated by funded groups

• Group these outcomes into common themes, using the original SA framework to help shape the approach

• Staff consultation (NGT): clarify purpose and focus and agree priorities

• Iterative process to produce refined strategic aim and draft outcomes framework

What ............

Theme (4) Desired Outcome (11)

Core: Developing Support Group core competency

Enhance Capacity of funded Support GroupStronger PartnershipIncreased leverage

Operational:Developing Local Groups (to be capable, representative and resilient)

Improved local infrastructure of groupsImproved group capacityIncreased group resilience

Operational:Developing Individuals (to be more involved and better skilled)

Increased individual participationImproved individual skillsEnhance volunteering

Strategic:Developing communities (Relationships, services and wellbeing)

Improved Social CapitalImproved Quality of Life

Next steps

• Process of consultation and testing of the framework

• Incorporate revised framework into transition year of CDIP

• Assess framework (evaluate)

• Assess capacity of groups and design and delivery support programme

72

Challenge

• The right strategy

• Engaging and supporting community groups and staff team

• Practicality Test (simple, clear, proportional, transparent, accountable, verifiable, affordable, etc)

o Design assessment model (criterion based)

o Design PMF (practicality test)

• Communication throughout the process

THANKS

What do you see as the main issues / challenges in relation

to funders and the sector collaborating to develop outcome

measures?

How do you think the Measuring Change approach

contributes to collaboration between funders and the sector

around outcomes?

How does Measuring Change complement other

approaches to collaboration on outcomes measurement

currently available to the sector?

Roundtable discussions

Panel Discussion/QuestionsMoving on: Next Steps