Past Compact Advocacy Cases

Past Compact Advocacy cases

Orthodox Jewish Group
BME sexual health organisation and local PCT
Anon individual and Essex Council's Children's Fund
Living Streets and Department for Transport
Tomorrow's People and The Home Office
Apex Trust and Lambeth Council
Norwich & Norfolk Voluntary Services and Norfolk County Council
Volunteering England and Department for Work and Pensions

Orthodox Jewish Group

The Problem: SAIL is an Orthodox Jewish group that provides summer programmes for inner city boys from socially deprived areas. The group applied to a funder but their bid was rejected. The reason for rejection was that they claimed the project promoted religion. Interlink, an umbrella body for Orthodox Jewish groups, heard about SAIL's case and also believed that a disproportionate number of funding bids by Orthodox Jewish organisations were being rejected because grants officers did not appear to understand the need for targeted funding for this community.

The Compact issue: BME code 6.8 - recognise the potential of faith organisations to contribute to social inclusion, which is distinct from the promotion of religion.

The Action: We wrote to the funder explaining how they had misunderstood the bid and breached the BME Compact Code in doing so. We then met with the funder and Interlink to discuss the case.

The Outcome: The funder admitted that they had misunderstood SAIL's bid, apologised and agreed to reassess the application. Valuable funding of just under £60,000 was eventually awarded to the group. The funder also stated that it has improved the training provided to grants officers about funding for faith organisations.

BME sexual health organisation and local PCT

The Problem: This award-winning BME organisation working on HIV and sexual health issues had received funding from the same London PCT for 10 years in a row. The organisation was waiting for clarity on the next year's funding arrangement and chased for confirmation from the PCT. Despite these efforts they were not told until June that their funding had been terminated in April that same year. They requested reasons why this had occurred and clarity on what notice was being given but received no response.

The Compact issue: Funding Compact code 7.6 - give enough notice at the end of grants and BME code 6.7 - undertake joint review when funding is withdrawn

The Action: We wrote to the PCT raising the concerns about poor communication and the Compact breaches and requesting that the PCT agree to fund the appropriate 3-month notice period.

The Outcome: The PCT replied, agreeing to fund the full, Compact-compliant notice period from April to August. The PCT also gave further details on the assessment process used when funding was terminated and entered into dialogue with the organisation about how they could work together in future.

Anon individual and Essex Council's Children's Fund

The Problem: The Children's fund was running a complicated funding application process, with detailed procedures and paperwork for small voluntary and community organisations to apply for funding. In particular the Draft Service Level Agreement drawn up by Essex County Council was overly complicated.

The Compact issue: Community groups code 5.3 - using clear guidelines and 5.5 - streamlined processes, Funding code 4.8 - discuss risks up-front and 4.9 - focus on outcomes.

The Action: We advised on using Compact Codes and best practice as part of the negotiating strategy with Essex County Council and the Children's Fund.

The Outcome: With the support and advice of the Programme the voluntary sector was able to negotiate a separate, streamlined agreement for smaller voluntary and community organisations. The new agreement was reduced from 82 to 3 pages, is called a grant agreement rather than a service level agreement, making a clear distinction between grants and contracts.

Living Streets and Department for Transport

The Problem: Living Streets previously enjoyed a good working relationship with the Department for Transport, however in the third round of funding for their Walk to School campaign they were encouraged not to claim the full cost of the work, told they would be paid in arrears of expenditure and were informed that the funding would be on a much shorter term basis.

The Compact issue: Funding code 2.8 - longer term arrangements, 3.10 - full cost recovery, 3.11 - keeping applicants informed, 5.6 - payment in advance and 5.7 - longer term funding

The Action: The Compact Advocacy Programme worked closely with Living Streets to lobby the Department whilst still maintaining a healthy working relationship. Living Streets sent letters quoting the Compact with advice from the Compact Advocacy Programme and a joint meeting was held with the Department to discuss the issues

The Outcome: We secured advance payment, and longer term funding with Living Streets and got a better level of funding agreed

Tomorrow's People and The Home Office

The Problem : Tomorrow's People were in the process of applying for a tender to run a resettlement service for HM Prison Service. At a supplier forum meeting they were informed about a capping of management charges. They sought clarification on this for a number of weeks as this would affect their ability to continue. Just days before the deadline a standard letter was received stating that the management charges cap had been lifted. Tomorrow's People were told there could be no extension and they missed the deadline.

The Compact issue : Funding Code 3.3 - well-managed application process and 3.11 - keeping applicants informed, Consultation code 5.1 - consult early and 5.2 -keep on-going dialogue

The Action: We wrote to the Home Office outlining the problems and the effect this had on the organisation.

The Outcome: Undertaking by the National Offender Management Scheme (the relevant part of the Home Office) to ensure that all contracts and processes are compact compliant in future. We secured:

Longer term contracts (this has taken place with 3 year funding)
Appropriate and proportionate contracting processes
Focus on outcomes not outputs and to consult with VCS on how to achieve this
Full consultation with VCS on development of contestability and commissioning including contracting and procurement
Capturing the additional qualities/added value brought by the VCS both at the bid stage and during the lifetime of contracts

Apex Trust and Lambeth Council

The Problem: Lambeth Council's Youth Offending Team terminated an ongoing contract with Apex trust, with very short notice, just two months after confirming it would be renewed.

The Compact issue: Funding code 7.7 - performance management

The Action: We wrote to Lambeth's Chief Executive outlining the relevant Compact breaches and suggesting a meeting between the council, Apex and the Programme.

The Outcome:

The council:

Acknowledged that it had breached the Compact, that it had handled the de-commissioning poorly and apologised unreservedly
Gave full reasons for the termination
Expressed a commitment to ensuring that all future contracts have the Compact at their heart
Agreed to cover any financial losses incurred by Apex

Norwich and Norfolk Voluntary Services and Norfolk County Council

The Problem: Norfolk County Council made cuts affecting the voluntary and community sector without proper consultation with the sector. They did not allow the recommended 12 weeks and failed to take into account the Christmas and New Year period.

The Compact issue: Norfolk Compact 7.6 - timely consultation process and Consultation code 3.1 - maintain best practice, 5.1 - consult early, 11.1 - 12 weeks, 11.3 - allow for holiday periods

The Action: - We wrote to the Council to highlight the issue of not consulting properly when proposing cuts.

The Outcome:

Assurances were received from Norfolk Council that all future relations between Council and voluntary and community sector will be Compact Compliant
Directly impacted on the Council's budget consultation process for 2007/2008 ensuring that its time scales will meet Compact standards
A number of meetings took place partly as a result of our intervention, including a meeting between voluntary and community sector and Director of adult and children's services.
A cross sector group will be set up to discuss overarching issues between voluntary and community sector and the Council.
Our intervention has given the voluntary and community sector/Council relationship added importance and placed the Compact at the heart of discussions

Volunteering England and Department for Work and Pensions

The Problem : Department for Work and Pension's A Guide to Volunteering While on Benefits included a statement that lunch expenses were not legitimate expense to be reimbursed to benefits claimants.

The Compact issue : Volunteering Code 4.3 - ensure volunteers are not out of pocket due to their volunteering and 4.4 - work to reduce barriers to volunteering

The Action : We wrote to the relevant ministers and talked with Ed Miliband, Minister for the Third Sector, and supported Volunteering England in their campaign.

The Outcome :

The Department for Work and Pensions U-turned on this issue. The case brought to the attention of Ministers and Civil Servants breaches of the Compact Volunteering Code and their undertakings within it. The Programme supported Volunteering England lifting a barrier to volunteering that will have impacted 2 million people.