4. Ten questions on the future of infrastructure..

1.    Is infrastructure an organisation, or a collection of people with similar aims..? (eg a limited-liability-partnership of consultants delivering services under one roof) or are we enablers of socially minded activity – and how would this change how we operate..?

2.    How can we be business-like and yet more informally collaborative and open to new entrants into the market (as well as specialist infrastructure orgs delivered by front line groups)..?

3.    How will we create a new membership offer of association, at a time of falling universal formal membership..?

4.    How will we harness the potential of non-hierarchical models of collaboration between our front line orgs and infrastructure..? (such as taking a stake in successful ventures, selling shares, sharing successes and failures..?)

5.    How can we work with new hybrid organisational structures that go beyond trusteeship and association..?

6.    How will we manage increasing individualism in collaborative processes..? What opportunity does this offers for community action by mobilising the power of individual people to feel they can make a difference (the concept of “do something then group together”) instead of the typical model of “group then do”..?

7.    How will we manage an increase desire for community involvement with a declining desire for current methods of engagement (eg low response on consultations, forums, panels, trustees)..?

8.    What can infrastructure representation do to support the rise of user led organisations & BME organisations without the usual power imbalances and associated problems..? Do we have to accept this is how it is..?

9.    Is infrastructure for the voluntary sector or are we here for citizens of a place..? (in which case how will we interact with people who increasingly operate outside of the mainstream VCS and have no interest in political boundaries..?)

10. Who would be involved in an infrastructure platform long term..? Local authorities are starting to operate more like infrastructure, and there is a top-down desire for more community activity, if not ownership. (Julian Dobson has suggested a National Grid for Community Infrastructure). 


Thoughts..?

3. Navigating perceptions between local authorities & third sector organisations..

I was at a third sector conference this week and in the midst of all the usual 'change-chatter' - one slide stood out. It was by garry fielding from north yorkshire county council and aside from the fact they are they only people i've found still using the term 'big society' (people these days are using 50radicals, but that's another story..) it seemed to sum up where local authorities & third sector might need to head..


My main question is: what's the role of infrastructure in bridging this gap?

If you want to see the full presentation its here.


Aside from the using network meetings, training on outcomes frameworks, and case studies of good practice (that have been going on since at least 2006) - what might the disruptive action be that genuinly shift these perceptions in a relatively small amount of time..? 

2. National & local drivers of change in infrastructure..?

National drivers of change

Local drivers of change

The relationship internationally has changed between national governments and their non-profit sectors: cuts, social finance, a decline in trust in charities, mergers, advocacy. There’s a real sense of change internationally (well summarised by NCVO’s head of research here). Earlier this year, Big Lottery published an independent review of capacity building by Professor Diana Leat, ‘New Tools for a New World’. This research highlighted the need to rethink approaches to capacity building, and highlighted the importance of supporting voluntary organisations to withstand difficult conditions and working with what is available – re-using and recombining skills and resources. In 2008 26% of charities and social enterprises reported as being ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’ with their infrastructure services conversely only 8% were dissatisfied, but 37% said the question was not applicable. The average age of trustees is 57 (charity commission), and there is evidence to show diminishing participation of younger people in the same way, coupled with a shortage of trustees. Office of civil society has released two consultations  the direction of which is unlikely to change under any future administration, both settling a very clear role for infrastructure. Big Lottery Fund have released Building Capabilities for Impact and Legacy which investigates how infrastructure can be provided in alternative ways (some suspect the aim is to provide support via phone lines and websites). The National Audit Office judged the previous infrastructure programme Capacity Builders “not good value for money”. Big Lottery Fund are being asked to reduce overheads to 10%. This is very different language from ‘full cost recovery’. NCVO almanac 2011 - 8% of the adult population accounting for almost half of all volunteer hours. This is clearly unsustainable as this population ages. Pathways through participation – a 5 year longitudinal study that shows volunteering & social action has been static for 10 years.

A market for infrastructure being created  which will give more power to frontline organisations to buy their infrastructure services. This will change the relationship between frontline organisations and infrastructure. It will make VCOs customers rather than members.  What would personalisation of infrastructure services mean? They will also be free to commission any organisation to deliver infrastructure services increasing competition and the need for direct results rather than advice. Even where funding comes externally infrastructure will increasingly be asked to be responsible for delivering outcomes rather than simply advising others to act. Organising without organisations (video by Clay Shirky) as a concept will reduce the need for intermediary bodies. A similar process may follow for direct democracy and direct representation by the costs of communicating over last geographies and collection of disparate people fall. A good example locally, the Spartacus report led by disabled campaigners, was a massive challenge to existing disable peoples’ infrastructure. The business models used for our currently funded projects are largely unsustainable in exactly their current form (funding advice, community accounting & employment advice services). The open market will drive costs below our full cost recovery rates, however the services are well used and valued so there is significant opportunity to generate income through this. Income will come from unusual sources: local procurement, social impact bonds, payment by results that all have an outcomes focus. Infrastructure will be responsible for positive social outcomes, not just the outputs of training or advice. Statutory partners are looking for an increase in activity without additional funds through transition funds or innovation funds.  This will increase pressure on groups to be efficient & effective. The cult of free. Work is changing, and many of our current roles will be automated or redundant, while new needs will emerge. Accountability to members is likely change, not just as more social enterprises join CVSs, but also as resources become more scarce. People may start to question the how existing assets are used (eg lottery funded conference centres)

1. How might we want to support independent voluntary action in 2020..?

We have been in a time of immense change the last two years, and I think now we have some coherence around what the future holds. I think the long term changes can be simplified as:

×          changing working practices

×          demographic changes

×          new technology as a disruptor

×          a new role between citizen and state

Infrastructure has a long history and a social mission which could be summed up as ‘association for social progress’. Fundamentally we have two options; fight the changes or demonstrate how we could do it better. I think both of these options are worth pursuing.

So what else do we do about it? I believe there are significant opportunities to increase social welfare in a time of diminishing resources by organising differently.

1.    Leverage - using resources in new ways, and hijacking resources in the most unlikely of sources.

2.    New networks - the primary driver of change in the 21^st Century will not be organisational, it will be a network.

3.    Community Resilience– the concept how communities react to outside problems such as floods, but also welfare or social changes (see Communities Connected, Inclusion, Participation & Common Purpose)

4.    Self-organising – how can formal structure help the semi-structured such as social care support networks, carers forums, international solidarity networks.

5.    Diversify our thinking - working with those will disagree with will be an important part of how we turn social ideas into action. We won’t get a seat at the local enterprise partnership table, but that doesn’t mean we can’t do anything.

It’s not necessarily anyone's responsibility to lead the response to all this, but I think the conditions are right and the opportunity is there to try something. No one has the answer, but unless we strive for something better we’ll be left with a substandard version of what we had 10 years ago..

The 'close-door' button on lifts and social movements..

The close door button on most lifts doesn't do anything.

It doesn't speed things up, it doesn't reset the timer, it isn't even connected when you take the back off. It is the same joke mechanism as on many traffic crossings: it really doesn't change the flow of all those cars carefully timed, it just makes you feel better.


So what can we learn from this..?

1. Firstly, it is the simple benefit of having an option. There is a choice to press or not press which makes you concider how busy you are and what to do about it.
2. Secondly, they make people feel like they're doing something. By something as simple as pressing we feel part of the solution.

I think co-producing, even of this minimalist kind, will start to change the mindset of people who feel powerless. If people are not happy about inequality, what can they contribute to reducing it? If people think something is being done badly, where do they start making the smallest of changes..?


I think they start in pushing a button. and if we can leverage in a further 20% of the population thinking about 1) their options, and 2) their actions, then we have the start of a social movement.. And maybe the button doesn;t matter that much. Like #50radicals, maybe its the button pushing that counts..?

Open Innovation in York (my contributions to www.geniusyork.com)

Challenge #1 - Hidden Gems

• Is there anyway it could make money? could a group take it on for 12 months, run an enterprise club and see what happens? could they be given a council contract to get them started - like to set up a new cleaning firm co-owned, or a river taxi scheme or a .......... could york businesses mentor them? I'm sure they'd be interested people to help (including me).

• Could you put a broadband connection in, get a few ex-council laptops and use it as a skills-share place (like learn direct). make it really informal, make sure it wasn't set on fire, but take some risks and make it an interesting working space?

• Could you start with a list of things that you currently see as problems and put them together with whatever they need. Its currently costing you £............ would you be prepared to use the money in a different way. you could get a grant for a skatepark, or photography workshop so long as the council was prepared to help out.

my 2p..
_____________________

On community groups - some of this work has been going on, but a real link between community & technology sectors would help it along.. 

1. So YorkCVS has open communication methods - anything of genuine use to community groups can go out in their newsletter, just email their newsletterhttp://www.yorkcvs.org.uk/voluntary-voice.
2. There's a google map of voluntary orgs in York http://g.co/maps/4wa58. 
3. They also has the most followed charity support org in the UK on twitter- and there have been been social media surgeries in the city since 2009.
4. There are charity forums on all sorts of topics that run, so if you have something for them get it on the agenda.. http://www.yorkcvs.org.uk/ycvs-groups
5. There's also a map (connected york) that is supposed to show the relationship between the statutory and third sectors http://www.connectedyork.org.uk/style/networkMap.png but will need changing when the LSP changes..

Maybe some of the stuff you're suggesting Anthony (sounds great) could be done through the York digital divide strategy..? (and btw - I used to work at yorkcvs..!)

In terms of the asset map, TIDAL leeds have done a very low-fi mapping zone of people who can contribute anything -  to create geographically close people who are willing to lend a hand to get something started.

Twitter does a similar thing of course.. ;-) 
___________________

My work has got a staff volunteering day on the 29th feb with some brilliant people, but to make the most of these existing opportunities I think we need to get much better at mapping the demand side of underused assets (physical or otherwise). Obviously councils opening up data is a great start, but we need more people-led-possibility. This is something Our Society is leading on nationally and I'd like to do something like Community Lovers Guide for York, to maximise existing good things (hint - if anyone wants to do one let me know!)

Also controversially I'm not sure councils are the best people to lead these things. Somewhere like headingley development trust (which is a model which would replicate really well in york) are only able to mobilise with volunteer and community support - something a local authority in probably unable to amass in the same scale..

Or this.. http://www.somewhereto.com 

Challenge #2 - Aiding vulnerable people

The Good Gym is an example of meeting two seemingly opposing needs: people's need for exercise with others need for company.. http://www.thegoodgym.org
(don't have much to say on this)

Challenge #3 - Improving relationships with business 

Money for social value already exists - normally through small grant funders, but doesn't fulfil the whole need. Using procurement to start new things, strengthen ideas or give backing to things that are going to take some time is a great idea. Start by releasing info on £5,000 contracts (this is ridiculously difficult right now) and let the info seep out. Give it some public transparency without making it into the full blown participatory budgeting process. keep it simple, keep it quick and you'll get some different ideas coming through..

For my 2p, I'd recommend this article on pro-social procurement..https://socialenterprise.guardian.co.uk/social-enterprise-network/2... 

Or http://bristolpound.org

Challenge #4 - Utilising footfall & transport

Some interesting ideas from the States - and some potential stats on the economic benefits of doing transport differently..? http://t4america.org/blog/2011/02/04/new-report-shows-the-job-creat...

Here's some case studies from other cities who have revalmped transport systems all over the world (complete with glossy brochures and pretty people laughing!): http://inhabitat.com/our-cities-ourselves-ten-global-cities-redesig...

And i remember going to Bilbao a couple of years ago and being reall impressed with the joined up BilboBus branding, co-ordination (and high public subsidies).. http://www.bilbao.net

Sheffield Transport hack days..? http://opendata.thegisthub.net/2011/03/transport-hack-day-datasets 

One last thing - with a population of 6 million people on the York to Liverpool route (give or take) it has always seemed ridiculous to me that we let the Pennines stand in the way of decent transport infrastructure - but that might be too much..!

The Portas 'Town Team' Pilot Scheme

Parts of the Portas reviwe was about how we use our spaces to live, not just as a place for financial transactions. So i think the interesting question for me is "how can we let anyone do what they want in our city or How can we bring poosibility back into public spaces..?"

1. Playful Leeds are looking at the cultural offer (again breaking this idea of us solely as consumers but more of pro-sumers)
2. We are your emporium is a social enterprise looking at getting more people a stake in retail by offering spaces for rent in a Mickelgate shop.
3. Bishopthorpe is well worth looking at simply because it has its own home-grown identity - something that might fit with the micklegate quarter etc..

There's lots of good stuff here on street design from Leith in Edinburgh: basically how we design our streets is how people use them.

Cycle lanes, traffic flow, city planning for idiots. worth a read and watch..http://www.greenerleith.org/greener-leith-news/2012/3/14/still-want

Map of Yorkshire orgs requesting help - on the 'leap day' 29 feb 2012

These places contacted me for help on the 29th Feb 2012 under the Local Leap scheme. 



View Local Leap - 29 Feb 2012 - Yorks Opoortunities in a larger map