1. Dr Orian Brook & Dr Alasdair Rutherford University of Stirling
Using Administrative Data to Understand Civil Society Organisations in Scotland
Dr Orian Brook & Dr Alasdair Rutherford
University of Stirling

2. Measuring Civil Society
Charity registers commonly used
Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR) hold records on all registered Scottish charities (no income threshold)
c24,000 records, high quality and complete data (relatively)
But suffers Head Office bias:
legal address not operational address
Only one location per charity, no matter how many they have

3. Milo database Therefore quality of data is increasingly important
Managed by Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations, used by Third Sector Interfaces/Volunteer Centres across Scotland
Supporting CSOs in legal formation, training, advising trustees etc
Key activity: matching volunteers and volunteering opportunities
Feeds various national online resources:
getinvolved.co.uk – search for third sector organisations
Volunteerscotland.net – search for active volunteering opps.
ALISS (A Local Information System for Scotland) – signposting to community support/resources
Goodhq.org (to be fully launched): share experiences of charities online (“tripadvisor for charities”)
Therefore quality of data is increasingly important

4. Milo Data
35,000 voluntary orgs/38,000 orgs (plus volunteers, opportunities but not used for this project)
Pros (compared to OSCR)
Records working sites not legally registered addresses
Records multiple sites (eg charity shops)
Records vol orgs which aren’t registered charities
Cons (compared to OSCR)
Recorded for working not research – messy, inconsistent
Incomplete – orgs not recorded if not interacting with TSIs/VCs

5. Cleaning Milo Missing data
c4,000 with no addresses
approx half of records have no “main activities” specified
Duplicates – few identified, but more to discover?
Out of date addresses – external cleaning (few)
Charity Reg No.
Approx 10% of charity numbers didn’t match OSCR
By checking correct formatting, able to match all but 1%

6. Linking Milo to OSCR Charity Reg (cleaned)
Deterministic – cleaned org name, postcode etc
Probabilistic - % likelihood
Difficult to automate eg 103rd A, B, C and D City of Edinburgh Brownie Units all separate registered charities
Still only matched 38% of Milo records, matching to 48% of OSCR
Hoping further work might increase this but still likely to be about half of each database not overlapping with the other

7. Coding Milo & OSCR
Using ICNPO (International Classification of Non-Profit Organisations) as widely-accepted for comparable studies
Level 1
1 Culture and Recreation
2 Education and Research
3 Health
4 Social Services
5 Environment
6 Development and Housing
7 Law, Advocacy and Politics
8 Philanthropic Intermediaries, Vol. Promotion
9 International
10 Religion
11 Business/Professional Associations, Unions
12 Not Elsewhere Classified

8. ICNPO detail
Level 2 codes also officially developed. Eg under social services:
4100. Social services (general)
4200. Emergency and Relief
4300. Income Support and Maintenance
Level 3 codes more bespoke to SCVO
To provide more discrimination, eg under 4100
4110. Services for Children and families
4120. Pre-school daycare
4130. Services for young people
4131. Scouts, Guides etc
4140. Services for people with disabilities
4150. Services for elderly people
Or to specify CSOs which could belong to other level 1 codes, eg 2410 Medical Research
Funds others, conducts research, provides health care & social support

9. Process
On OSCR & Milo multi-select categories are inconsistently selected, v hard to analyse, often missing in Milo
Inspired by Mohan/Barnard/NCVO work
Coded charity registers (English and Scottish)
Searched for keywords in charity name and/or aims
Now using Milo, coding primarily by searching for specific keywords which accurately categorise CSOs
Using code not manually so can be rerun for refreshed or different data
Also referring to previous coding, to org aims, to other SCVO data and using generic keywords
Coded all but 7% of records

10. Results

11. Urban-Rural Classification
Milo has higher proportion of CSOs outside Large Urban Areas – removal of head office bias?
OSCR
Percent
Milo 1
Large Urban Area
7,759
34.4%
8,512
27.6% 2
Other Urban Area
5,198
23.1%
8,659
28.1% 3
Accessible Small Towns
1,642
7.3%
2,350
7.6% 4
Remote Small Towns
690
3.1%
1,055
3.4% 5
Very Remote Small Towns
532
2.4%
1,037 6
Accessible Rural
3,390
15.0%
4,597
14.9% 7
Remote Rural
1,292
5.7%
1,732
5.6% 8
Very Remote Rural
2,040
9.0%
2,875
9.3%
22,543
30,817
Missing
265
6,031
Milo records with address missing: as often recorded by TSIs/VCs within central belt as other records, so probably no major bias

12. Urban-Rural Classification
Standardised by population shows greater impact of how Milo represents CSOs outside large cities

13. Indices of Multiple Deprivation
Milo shows much higher proportion of CSOs based in more deprived areas, and fewer in least deprived areas
Quintile
OSCR
Milo
1 Most Deprived
2,601
11.6%
5,349
17.5% 2
3,551
15.9%
6,493
21.2% 3
5,720
25.6%
7,661
25.0% 4
5,733
6,739
22.0%
5 Least Deprived
4,776
21.3%
4,403
14.4%
Total
22,381
100%
30,645

14. Indices of Multiple Deprivation
Analysis by population shows much more important presence of CSOs in deprived areas.
Address of CSO not = area of operation, but more likely on Milo, and unlikely to be based in a deprived area but not working in one

15. ICNPO Top Level Codes
Relative distribution between lists mostly similar, differences not restricted to particular sectors
ICNPO Level 1
OSCR
OSCR %
Milo
Milo %
1 Culture and Recreation
3,673
15.3%
8,400
21.5%
2 Education and Research
1,288
5.4%
1,929
4.9%
3 Health
921
3.8%
2,138
5.5%
4 Social Services
7,109
29.7%
9,896
25.4%
5 Environment
922
3.9%
1,578
4.0%
6 Development and Housing
2,576
10.8%
5,062
13.0%
7 Law, Advocacy and Politics
592
2.5%
1,310
3.4%
8 Philanthropic Intermediaries, Vol. Promotion
1,205
5.0%
877
2.2%
9 International
1,111
4.6%
1,013
2.6%
10 Religion
3,750
15.7%
2,984
7.7%
11 Business/Professional Associations, Unions
222
0.9%
394
1.0%
12 Not Elsewhere Classified
561
2.3%
3,410
8.7%
Total
23,930
100.0%
38,991

16. ICNPO Top Level Codes Milo has more CSOs in Culture & Recreation
ICNPO Level 1
OSCR
OSCR %
Milo
Milo %
1 Culture and Recreation
3,673
15.3%
8,400
21.5%
2 Education and Research
1,288
5.4%
1,929
4.9%
3 Health
921
3.8%
2,138
5.5%
4 Social Services
7,109
29.7%
9,896
25.4%
5 Environment
922
3.9%
1,578
4.0%
6 Development and Housing
2,576
10.8%
5,062
13.0%
7 Law, Advocacy and Politics
592
2.5%
1,310
3.4%
8 Philanthropic Intermediaries, Vol. Promotion
1,205
5.0%
877
2.2%
9 International
1,111
4.6%
1,013
2.6%
10 Religion
3,750
15.7%
2,984
7.7%
11 Business/Professional Associations, Unions
222
0.9%
394
1.0%
12 Not Elsewhere Classified
561
2.3%
3,410
8.7%
Total
23,930
100.0%
38,991
Milo has more CSOs in Culture & Recreation
– consonant with intermediaries membership
– good integration with TSI/VC orgs

17. ICNPO Top Level Codes
ICNPO Level 1
OSCR
OSCR %
Milo
Milo %
1 Culture and Recreation
3,673
15.3%
8,400
21.5%
2 Education and Research
1,288
5.4%
1,929
4.9%
3 Health
921
3.8%
2,138
5.5%
4 Social Services
7,109
29.7%
9,896
25.4%
5 Environment
922
3.9%
1,578
4.0%
6 Development and Housing
2,576
10.8%
5,062
13.0%
7 Law, Advocacy and Politics
592
2.5%
1,310
3.4%
8 Philanthropic Intermediaries, Vol. Promotion
1,205
5.0%
877
2.2%
9 International
1,111
4.6%
1,013
2.6%
10 Religion
3,750
15.7%
2,984
7.7%
11 Business/Professional Associations, Unions
222
0.9%
394
1.0%
12 Not Elsewhere Classified
561
2.3%
3,410
8.7%
Total
23,930
100.0%
38,991
Development & Housing closely aligned to civil society contribution to social policy – 44% of Milo records additional to OSCR

18. ICNPO Level 2 codes
Social Services CSOs also closely aligned to social policy
Milo also holds 40% more records, and most subcodes have even higher proportion, with exception of Scout troops
Breakdown of Level 2 for Social Services
OSCR
OSCR %
Milo
Milo %
4100. Social services (general)
1255
5.2%
2080
5.3%
4110. Services for Children and families
727
3.0%
1478
3.8%
4120. Pre-school daycare
194
0.8%
362
0.9%
4130. Services for young people
613
2.6%
1539
3.9%
4131. Scouts, Guides etc
2906
12.1%
1800
4.6%
4140. Services for people with disabilities
357
1.5%
1013
4150. Services for elderly people
185
939
2.4%
4200. Emergency and Relief
133
0.6%
193
0.5%
4300. Income Support and Maintenance
714
492
1.3%

19. ICNPO Level 2 Codes
Milo holds more CSOs tackling mental health and addictions support, important for Scotland’s pressing public health issues
Breakdown of Level 2 for Social Services
OSCR
OSCR %
Milo
Milo %
3100. Hospitals and Rehabilitation
179
0.7%
332
0.9%
3200. Nursing Homes
108
0.5%
202
3300. Mental Health
163
459
1.2%
3400. Other Health Services
411
1.7%
913
2.3%
3410. Addictions support 57
0.2%
232
0.6%

20. ICNPO Top Level Codes
OSCR better represents Scouts, Religious orgs & grantmaking trusts – less integrated to TSI/VCs, no help needed for volunteers etc
ICNPO Level 1
OSCR
OSCR %
Milo
Milo %
1 Culture and Recreation
3,673
15.3%
8,400
21.5%
2 Education and Research
1,288
5.4%
1,929
4.9%
3 Health
921
3.8%
2,138
5.5%
4 Social Services
7,109
29.7%
9,896
25.4%
5 Environment
922
3.9%
1,578
4.0%
6 Development and Housing
2,576
10.8%
5,062
13.0%
7 Law, Advocacy and Politics
592
2.5%
1,310
3.4%
8 Philanthropic Intermediaries, Vol. Promotion
1,205
5.0%
877
2.2%
9 International
1,111
4.6%
1,013
2.6%
10 Religion
3,750
15.7%
2,984
7.7%
11 Business/Professional Associations, Unions
222
0.9%
394
1.0%
12 Not Elsewhere Classified
561
2.3%
3,410
8.7%
Total
23,930
100.0%
38,991

21. Aberdeenshire & Moray

22. Urban-Rural Classification
Milo has higher proportion of CSOs outside Large Urban Areas – removal of head office bias? `
Aberdeenshire
Moray 1
Large Urban Area 2
Other Urban Area
390
20.1%
307
29.5% 3
Accessible Small Towns
199
10.2%
223
21.4% 4
Remote Small Towns
270
13.9% 43
4.1% 5
Very Remote S Towns 6
Accessible Rural
663
34.1%
323
31.0% 7
Remote Rural
367
18.9%
137
13.1% 8
Very Remote Rural 54
2.8% 9
0.9%
1,943
1,042

23. Indices of Multiple Deprivation
Milo shows much higher proportion of CSOs based in more deprived areas, and fewer in least deprived areas
Quintile
Aberdeenshire
Moray
1 Most Deprived 66
3.4% 21
2.0% 2
120
6.2%
108
10.4% 3
398
20.6%
364
35.0% 4
717
37.1%
411
39.5%
5 Least Deprived
634
32.8%
136
13.1%
Total
1,935
100%
10,040

24. ICNPO Top Level Codes ICNPO Level 1 Abderdeenshire Moray
1 Culture and Recreation
495
26.0%
248
24.5%
2 Education and Research 66
3.5% 44
4.3%
3 Health 69
3.6% 39
3.8%
4 Social Services
630
33.1%
284
28.0%
5 Environment 74
3.9%
7.3%
6 Development and Housing
218
11.4%
150
14.8%
7 Law, Advocacy and Politics 20
1.0% 14
1.4%
8 Philanthropic Intermediaries, Vol. Promotion 34
1.8% 37
9 International 38
2.0%
10 Religion
217 76
7.5%
11 Business/Professional Associations, Unions 7
0.7%
12 Not Elsewhere Classified 22
1.2% 21
2.1%
Total
1906
100.0%
1014

25. ICNPO Level 2 codes Aberdeenshire Moray
Aberdeenshire
Moray
4100. Social services (general) 61
3.20% 27
2.66%
4110. Services for Children and families 81
4.25% 43
4.24%
4120. Pre-school daycare 23
1.21% 16
1.58%
4130. Services for young people 46
2.41% 40
3.94%
4131. Scouts, Guides etc
325
17.05% 90
8.88%
4140. Services for people with disabilit 25
1.31% 19
1.87%
4150. Services for elderly people 28
1.47% 9
0.89%
4160. Services for women 1
0.05%
0.10%
4170. Carers Organisations 5
0.26% 3
0.30%
4200. Emergency and Relief
0.47% 2
0.20%
4300. Income Support and Maintenance 26
1.36% 34
3.35%

26. ICNPO Level 2 Codes Aberdeenshire Moray
Aberdeenshire
Moray
3100. Hospitals and Rehabilitation 13
0.68% 19
1.87%
3200. Nursing Homes 8
0.42% 3
0.30%
3300. Mental Health 14
0.73% 6
0.59%
3400. Other Health Services 32
1.68%
0.79%
3410. Addictions support 2
0.10%

27. All CSOs, NE Scotland

28. Social Care CSOs, NE Scotland

29. Health CSOs, NE Scotland

30. Thank you!