Commissioning for Outcomes Steering Group Meeting Wednesday 27 th May 2009 ECONOMIC BENEFIT TASK GROUP Paul King Jennifer Lindsay

Objectives To briefly describe the “journey” and process To hi-light our “light bulb” moment To illustrate our final 3 outcome measures linked to SROI To recommend next steps to you

Our Point “To develop finance & probity outcomes measures that demonstrate service effectiveness within that context”

Our Journey Originally labelled “Finance & Probity” PCT, Turning Point & Trust membership Formation in December “slow” A genuinely difficult concept to grapple with

Our Journey – A Slow Start December meeting – no meaningful data available Actions centred around “grabbing some data” Output to make sense of that data Limited discussions about potential outcome measures

Our Journey – Group Re-set January meeting – no data produced Turnover, through exit, of task group members Further discussion of financial “dashboard” tool Name change (via Steering Group) to Economic Benefit Long list outcome measures developed Frustrating differences in Steering Group discussions Bridget Gill joined and immediately focused our thinking

Our Journey - Enlightenment Further input from the Steering Group New focus on “social Return on Investment” Suggested metrics Better “fit” membership

The “Light Bulb Moment” March meeting – Paula Dennison from the DH Social Enterprise Support Unit – “the missing piece” Fantastic definitional presentation Short list of outcome measures reduced to 5 Cohort meeting to develop model further Further Steering Group encouragement

Social Return on Investment Model “…the social, environmental or economic benefits which an organisation delivers sometimes called social added value….”

Social Return on Investment Model Distinguishes outputs from outcomes Identify stakeholders Identify impact Identify measures Be clear about assumptions Be clear about managing the impact

Social Return on Investment Model Uses impact mapping techniques Need to remove double counting Scenario plan – what would have happened anyway Financial values a proxy for value

Social Return on Investment Model Need to understand your story Need to understand the value you are creating Look how well we manage it We can prove it with clear evidence

Social Return on Investment Model Start with the impact map This measures the value Demonstrates change Quantifies financially

Social Return on Investment Model – THE MAP Stakeholders Inputs Outputs Outcomes Impacts

Social Return on Investment Model – MATERIALITY “We do not need to include everything just what we need to make a sensible decision”

The Outcome Measures Reduction in crime Focusing on acquisitive crime Reduction in A&E attendances Data available split by alcohol/controlled drug – accidental or deliberate poisoning Reduction in benefits paid Move from sickness benefit to job seekers allowance to gainful engagement, paid work or into education

The Outcome Measures “The challenge, having identified the measures, is to impact map them within a social return on investment model”

Outcome 1 Reduction in Crime

“In relation to the DIP service, presently 77 service users drop out every year. If those 77 service users remain engaged in the treatment programme for a year and are actively managed to remain positively engaged, then the contract value of the service would be paid for through savings in crime reduction”

Outcome 1 Reduction in Crime

Outcome 2 Reduction in A&E Attendances

Outcome 3 Reduction in Benefits Paid Movement from sickness benefit to job seekers allowance Then from job seekers allowance to gainful engagement, paid work or education

Recommendations To understand and then impact map the A&E data To understand and then impact map the benefit data To impact map the crime data for associated groups Progress to workStructured day CommunityYoung people Shared carePrisons Health & well beingDual diagnosis Alcohol

Commissioning for Outcomes Steering Group Meeting Wednesday 27 th May 2009 ECONOMIC BENEFIT TASK GROUP Paul King Jennifer Lindsay