WHO CARES ABOUT THE VOLUNTARY SECTOR?

Oluwaferanmi Adeyemo, Doctoral Researcher

​

Supervisors:

​

Elizabeth Sanderson, Senior Research Fellow

​

Peter Wells, Professor of Public Policy Analysis and Evaluation

Aim:

Evaluate the state-voluntary sector relationship:

• Labour Government (1997-2010)
• Conservative-led Government (2010-2024)

​

Specific focus on:

• Dominant public policy narratives (e.g. State-Sector Partnership, Big Society, Levelling Up)
• Funding (e.g., Grants, EU funding, SPF, social investment, markets)
• Focus of support (e.g. Capacity building) 
• Contexts of crises and choice of response (2008 GFC vs Covid-19)

​

Comparison of the landscape in the UK with that of the US.

OUTLINE

Why bother about the ideology of who cares about the Voluntary Sector?

Introduction

Methodological Approach

Source: Adapted and extended from Alcock (2016) 

THE 3 EPISODES OF STATE-VOLUNTARY SECTOR RELATIONSHIP

• Tony Blair and the Third Way Idea – neither state nor the market
• Competitive tendering market
• Proliferation of the voluntary sector in public service delivery
• Funding – growth and scale of the VS
• Key capacity building projects:
• £150million ChangeUp programme – 2004
• £215million Futurebuilders fund (2005-2008), extended from 2008-2018 (£90million)
• £70million Communitybuilders fund
• Stand-alone Adventure Capital Fund – later renamed Social Investment Business (SIB)

The Partnership Period: 1997-2010

Funding: Income vs spending

Source: NCVO/TSRC, Charity Commission

Share of income based on size

Source: NCVO/TSRC, Charity Commission

Big Society Agenda (libertarian paternalism): 2010-2012

• David Cameroon and his 'Hugo Young Lecture
• Big Society as a solution to the UK’s broken society
• Devolution of power – decentralisation and localism
• Key Focus of Support – Big Society Bank and the ‘right to provide’ reform of the public sector

However

• The Big Society turn out to be less significant than the political rhetoric suggests
• The honeymoon period of hyperactive mainstreaming of the sector became unsettled, especially within the context:
• Austerity and budget cuts
• A move away from partnership to co-production
• State-sector relations moved from relational to more contractual driven by an econometric situation – outcome driven.
• The ‘builders’ programmes were discontinued
• Associated agencies like Capacity Builders and the Compact Commission were closed down.
• The public service provision environment became more competitive rather than voluntary and community action

…Cont.…

Relative silence on the voluntary sector marked by uncertainties: 2013 onwards

A decline in the policy reputation of the voluntary sector

• Increased emphasis on intelligent commissioning and funding principles based on two directions - quality service provisions and cost containment (value for money).
• ‘Levelling Up’ – new UK government mantra to address longstanding local and regional inequalities and, especially, to tackle the problems of ‘left-behind’ places.
• Acknowledges the vital role of the sector, but no concrete funding plans and few policy proposals to deliver on its ambition.

In contrast

Sector-blind utilitarianism approach

• The commissioning landscape from more plural and widespread to focusing on a small number of larger organisations referred to as parachuters, particularly from the private sector.
• Greater emphasis on formal accountability and evaluation (usually in cost-benefit terms) – evidencing of what works.

Context of Crises and choice of response

Comparative examples: UK vs US�

Conclusion

• What, then, might be a more nuanced way to draw out the contentious ideological aspects of who cares about the voluntary sector as we look ahead to the next general election with a possible predicted change in government?
• The key takeaway from the review we have made so far is that:
• There is little evidence to suggest that the state (Labour or Conservative-led governments) cares about the voluntary sector as the sector is usually mainstreamed during the period of polycrisis based on the need to save or rebuild society.
• Irrespective of who wins the forthcoming general elections, the UK may likely continue to witness:
• More rolling back of the state from service provision and funding
• More opening up of market forces and continuous competition for funding, a threat to the VS.
• Continuous increase in demand for services (e.g., integrated mental health and employment support).

Key References

​

• Acheson, N. (2010). Welfare state reform, compacts and restructuring relations between the state and the voluntary sector: reflections on Northern Ireland’s experience. Voluntary Sector Review, 1(2), 175-192.
• Acheson, N. (2010). Welfare state reform, compacts and restructuring relations between the state and the voluntary sector: reflections on Northern Ireland’s experience. Voluntary Sector Review, 1(2), 175-192. https://doi.org/10.1332/204080510X511238
• Alcock, P., & Scott, D. (2002). "Eight: Partnerships with the voluntary sector: can Compacts work?". In Partnerships, New Labour and the governance of welfare. Bristol, UK: Policy Press. https://doi.org/10.51952/9781847425492.ch008
• Alcock, P. (2012a). The Big Society: a new policy environment for the third sector? Working Paper. University of Birmingham, Birmingham.
• Alcock, P. (2012b), New Policy Spaces: The Impact of Devolution on Third Sector Policy in the UK. Social Policy & Administration, 46: 219-238. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2011.00832.x
• Alcock, P., Kendall, J., & Parry, J. (2012). From the third sector to the Big Society: consensus or contention in the 2010 UK General Election? Voluntary Sector Review, 3(3), 347-363. https://doi.org/10.1332/204080512X658054
• Alcock, P. (2012c). New Policy Spaces: The Impact of Devolution on Third Sector Policy in the UK. Social Policy & Administration, 46: 219-238. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2011.00832.x
• Alcock, P. (2016a). "Two: The history of third sector service delivery in the UK". In The Third Sector Delivering Public Services. Bristol, UK: Policy Press. https://doi.org/10.51952/9781447322412.ch002
• Alcock, P. (2016b). From Partnership to the Big Society: The Third Sector Policy Regime in the UK. Nonprofit Policy Forum, 7(2), 95-116. https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2015-0022
• Bartlett, W., & Grand, J. L. (1993). The theory of quasi-markets. Quasi-markets and social policy, 13-34.
• Giddens, A. (2013a). The third way: The renewal of social democracy. John Wiley & Sons.
• Giddens, A. (2013b). The third way and its critics. John Wiley & Sons.
• Cheng, Y. (2019). Exploring the role of nonprofits in public service provision: Moving from coproduction to cogovernance. Public Administration Review, 79(2), 203-214.
• Rees, J., Taylor, R., & Damm, C. (2024). Opening the ‘black box’: Organisational Adaptation and Resistance to institutional isomorphism in a prime-led employment services programme. Public Policy and Administration, 39(1), 106-124. https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767221118490
• Stephen P. Osborne & Kate McLaughlin (2002) Trends and Issues in the Implementation of Local ‘Voluntary Sector Compacts’ in England, Public Money & Management, 22:1, 55-64. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9302.00297
• Tomaney, J. and Pike, A. (2020), Levelling Up?. The Political Quarterly, 91: 43-48. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12834

​

LinkedIn

DISCUSSIONS AND QUESTIONS?

THANK YOU