Category Archives: mutuals

Co-operative and mutuals membership up 25% since credit crunch – now close to 10m

By David Bicknell

The Co-operative sector has grown by more than 25% since the credit crunch, with membership of co-operatives now close to 10m. Turnover in 2o10 was over £16bn, according to a report in the Observer.

The article says that the annual report from Co-operatives UK, to be published this week, will show that as well as  big players such as the John Lewis Partnership and the Co-operative Group performing strongly, a thriving new generation of smaller, grassroots organisations has sprung up.

The report also refers to efforts by some MPs to persuade Chancellor George Osborne to consider a mutual model for bailed-out bank Northern Rock, which Osborne is expected to put up for sale before the end of the year.

NHS users should require mutuals to deliver more benefits than in-house, says NAO

By David Bicknell

The National Audit Office (NAO) has highlighted risks to value for money associated with the Department of Health’s programme aimed at enabling its staff to take the lead in leaving the NHS – or ‘spinning out’ – to set up health social enterprises or mutuals.

The NAO’s  Report recognises that, at this early stage of the ‘Right to Request Programme’, it is too early to assess its costs and benefits. But it makes the point that the Department of Health has not set measurable objectives specifically for the Right to Request Programme against which to evaluate its success. PCTs expect social enterprises or mutuals to deliver more benefits than other providers, but did not generally contract for them to deliver savings or any other additional benefits.

The NAO’s report points out that many risks and liabilities still reside with the PCTs and will need to be managed if value for money is to be achieved. In the last resort, the trust or its successors will be responsible for ensuring that essential services continue to operate. For a time, social enterprises will be highly dependent on work and cash flow from their respective PCTs. They will also be operating in an ‘increasingly competitive market’ owing to changes in health legislation currently going through Parliament. So PCTs or their successors will need to have a clear idea of how they will react if enterprises run into financial difficult or fail.

Amyas Morse, head of the National Audit Office, said, “There are many risks to be managed if the Department is to get value for money from the £900 million contracts awarded to social enterprises. The Department needs to reassess its approach, when contracting with social enterprises, of not requiring efficiencies over and above what would have been achieved if the services had remained within the Department.”

You can access the full report here

Third Sector: “Pathfinder mutuals suffering mixed fortunes and need more support mechanisms”

Third Sector has taken a look at the fortunes of the current mutual Pathfinders and concludes that they have been suffering mixed fortunes.

Plans for lecturers to take over Newton Rigg College in Cumbria were hit when the college was taken over by another institution.  And a project to spin out youth services in three London councils has been held up because the councils – Westminster, Hammersmith and Fulham and Kensington and Chelsea – are currently negotiating to merge many of their services as a result of the financial squeeze on local authorities.

Many mutuals, though, are making good progress, and some have already been launched successfully, Third Sector says. However, although the government has created a lot of buzz around mutuals, the piece argues that mutuals need more frameworks and support mechanisms in place.

That particularly includes a framework for council workers to take over services, which will be partly solved when a ‘right to challenge’ is enshrined in the Localism Bill towards the end of this year. However, many observers feel the right as it currently stands is not strong enough.

Third sector has also interviewed Julian Le Grand, who is leading the government’s Mutuals Taskforce. He suggests there are five key issues that the taskforce must help mutuals tackle:

  • Business Planning
  • External opposition, notably from unions
  • Procurement
  • Money issues
  • Getting start-up funding

Under a blood red sky: the challenges facing local councils over mutuals and social enterprises

By David Bicknell

The longer the waiting goes on for the open public services white paper to provide some clear direction on the Coalition’s up-to-date thinking, the more the mystique around mutuals grows.

Local Government Chronicle has just carried a blog by Chris Brophy, a partner at the Capsticks health and social care law firm, which discussed the potential of mutuals and social enterprises.

Brophy makes some good –  and certainly descriptive – points, suggesting for now that “there is a certain ‘quiet before the storm feeling’. You can sense the sea being sucked back, the birds have gone quiet, the sky is red-stained, there is no breeze, as those interested in new business methodologies wait anxiously to hear whether there is a panacea for financial, staffing and service problems.

“Breathing becomes more steady as anxiety is anaesthetised by contemplating the difference between mutuals on the one hand and social enterprises on the other and then you can start settling down to really understanding what is going on, and settle down you must as you realise you really need to understand this beast before heading back to base and being enveloped by the day to day issues.”

He goes on to make some excellent points about the challenges facing local authorities:

‘One of the difficulties for local authorities developing social enterprises is the time, funding and resources needed to just to consider change, never mind working up business plans including engaging with staff and thinking about the identification and transfer of significant businesses. Despite the difficulties all Councils have, everyone knows this process needs to be commenced, and now, as deadlines start to loom more large and the need to stay in control of the process becomes the main line on the forehead.

‘In many ways Local Authorities have it more difficult than PCTs. At least PCTs knew essentially what services they were looking to transfer as part of the Department of Health’s “Transforming Community Services programme and pursuant to their Right to Request” to take their provider services. The scope of the businesses for the LAs to think about is potentially very extensive and there is also the question of how to package businesses together.

‘Should all the businesses in contemplation be transferred to one social enterprise or would those businesses not work together and need to be packaged in different ways. They might for example have very different kinds of beneficiaries or users of the service and the stakeholders may be very different and therefore it might be more difficult to align the governance of the organisation with the business objectives if they were all combined. However scale is important and of course funding and income is crucial. It serves no useful purpose to set up a business which has no viable business plan. Whatever happens you need to identify the services, the assets, the staff and the support that will be involved and at the same time you will looking to satisfy yourself about the potential management team, its capabilities and skill-sets and then developing the business plan to see if it can all work.

A useful and informative piece. You can read the whole post here

How to set up an employee-owned mutual

By David Bicknell

There was a useful piece in the Guardian on Saturday about how to set up a mutual.

The article, ‘From councils to co-ops: how public workers can form a mutual’, suggests “employee-owned mutuals offer an attractive third way to the cuts programme”, and offers an eight-point plan on how to set one up.

All Party Group lauds promise of mutualising public services – but warns against economic motives

By David Bicknell

An article in Community Care magazine has said employee-led mutuals could positively transform public services as long as they are not driven by economic motives.

The magazine cites a report by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Employee Ownership, which found the coalition government had made “significant process” with its commitment to mutualise public services, including social work.

But the all party group warned that, although many employee-led mutuals had reported efficiencies, cost-cutting alone “should not be the prime motivator for seeking out mutual ownership models”.

The MPs, chaired by Conservative MP Jesse Norman, identified some concerns about the timing of the mutuals intitiative. Trade unions in particular have suggested it is being driven by financial considerations rather than the desire to give frontline workers more freedom and control.

“Several witnesses told us that the timing of the public service mutuals initiative, during a time of deep budget cuts at central and local government level, was inflicting severe damage on how the initiative was perceived and how it was being implemented,” the report said.

“The group is concerned to hear that some spin-outs appear solely driven from very senior level, typically under the pressure of the need for immediate short term cuts, with the wider base of employees engaged only after the process had started.

The APPG, set up in 2007 to raise awareness of the benefits of employee ownership, also noted that the “plethora” of employee ownership models available had caused confusion among frontline workers.

Norman said policy makers should do more to connect would-be mutuals with experts and ensure that advice is accessible.

You can download the report here

Newcastle Council to be in vanguard of public services reform, including using mutuals?

By David Bicknell

There is an interesting piece in the Guardian’s Society pages today about the ambitions of Newcastle Council in pushing through public services reform.

Peter Hetherington’s article  says that Nick Forbes, the new Labour leader in Newcastle has two problems to grapple with: budget cuts this year of £45m, and reinvigorating the existing management regime.

Forbes is quoted as saying that one of the big challenges is to reinvent the concept of public services in the 21st century in a way that matches Labour’s values of equality and fairness and co-operation. “There’s the opportunity to capitalise on what the government is saying around mutuals and workers’ co-operatives and develop genuinely new models that give service users and staff a stronger ‘say’ but also protect essential public services from the destructive forces of market competition.”

Audit Commission to Offer Procurement Opportunity for Employee-led Mutuals to bid for projects

By David Bicknell

An article published by eGovMonitor has suggested that local authority audits could be outsourced to the private sector by 2012/13.

eGovMonitor suggested that the Audit Commission has been asked to develop a procurement process through which a range of firms could bid for the projects. These would also include employee led mutuals.

“We have been asked to design a procurement process that allows a range of firms to bid, including the possibility of an in-house bid, which could form the basis of a new and distinctive provider in the market, possibly a mutual,” Eugene Sullivan, Chief Executive of the Audit Commission said.

 

Mutuals: After the Big Society, the Good Society…

By David Bicknell

I came across a piece from Public Finance written by Maurice Glasman discussing what Labour’s answer to the Big Society might mean in practice.

There are some interesting thoughts on mutuals here. Glasman writes:

“There is far more to meaningful work than money and self-interest; it is the way we serve and change the world. The workforce is at the heart of this. The Good Society stresses its importance in the private as well as the public sector. This is very different to the Big Society agenda, which does not recognise that capital seeks the highest rate of return and thus creates great pressure to turn both humans and nature into commodities.

“To understand what is at stake here, look at the idea of corporate governance. The Big Society offers two ideas of corporate governance for the public and private sectors. In terms of the state, it prefers a form of mutualisation, developed by Julian Le Grand, in which public services are provided by worker-owned enterprises. There is no balance of interest in the governance of the service provider, and users and funders are excluded. State-funded services have no representation on the board. This is in contrast to the Big Society view of private sector corporate governance, in which the worker has no status at all and managerial sovereignty prevails.

“Our ‘Blue Labour’ approach brings the two together. Reliance on managerial sovereignty is both wasteful and ineffective and does not engage fully the innovation, creativity and vocational energy of the workforce. It is a contractual and assessment-based model that focuses too much on procedure and not enough on developing relationships.

“Instead, a third of the mutual boards should be elected by the workforce. Another third should be represented by users (the involvement of users is an important part of community organising that needs to be undertaken to strengthen society and give voice to disorganised people). The final third of the board should be the local authority or the state, which has a legitimate interest in procedure, wider social goals and its integration into government policy.”