DCH 24 Turning Point
Turning Point is a member of the Charities Act coalition,
chaired by NCVO. Turning Point is pleased that NCVO will be representing
the coalition at the oral session of the Joint Committee next
week. We endorse their position in relation to the Bill.
I would like to use this opportunity to respond to
the question posed by the Joint Committee in relation to whether
the bill would permit the charity and voluntary sector to play
a greater role in the delivery of public services, if they wished
to do so
Turning Point agrees that there is an
urgent need for legislation to modernise charity law. It will
help to create an environment in which charities can retain public
trust and confidence and be seen to be open and accountable to
a range of stakeholders, including comissioners, private and
statutory providers, the public and users of services. Charity
law needs to be seen to be relevant and effective in order to
retain confidence in the sector as a whole. It is important for
government to be able to nurture and support and development of
the sector as a whole but also to provide the infrastructure support
that is necessary to bring about a greater role for the voluntary
sector in the delivering public services.
The Charities Bill is strong in terms
of fulfilling a supportive role for the sector and by maintaining
public trust in charities, may help to bring about an improvement
in cultural attitudes towards the sector. However, charity reform,
in itself, will not bring about a step change in the delivery
of public services unless accompanied by infrastructure reform.
In common with many other major providers, Turning
Point has long been concerned that there is not a level playing
field in the commissioning and provision of services. The voluntary
sector is nominally included in partnerships at a local level.
However, any theoretical advantage of being at the decision making
table is undermined by the lack of an explicit statement of roles
and powers, (as not all local authorities have developed a local
compact), and a lack of financial muscle by the voluntary sector
that would otherwise allow contracts to be negotiated fairly and
on equal terms with full cost recovery.
These concerns over funding agreements with the voluntary
sector not only have implications for individual voluntary sector
organisations, but also have profound consequences for the overall
shape and well being of the voluntary sector. The current contractual
relations between local government and the voluntary sector is
often characterised by a donor and supplicant approach rather
than a relationship based on genuine collaboration or working
in partnership together to deliver better public services.
For these reasons, Turning Point has
argued campaigning for a standard form of contract between health
and local authorities and the voluntary sector. This would specify
the standard terms and conditions that would form the basis of
any contractual arrangement drawn up with the voluntary sector.
It would seek to build on principles governing the financial
relationship between Government and the voluntary sector, as set
out in the Government's cross cutting review. It would take
account of other precedents that already exist such as the standard
contract for Supporting People services and JCT contracts, which
govern the contracting of both small and large building services
in the housing field.
Turning Point hopes that a standard form of contract
would revolutionise relationships between purchasers and service
delivery organisations in two ways:
First, it would enable both parties to focus more
on the actual frontline service rather than the legal framework
within which that service is going to be delivered.
Second, if services are delivered within a clearer
and more standardised framework, it will make it easier to monitor
and make comparisons between service delivery agencies as regards
their impact on an individual or group. It would mean the sector
is scrutinised more closely in terms of price, standards of delivery
and quality of outcomes for the user
The Charities Bill has some provision
which will extend powers to spend capital, including larger charities
to spend permanent endowment funds. Currently, the sector is not
seen as a good risk in accessing wider capital because of the
short- term nature of contracts and because it cannot always achieve
full cost recovery under existing contracts. However, a wider
Voluntary Finance Initiative could allow for the sector to invest
in large-scale capital projects and free voluntary organisations
from the short-term, time-intensive system of grants that currently
dominates.
For example, the capital costs of establishing
residential care and support for people with severe learning disabilities
or mental health problems could be borrowed against a long-term
(10 or 25-year) contract to provide that care. The property would
then be owned by the charity rather than a private provider (who
would be free to charge higher rents, given the specialist requirements
of the building) and could be borrowed against to build further
projects, ploughing funds back into service provision. Innovations
like the Futurebuilders Fund provide a great opportunity for a
new deal between government and voluntary service providers and
should be built on to allow the sector to access new forms of
finance.
In conclusion, the Bill could create
the impetus for wider structural changes. It could therefore
have a significant impact on enabling the voluntary sector to
play a central role in the delivery of public services.
Yours sincerely,
Victor Adebowale
Chief Executive
| 
