The Rep Birmingham 30 January 2008 Supporting People Seminar

The RepBirmingham

30 January 2008

Supporting People Seminar

[email protected] 020 8579 9983

Capacity building for small SP providers

Alan Cripps neadonconsulting ltd

Background

• CLG – concern about impact on small providers of:-– Concentration of the market

– Spread of procurement approach

• SITRA – specialist technical resource agency for providers and commissioners

• HACT – Housing Associations Charitable Trust. A history of working to support small providers




The Programme

• CLG – follow-up to Value Improvement Programmes – a series of good practice resources for commissioners

• SITRA – “A Provider’s Guide To Procurement” and a series of training events

• HACT – Capacity-building pilot programme to:-

– Explore a range of ways in which small providers can maintain a place in the market

– Work with 6 projects providing a budget and facilitation support

– Evaluate, write up, produce materials and disseminate




The pilots – where?

• Durham

• Liverpool

• Redbridge

• Rotherham

• Southend

• Suffolk




The pilots – a typology

• Large provider with one small specialist subcontractor

• Six characters in search of a lead agency

• A coalition of sub-contractors

• Conventional “lead agency” consortium

• Bidding vehicle




The pilots – where they are at present• LSP – Main contract already awarded – discussions about terms of

sub-contract and start-up costs.

• “Six Characters” – Discussions with two possible lead agencies – both RSLs

• Coalition – Three potential partners lined up – awaiting release of tender documents; developing common infrastructure systems

• Consortia – one has won 6 contracts; the other has successfully passed PQQ stage

• Bidding vehicle – Independent Local Services launched November 07 – working on detail; awaiting details of Framework Agreement and tender documentation




Key themes 1- establishing the group

• Who’s in and who’s out?

– What are you looking for – specialisms, capacity, infrastructure, local presence/reputation, quality?

– How big is the pot, and what is commissioner looking for?

– How strong is the commitment to collaboration?

• Trust, good personal relationships, transparency are essential – backed up by MOU, confidentiality agreement etc.

• External facilitation can help groups deal with potentially fissile issues




Key themes 2- Defining the USP

• Each group has to understand and communicate how it can add value

• Points to emphasise include:-

– Connectedness

– Ability to lever in resources

– Strategic relevance

• Don’t rely on added value to make up for weaknesses in other areas




Key themes 3 – Role of commissioners

• Enabling small providers to remain part of the mix requires a proactive approach.

• Obvious barriers include bidding and organisational capacity

• Unintended barriers can include:-

– Rules around access to Framework Agreements

– The “20%” rule

– Suspicion of consortium approach – cost and communications

• Is competitive tendering required? Creative use of waiver powers




Good practice in commissioning

• Analysis and understanding of the market

• Encouragement of collaborative approaches – workshops, capacity building

• Allow time for relationship building

• Helpline for small providers

• “Meet the partners” sessions

• Design of method statements and scoring frameworks

• Active management of sub-contracting

• Change management and exit strategies for unsuccessful tenderers




Good practice in bid assessment

• There’s a huge amount of variation

• Get the quality:price ratio right or go for fixed price

• Base bid documents on a vision of what a really good service would look like:-

– Integrated into a wider network of provision

– Able to mobilise resources within the community

– Contributes to broader strategies – e.g. sustainable communities, crime and disorder reduction

• Ensure that items such as strategic relevance, partnership & joint working and added value are given a heavy weighting




Implications for small providers

• Bidding strategies

– Go it alone and argue for a waiver

– Gear up for tendering as a sole provider

– Gear up for tendering as part of a consortium

– Look for larger partners to sub-contract with

• All of these constitute high stakes gambles, with greatly increased uncertainty in funding and potential collateral damage.

• LAAs mean that there is a strategic choice between specialisation and integration into local service networks




Queries

• How replicable are these models?

• How do SP commissioners see their role in managing the market, and sustaining a competitive pool of providers?

• How can CLG/RIEPs promote good practice in commissioning/ procurement?

• Will LAAs work in favour of local providers, against unpopular groups, or both?

• Will LAAs lead to a longer term downward pressure on costs which will drive out small providers?

Documents

The Rep Birmingham 30 January 2008 Supporting People Seminar