SCVO response to Civil Society Covenant Framework engagement exercise

About our response

Your relationship with public bodies

How do you engage with public bodies?

• Influencing decision-making 
• Influencing service design 
• Other: SCVO manages a range of funds on behalf of grant sponsors including a range of Scottish Government departments including Health and Social Care, Digital and CLD, and other organisations too (e.g. Cycling Scotland) to voluntary and community sector organisations.  Over the past two years we have managed in the range of £10m.  These grants are for a range of different types of organisations which are agreed in line with the funder’s policy intent. 

Do you experience barriers engaging with public bodies?

Yes.

Please tell us more about your experience

This response is primarily informed by the experience of engaging with public bodies in Scotland, unless otherwise stated. This reflects (1) the fact that the operating environment of the voluntary sector in Scotland is overwhelmingly a devolved competence and (2) voluntary sector engagement with decision-makers is, primarily, limited to local government and the Scottish Government. While the Covenant will apply to UK government departments and agencies, it is our hope that our reflections are, nevertheless, useful in its development.

As a national infrastructure organisation, we are in a privileged position of having good access to, and strong engagement with, decision-makers. In relation the Scottish Government, our engagement is chiefly with the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, and the Third Sector Unit. Engagement with other parts of the Scottish Government is less consistent. In terms of the UK government and its agencies, where the principles of the Covenant will be applicable, SCVO's engagement has, primarily, been with the Scotland Office. 

For the voluntary sector in Scotland at large, there is no singular experience in terms of engagement with public bodies. Different public bodies have different attitudes to engaging with voluntary organisations. Even within public bodies, departmental approaches will vary drastically. Where engagement is strong, this usually driven by strong personal relationships. 

Our engagement with the sector has found that, where engagement is poor, it is driven by a range of barriers. These include: 

• Poor understanding of the voluntary sector within public bodies
• An unequal partnership between sectors
• A lack of trust 
• Inconsistent communication 
• A reluctance to hand power and resources to communities, including voluntary organisations and service users
• A lack of accountability 
• Poor funding practice

While the principles included in the Covenant are to be welcomed, it is unclear how these would, in practice, overcome these barriers or make any meaningful difference without dedication of time, resources, and significant practical changes, e.g. to funding practices.

What supports an effective relationship between civil society organisations and public bodies?

In recent years SCVO has worked with its members, as well as partners across local and national governments, to gather information and data on collaboration and partnership with the public sector in Scotland. Our findings broadly align with the Covenant principles. We have found that, to support effective relationships between the voluntary sector and public bodies, the following are crucial: 

• Parity of esteem: recognition of the current imbalance of power between the public and voluntary sectors, moving to treatment of the voluntary sector as equal partners. 
• Understanding of the role of the voluntary sector: proper understanding (which is all too often lacking) of the role, remit, and the challenges faced by voluntary organisations, particularly in relation to funding.  
• Mutual trust and formalised relationships: mutual trust between the sectors is essential to overcoming barriers to collaboration. This means putting in place robust, formalised frameworks (e.g. Memoranda of Understanding (MOU), or placing the relationship in statute, as in the Welsh Third Sector Scheme) that future-proof, and make consistent, working relationships across all government departments and agencies. Personal relationships alone, while important, cannot be relied upon. 
• Clear, consistent communication: joint agreement of the scope of collaboration and outcomes, the use of terms of reference, and honest conversations, especially when things do not go to plan. 
• Accountability and effective evaluation: accountability mechanisms ensure partners hold one another to account and fulfil their obligations. In terms of effective evaluation, we commend the work of Evaluation Support Scotland, and the assets they have produced for voluntary organisations to take an outcomes-based approach to evaluating partnership. 
• Fair funding: SCVO calls on the UK government departments and agencies to adopt our Fair Funding policy asks, which are crucial to effective collaboration. These include longer-term funding models, processes that are accessible and consistent, more unrestricted funding, and inflationary uplifts.
• Procurement processes that are inclusive of the voluntary sector: more equitable, effective, and flexible procurement processes that encourage the participation of voluntary organisations of all sizes. This includes straightforward, streamlined approaches that support Fair Work and prioritise quality outcomes over cost alone. 

While these observations are taken from the voluntary sector’s experience of engaging with the Scottish public sector, the lessons will, nevertheless, be applicable to UK government departments and agencies. For further information on the experiences of voluntary organisations in collaborating with public bodies, please see the below resources:  

• Scottish Government funding of voluntary organisations: a case study of voluntary sector intermediaries: in October 2022, SCVO published a report on the experiences of voluntary sector intermediaries to shine a light on how the Scottish Government directly funds voluntary organisations, including the processes it adopts and how it interacts with those that receive funding.   
• Organisational profiles: funding and public sector relationships:  in 2021 SCVO commissioned an independent consultant, Arrivo Consulting, to conduct depth interviews with several of our members. The aim of the project was to deepen our understanding of the key challenges faced by voluntary sector organisations, specifically in relation to funding and relationships with the public sector.  
• Supporting collaboration between the third and public sectors: evidence review: the research review conducted in 2022 as part of the Strengthening Collaboration work between Scottish Government, SCVO, COSLA and the TSI Network found that issues of trust, power and structure are as prevalent as ever.   

What actions should civil society organisations take to improve the relationship with public bodies?

Voluntary organisations have a significant role to play – especially in taking the time to understand the public sector and to build relationships. Respondents to the Supporting collaboration between the third and public sectors: evidence review noted that voluntary organisations were not always aware of the structures, processes, statutory requirements, and culture that shape national and local policymaking. While voluntary organisations can lack capacity to develop this knowledge committing time to do so is clearly vital to improving collaboration. 

However, because of the power imbalance that exists between voluntary organisations and public bodies mean that the mechanisms to improve relationships sit, primarily, within public bodies, e.g., those that relate to funding and procurement. 

What actions should public bodies take to improve the relationship with civil society?

The inverse to the previous answer, is that decision-makers must better understand the voluntary sector and take time to build that relationship too. Respondents to Supporting collaboration between the third and public sectors: evidence review  noted that local authorities and the Scottish Government often do not appreciate the challenges that poor funding practice creates, while also misunderstanding what the sector does. Some respondents felt that the public sector viewed the voluntary sector as an extension of the public sector, rather than an equal partner. Public bodies committing the time to turn round such a dynamic is essential. 

In addition to the above, and in the name of concision, please refer to the answer to question 2.   

What supports civil society to innovate and find solutions to societal problems?

Building on previous answers, joint working between the voluntary and public sectors during the Covid-19 pandemic is instructive, showing the power of effective collaboration in addressing societal problems in Scotland. Barriers to effective partnership-working across sectors were overcome in the short-term to the benefit of communities, demonstrating what can be achieved on a large scale when we are empowered to work together towards a common goal. Unfortunately, as the pandemic receded, so too has innovative practice on the part of the Scottish Government and other public bodies, with a return to business-as-usual.  

While this example relates to public bodies in Scotland, the lessons will be equally applicable to UK government departments and agencies. Key attributes of success include: 

• Parity of esteem: respondents to the Supporting collaboration between he third and public sectors: evidence review noted that during the Covid-19 pandemic the public sector realised the importance of the voluntary sector. 
• Trust: relatedly, respondents also noted new relationships forged quickly and existing relationships becoming much stronger. 
• Funding: emergency funds from the Scottish Government and other public sector funders allowed voluntary organisations to quickly and flexibly support communities, without burdensome reporting requirements. This allowed rapid, targeted assistance and innovation, benefiting people and communities across Scotland. This, and more, is incorporated into our Fair Funding asks.

Your feedback on the Civil Society Covenant Framework principles

Do we need a Covenant to improve the relationship between civil society and organisations and government?

Yes.

To what extent do these four principles support an effective relationship between civil society and public bodies? 

While the Covenant principles are, largely, to be welcomed, collaboration between the voluntary and public sectors requires more than words on a webpage. As stated in response to previous questions, parity of esteem, better understanding of the role and remit of the voluntary sector, mutual trust and formalised relationships, clear relationship, as well as accountability and effective evaluation are all required. All of this requires a commitment of time in both sectors to build those relationships, as well as a host of practical changes, like improved funding or procurement practices. At present is unclear how this will be achieved. 

What changes or additions, if any, would you make to the draft principles? 

In addition to the answer provided to the previous question, while we welcome the inclusion of “honest conversations about funding”, that alone is insufficient. A change in funding culture and practice is required at all levels of government. For many years, SCVO has been engaging with voluntary organisations to understand the many challenges of income-generation, including public sector grants and contracts, and the solutions needed. As stated in response to the first question, SCVO has developed a suite of Fair Funding policy asks, including longer-term funding models, accessible and consistent processes, more unrestricted funding and with in-built uplifts.

Furthermore, we advocate for the adoption of the IVAR Flexible Funding principles for grant-making and reporting. Commitments include not wasting time, asking relevant questions, accepting risk, acting with urgency, being open, flexible, communicating with purpose and being proportionate.

Additionally, the relationship between the proposed Covenant framework and devolution needs to be urgently clarified. Such a framework must sit alongside existing structures and frameworks that exist in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The principles can only ever, realistically, be applied to reserved decision-making and those relationships that UK government departments and agencies have with voluntary organisations. This should be made clear. 

How can we ensure civil society organisations and public bodies uphold these principles?  

As stated in response to previous questions, parity of esteem, better understanding of the role and remit of the voluntary sector, mutual trust and formalised relationships, clear communication, as well as accountability and effective evaluation are all required. All of this requires a commitment of time in both sectors to build those relationships, as well as a host of practical changes, like improved funding practice.