Case studies for commissioners

RIFT Social Enterprise is a Community Interest Company (CIC) that delivers self-employment services across the UK, with its main focus being on a 12-month one-to-one support for people interested in working for themselves. Its vision is to be the leading provider of self-employment support for marginalised people, and its mission is to empower participants to achieve sustainable self-employment and raise awareness that this is a viable option for many. The business has been trading for seven years, delivering a series of courses and webinars beyond its main support programme as well as accredited workbooks. From a team of two, it’s grown to 15 staff members, and in the last year alone supported more than a thousand people on their journey to self-employment. Working to support those in the criminal justice system For the first four years of RIFT Social Enterprise’s existence, the government department it’s worked with most has been His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS). It has delivered services via the dynamic purchasing system (DPS) for the prison service and through CFO3 (Co-funding Organisation Round 3), which supported people with convictions to overcome barriers to education and employment. This funding ended in July 2024, but the social enterprise has been onboarded by the majority of prime providers delivering the programme's next iteration, CFOE. Two years ago, RIFT Social Enterprise diversified its services and started delivering for the Department for Work and Pensions’ (DWP) Restart Scheme. This works with people who have been long-term unemployed, giving them specialist tools and support to get back into the job market. The scheme is primarily contracted out to a series of prime organisations, such as Maximus and Ingeus, and RIFT Social Enterprise currently delivers for 20 different Restart providers all across the country. What are the benefits to government of working with Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise Organisations (VCSEs)? RIFT Social Enterprise’s chief executive Andy Gullick emphasises the additional value that comes through partnering with organisations dedicated to creating a positive social or environmental impact: “Social enterprises have social value at their core. The work that we do is founded in doing it for the right reasons, and profits have to be reinvested back into the business for the greater good of the work we’re doing. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy that’s only going to lead to long term benefits for the participants, the local community, and that government contract as a whole.” What challenges have you faced in the contracting process?   Process, transparency and the role of relationships One of the big challenges RIFT Social Enterprise has found when applying for contracts is the time it takes to get onto portals such as the DPS for the prison service. Organisations wishing to deliver government contracts submit eligibility to deliver a service onto a DPS, with the relevant department going to those who have made it onto these procurement platforms to decide who to contract with. Whilst these are set up to simplify the contracting process, getting on the DPS “took hours and hours for a relatively new social enterprise at the time”. For smaller VCSEs, the amount of detail required can prove to be a challenge: “When you don’t have a big team or the experience of bidding for government contracts, it’s quite difficult in terms of bid writing , having to have two years’ worth of audited accounts, or if not providing management accounts and references. Having to go through 90 different questions as part of the due diligence process is really time consuming!” Once on a procurement portal, Andy highlights that many organisations “expect to sit back and wait for call-off opportunities to be published which they can bid for” but in reality it’s often “more about the relationships that you had or forge with particular prison governors of prison leadership teams, rather than it being an equal process”. This focus on forging relationships with commissioning bodies can lead to criticisms about the transparency of the process, and service deliverers sometimes approaching commissioners with ideas on what kind of services to commission. Compared to work with HMPPS, the Restart work through DWP was easier - but there were common challenges around the onboarding process, primarily around working with primes (organisations applying directly apply to DWP to deliver the bulk of the contract). In the example of Restart, a prime organisation would deliver a certain percentage of the contract and subcontract a supply chain to deliver another percentage, then both subcontract RIFT Social Enterprise on a spot purchase arrangement to provide specialist self-employment provision. Each layer required separate due diligence processes. Working with so many primes meant RIFT Social Enterprise had to fill out the same information multiple times and often in different ways; Andy said: “I wish that there was one standard proforma that was used for all VCSE providers that captured all of the information that all the primes need for due diligence.” Capturing broader impact Andy raised concerns that contracting processes don’t capture well the broader impact created by VCSEs, which are set up to tackle social and environmental challenges. He stressed how “stories of change” and the impact of RIFT Social Enterprise’s programmes on individual participants are key to its work, but often beyond the specifications of many contracts. With Restart, prime organisations draw down funding every time RIFT Social Enterprise can evidence that someone is self-employed as a result of the organisation’s work, but what is not counted are the “many softer outcomes for that individual such as an increase in confidence, better relationships with family and the wider community”. “There’s a real dichotomy between us being a not for profit, doing things for the right reasons, but working on a contract, where in a way, they encourage us to screen people out that aren’t going to get to the point of trading because they won’t be able to draw down any funding for that person – it’s a constant battle.” One possible solution to making it easier for VCSEs to apply for government contracts suggested by Andy is to influence primes to work with more VCSE suppliers: “With any new government procurement opportunities, the prime should be mandated so that a percentage of delivery has to fall within VCSE organisations. We add so much in terms of social value and impact but, at the moment, it’s a nice to have.” Based on a conversation with Andy Gullick, Chief Executive at RIFT Social Enterprise riftse.co.uk

Groundwork is a federation of 15 charitable organisations operating across the UK. It runs programmes and activities to help people improve their prospects, working with communities facing multiple challenges, in places that lack social infrastructure and economic opportunities. It combines environmental and social impact, building the green economy while supporting communities to connect with nature and adapt to the climate crisis. From creating green jobs to supporting people with energy bills and retrofitting homes, it works to build a fairer and greener future in which people, places and nature can thrive. Working with government departments Groundwork UK (the national body of the federation) distributes grant funding for the UK Government, acting as an intermediary to make sure public money is invested in communities at a grassroots level. This involves bidding for contracts with central government departments and acting as an outsourced intermediary provider of grant management services. It’s worked with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to get groups  such as parish councils involved in local planning, and with the Home Office to support charities tackling extremism. It’s also been contracted by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to run the Voluntary Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE) Energy Efficiency Scheme - a £25m programme, largely distributed through grants. So far it has funded 1,100 organisations to carry out energy assessments to help them improve the efficiency of their buildings. The benefits of working with a VCSE organisation Groundwork UK’s position of having national grant management capability but also being able to leverage connections through its federation members allows it to promote grant programmes at a local level, supporting organisations to navigate through complexity and access funding they may not have been aware of. Chief executive Graham Duxbury states that government outsourcing this kind of work aims to ensure grants are accessible to smaller, local organisations that are often volunteer-run. He said: “Having knowledge of that sector and that space is hugely important in terms of designing the service. You’ve got to be aware of capacity restraints and limitations, you’ve got to understand how volunteer-led organisations work and how to communicate with them as well as what to expect in terms of their capability to manage due diligence processes.” This close knowledge of the VCSE sector has allowed Groundwork UK to develop a good understanding of what’s proportional when it comes to distributing money, which means it can give the contracting body a clearer idea of what money can deliver when directed to organisations of various sizes and capacities. The second major benefit of working with Groundwork is that it’s “really good at bringing together partnerships”, as it knows where the “deep pockets of expertise are in the sector”. Graham points out that the energy efficiency programme would not have been possible without the support of specialist organisations such as the Centre for Sustainable Energy, the Energy Saving Trust and Locality. Thirdly, working with a VCSE provider helps create broader impact, with “cross fertilisation being what you get from the sector”. Combining the social and the environmental is at the heart of Groundwork’s ethos, and the funding it distributes  can create other opportunities for VCSE organisations. As Graham phrases it: “A grant programme may allow them to do one thing, but we may be able to communicate to them other opportunities and provide them with added value; so when we’re managing grants focused on a social issue we can signpost local grantees to other forms of funding and provide advice that might encourage them to think about their environmental impact too.” What were the main challenges in applying for a central government contract? One of the main challenges Graham identified was bidding timescales, with it being tricky to “be able to drop everything and jump on a bidding process for sometimes as little as three weeks”. This can make forming partnerships to deliver contracts difficult because “partnerships take time to develop, build and form - and very few VCSEs have those bidding resources, even relatively large ones like us”. Other challenges identified are issues around negotiating risk levels on contracts, as government contracts involve public money, with Treasury rules to “rightly focus on money being sensibly spent and looked after”. When it comes to grant management services, like those managed by Groundwork UK, these can lead to there being an over-specification on the part of the ultimate recipient of the money: “We’re sometimes caught between government machinery which wants all this assurance and protection and risk management, and a small voluntary sector organisation which doesn’t have the capacity to do that. If you put too much on them, they won’t engage - and that’s counter to the purpose of the grant programme, which is to get small-scale voluntary organisations funded to deliver.” The biggest challenge Groundwork faces on some grant programmes is down to annualised budgeting within Government, which can affect frontline organisations if delivery time slips and “potentially means that money disappears if delivery needs to extend into the next financial year”. Before VCSE organisations even get to bid to run a government service, the department in question has to bid to the Treasury as part of a Budget or Spending Review process. Once granted, “there’s a clock ticking”, with the design work and procurement exercise needing to be carried out - so the actual window for the delivery of the services can be “really concertinaed at the back end”, especially if the funding is only secured for a year.  As Graham puts it: “As an intermediary in the process you know sometimes you’ll have to put pressure on organisations to deliver in a less than ideal timeframe because funds can’t easily be moved from one year to the next.” Graham acknowledges that it is “hard to get the right balance between due diligence and not overburdening VCSEs”, but feels there could be solutions around “expanding those timeframes; thinking about multi-year commissioning processes to bring about more long-term certainty.” Another challenge faced by VCSEs is the still significant weighting on price as a deciding factor in who is awarded a contract, which can skew the process towards organisations able to offer the biggest discount, which may not be beneficial to the service being delivered. Graham asks: “If a department has secured funding from the Treasury for a particular piece of work, they’ve secured the money, so why put the additional stretch in there in terms of who can do it the cheapest?” Based on a conversation with Graham Duxbury, chief executive at Groundwork UK groundwork.org.uk

Bounce Back, a charity and social enterprise, creates opportunities for young people and adults who have a history of or are at risk of offending to thrive, and ultimately help to shape a society where everyone can look forward to a bright future. It has been in operation since 2011 and supported nearly 10,000 people. The organisation provides end-to-end solutions focused around education, training and employment, working in prisons and in the community to provide holistic support. Shirley Riley, Director for Bounce Back, told us: “We believe everyone can change, and should be given the opportunity to do so. We provide this for people  inside and outside prison through diversionary activities, including City & Guilds training and wrap-around support into jobs with prospects, with a particular focus on construction trades.” Bounce Back’s charity funding comes mostly from contracts and grants, with around ten per cent from trusts and foundations as well as corporate sponsors. Its social enterprise, staffed by people who have accessed its services, started out in painting and decorating but now offers emergency repairs and maintenance for corporates,  charities and community groups. How Bounce Back works with central government departments. Bounce Back has worked with the Department for Work and Pensions and the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) as well as several local authorities. An example of its work includes the successful delivery of the ‘E-nuff’ Prison Leavers Project, funded by the MoJ through the Local Leadership and Integration Fund. E-nuff aimed to reduce reoffending through culturally informed holistic rehabilitation interventions, including resettlement planning and employment support. The programme was specifically designed for people serving a 12-month sentence or less with a focus on Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic prison leavers. In partnership with BeOnsite, Change Grow Live, A Fairer Chance and RISE, the initiative offered comprehensive access to the services required for a better experience on release and successful resettlement - from training and pre-employment support to family intervention and housing support, as well as services for substance misuse and other factors that contribute to rehabilitation. What are the benefits to government of working with VCSEs? Shirley believes that voluntary, community and social enterprise organisations (VCSEs) provide much more added value, going above and beyond the scope of commissioned services. When funders, and private sector providers invest in charities and social enterprises like Bounce Back, they also tap into and benefit from their extensive partnerships with local communities and groups, corporate partners, and employers – not to mention volunteers, who offer their time for free to make a difference. Shirley states: “VCSEs exist to make a difference, all our funding goes into making a difference to people’s lives, and communities.” Bounce Back’s work supporting those caught up in the criminal justice system also reduces the cost to wider society. As Shirley puts it: “If an individual can thrive, then the community thrives. If the community thrives, the whole borough thrives, and the economic climate improves. “By reducing re-offending, the cost savings to the government are significant, and also when people make positive behaviour changes, learn new skills and move from benefits to paid work. The average cost of a prison place in England and Wales is £46,696 a year (2021/22). People supported by Bounce Back are less likely to offend, with less than one in ten going on to re-offend, and three-quarters of those sustaining employment for at least six months (2021/22). “VCSEs can also better respond at speed and offer innovative solutions in a cost-effective way. They often go out of their way to “make things happen” - but this can put a squeeze on resources, especially given the uncertainty created by short term contracts.” What have been the main challenges in applying for government contracts? As mentioned, funding can be both short-term and not recurring. Shirley believes that - whilst this is great for testing new ways of working - if you evidence something works, there isn’t a way to scale and replicate so that it can be rolled out from short-term pilots to something permanent.  It’s also common for VCSEs to have to source contracts from different funding streams, to ensure people don’t fall through the gaps and get the support they need when they need it. Shirley commented: “It’s quite paradoxical that the work we’re trying to do is to help people have long term employment and long-term prosperity, yet the funds that they give us mean we’re employing people on short-term contracts.” She added: “Applying for funds requires resource, which for smaller VSCEs means leaders putting on one of their many hats and finding the time to apply.  At Bounce Back, we’re fortunate to have a small resource, but even we find it a struggle keeping up.” While Shirley has noticed social value in some tender questions, she felt it can be a bit “tokenistic” and framed too broadly. For example, criteria such as ‘employing local people’ overlook the additional benefits of working with an organisation like Bounce Back, which not only creates local jobs but also new opportunities specifically for those marginalised by the labour market. Based on a conversation with Shirley Riley, Director at Bounce Back bouncebackproject.com

Mental Health First Aid (MHFA) England® is a social enterprise with a vision to improve the mental health of the nation. It will achieve this through its mission to train one in ten people in mental health knowledge, awareness and skills – the tipping point for lasting societal change.   With most adults spending a third of their lifetime at work, MHFA England focuses much of its efforts there, to change how society deals with mental health now and in the future. Its training, consultancy and campaigning is paving the way for positive mental health in the workplace and beyond. Through its work over the last 16 years, with more than 20,000 employers of all shapes and sizes, it knows that each organisation's culture is unique and the key to maintaining a mentally healthy workplace is understanding the people within it. In February 2024, MHFA England celebrated the phenomenal milestone of reaching a million people with its training, which equates to one in 38 of the population. Social enterprise working with government The government has committed to bringing more voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) organisations into public sector supply chains. VCSE sector expertise means they are often uniquely placed to help create and deliver compassionate and responsive services, and government research has shown there are barriers VCSEs face in entering public sector markets.[1]       We spoke to Vicki Cockman, Head of Client and Training Delivery at MHFA England, to find out more about the social enterprise’s impact and its strong relationships with government. How does MHFA England work with central government departments? MHFA England works with a range of government departments including the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), the Cabinet Office, the Department of Education, the Home Office, and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. Our flexible training and support offer can be tailored to support each department’s unique needs. For example, we have worked with DWP to train Instructor Members, who then train their staff. There are now more than 400 MHFAiders® at DWP. As part of our bespoke offer for the department, we also support quarterly sessions to look at the impact of MHFAiders and identify areas where further support is needed. This works well for DWP, but each department has its own approach, depending on its needs. For example, in 2024, we began work with Ofsted on a programme to train all their inspectors in our Mental Health Awareness course. This had a positive impact on those undergoing the training, and aims to create a ripple effect through the schools inspected. The contracting process varies between departments. The majority approach us directly, due to our proven track record, while others put out services to tender for which we apply. MHFA England is listed on the government’s procurement learning framework: a due diligence process allowing organisations to be listed as a preferred supplier. What would you say to commissioners who are debating working with social enterprises? There are lots of benefits to working with social enterprises. As well as meeting your own organisation’s needs, you are supporting businesses who deliver social impact to workplaces, communities and wider society. When it comes to working with MHFA England, the impact can be huge. Improved awareness and understanding of mental health create happier and more productive workplaces. We give people the skills to spot the signs of poor mental health, the confidence to start a conversation, and the knowledge to signpost to support. This can be lifechanging and lifesaving. We know how to work effectively in the public and private sector. When people work with us, they are not only creating social impact - they are getting a partner that meets their needs, provides market leading training and consultancy, and delivers a phenomenal service. Are there any challenges in applying for government contracts? We are thrilled to work with so many different government departments. It is a huge source of pride for us, as a social enterprise, to know that we are trusted delivery partner. We do brilliant work together that impacts both the workplace and wider society. We welcome the desire from government to work more with our sector. As with any relationship, both parties need to take time to understand one another and their ways of working. To achieve this, VCSEs must be treated as an equal partner. To increase the number of VCSEs working with government, the procurement process could be strengthened and streamlined. It can take a lot of time and resource to complete. We appreciate the need for diligence to ensure responsible spending, but it is important that the scale and time involved in the procurement process matches the business benefit of the contract. As a social enterprise, we want our time to be focused on making the biggest impact on the mental health of the nation, not processes and administration. Although we know that government departments want to work with us, we can be asked to discount heavily, which isn’t always viable. Budgets and funding in the public sector have to considered carefully, and we want to ensure we can make the largest impact in the most cost-effective way. We have to find a viable way to achieve this together. For more information about MHFA England and its training and consultancy, visit: mhfaengland.org [1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-role-of-voluntary-community-and-social-enterprise-vcse-organisations-in-public-procurement/the-role-of-voluntary-community-and-social-enterprise-vcse-organisations-in-public-procurement

NOAH Enterprise is a charity supporting people struggling against homelessness and exclusion, with services across Bedfordshire working to find and help people with nowhere else to turn. Founded in the late 1980s by a nun, Sister Eileen O’Mahoney, the charity initially operated out of a block of condemned flats but has since grown significantly in scale and impact. NOAH now includes an outreach service to help people off the street, work experience and skills training to get people into employment, and social enterprise shops to raise money for the cause. Its welfare centre also offers warm meals, medical and dental care, accommodation support, clothing and laundry facilities, immigration advice and much more. In the last year, NOAH has supported 1,038 people at the welfare centre and 466 people on the streets, as well as helping 284 people into accommodation and 20 people into employment. How does NOAH work with government departments? NOAH’s primary work with central government departments is with the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) for which it delivers street outreach services under the Government’s Rough Sleeping Initiative. Winning this contract has allowed NOAH to expand this element of its work into central Bedfordshire and central Luton. NOAH has also worked on contracts with the Home Office to provide EUSS advice and, outside of central government commissioned services, is also working on a pioneering hospital discharge project with Bedfordshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. How did NOAH succeed in winning the contract? Paul Prosser, Head of Welfare Services at NOAH, believes that core to the charity winning this DLUHC contract was its proven track record of transforming lives. The way NOAH operates means that they can “build trust, get to know people and work with them to create bespoke solutions”. Being an independent provider also has its advantages, as people are more likely to seek support from organisations they have a personal relationship with than bodies like the local council who they may have had a negative experience with. NOAH’s broader holistic support offer was another contributing factor in its DLUHC bid success, as people helped through the street outreach programme can also access the wider services provided by its Welfare Centre. Whilst the centre is not statutorily funded, the ability to co-locate services around a central hub adds value to the contract. When the service was put out to tender, NOAH’s application included a supporting letter from the local authority highlighting the charity’s expertise. What were the benefits to DLUHC of working with you? NOAH brings additional value to the contract through its commitment to impact and its proximity to the frontline. The charity’s years of being embedded in the local area mean that the community really believes in its work, meaning that the charity can work with volunteers who are passionate about delivering on its mission whilst also keeping down costs. Paul believes that commissioners now have a “greater risk appetite for embedding lived experience”, a core tenet of many VCSEs, which can be lacking in local authorities and private sector providers, who are driven by minimising costs and maximising shareholder value. What were the main challenges in applying for government contracts? Although NOAH’s experience applying for the DLUHC contract was a positive one, Paul states that when applying for government contracts there can generally be difficulties in understanding what is being prioritised. He highlighted the tension between showing innovation as a provider without scaring the commissioner, stating that “it can be a little unclear as to how much innovation to try compared to how much risk the funder is trying to take”. Other challenges include “trying to clarify why we are the most appropriate provider”, as well as complicated portals adding delay and difficulty to the application process, with VCSEs sometimes having to pay external fundraising consultants for support. Based on a conversation with Paul Prosser, Head of Welfare Services at NOAH Enterprises noahenterprise.org

The Nelson Trust is a charity set up to support people with complex needs ranging from trauma and addiction to experiences with the criminal justice system. It has provided residential addiction rehabilitation support since 1985 - but in the mid-2000s it emerged that women in treatment centres weren’t having as good outcomes as men, leading the charity to look into their specific needs and establish a new trauma-informed gender responsive service with an all-female staff team. At the same time, a review into the female prison estate by Baroness Corston[1] found that women should be rehabilitated in the community as they tended to be serving short sentences for non-violent crimes. This enabled the Nelson Trust to win funding that led to it now running seven women’s centres across the South West and Wales. How does the Nelson Trust work with central government departments? On opening the first women’s centre, most of the Trust’s income was derived through grants, but in recent years the charity has moved into public sector tendering. The main central government department the Nelson Trust works with is the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) and, through them, His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service. The charity has also received money from the Home Office. What kind of work does the charity do with central government? In 2022, the Nelson Trust led a partnership bid with nine other organisations to work on a prison leavers pilot for a contract created by the MoJ, based at Eastwood Park in South Gloucestershire. There were no specific delivery terms, other than improving outcomes for prison leavers so the charity could use its creativity and years of experience to create an innovative way of meeting the contract. It saw that services to support women both in prison and on release were fragmented; for example, – women from Wales serving time at Eastwood Park receive NHS England care but aren’t entitled to some ‘through the gate’ services (such as ‘reconnect’ which supports prison leavers access health care services) that they would be if they lived in England, as justice is centrally funded but health is devolved across the Home Nations. It also noticed a lack of integration meant women often had to share trauma-inducing stories repeatedly to different organisations, and so wanted to join up the system. As Christina Line, Chief Operating Officer at the Nelson Trust, states: “One woman told us she’d been asked if she was pregnant nine times through her induction into the prison. We wanted to co-ordinate a package of support so that a woman has one lead keyworker, has to tell her story once, has one assessment, we all work from one case management system and we broker in the other support services as she needs them.” The Nelson Trust led the work in partnership with other organisations including housing providers, organisations supporting women to re-unite and maintain ties with their children, a substance misuse specialist, and a domestic violence support provider. Prison officers also worked to bring women into the centre and aid systemic work within the prison for internal processes to be trauma-informed. Central to the whole project was one case management system, which all organisations could log into, preventing women having to tell their stories over and over again. This new system was funded as a pilot programme for 15 months and is currently being externally evaluated. Initial data from the project is showing that, as a result of this intervention, the rates of women going back into prison have significantly reduced. What were the benefits to the MoJ of delivering this contract? Christina Line believes that a core benefit of working with the Nelson Trust is the savings that such an approach to criminal justice and the wider system brings to the public purse. It costs the government around £1,500[2] to rehabilitate a woman through the Nelson Trust, but the cost of sending someone to prison is around £46,696 a year.[3] The way the charity is set up means that “we don’t close the door on women, and our support will continue long after the MoJ have finished paying”. The holistic help provided - from supporting people out of addiction and disadvantage to support finding work - also means that they are reducing costs in other ways, such as welfare benefits or ambulance and police call-outs. Christina says the voluntary, community and social enterprise sector (VCSE) is markedly different from larger profit-driven service providers in its dedication to “get on with the job”, explaining that “people work because they want to make an impact”. What are the main challenges in applying for government contracts? One of the main challenges identified by the Nelson Trust is the lack of capacity faced by many VCSEs, with some not having a dedicated business development team. This often means a lack of resources holds organisations back, even though they may be capable of effectively delivering contracts. There can also be challenges in the complexity of certain contracts, where “the level of detail required isn’t always commensurate with the financial contract”. Christina pointed out that contracts for women’s prison services worth around £100,000 can require the same level of detail as men’s prison services worth millions. Unless contracts are simpler, Christina believes that the whole contracting process can “tip the scales in favour of larger organisations”. Based on a conversation with Christina Line, Chief Operating Officer at the Nelson Trust nelsontrust.com [1] https://www.nicco.org.uk/directory-of-research/the-corston-report [2] What the Nelson Trust are paid on their contract annually [3] https://prisonreformtrust.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/prison_the_facts_2023.pdf