York 's voluntary sector strategy in 2 pages..

Components of York 's voluntary sector strategy: - see what you think..

1. More people getting involved in their communities 

2. A constructive dialogue between sectors is established and valued 

3. Strong voluntary sector infrastructure that can support high quality services  and volunteering   

4. Commissioning and funding frameworks that are needs led and offer value for money

5. A city wide asset strategy that recognises the social value in communities taking ownership of their facilities and empowers people to take an active role in creating what they know is needed in their community.   

Outcome 1; More people getting involved in their communities

Volunteering is a powerful force for change, both for those who volunteer and for the wider community.  Together we can support the development of valuable social networks that will strengthen community involvement in the life of the city through

1. To further develop neighbourhood networks, such as time banking
2. To promote and embed York 's Volunteering Charter across the partners
3. To make sure volunteering meets the needs of the most vulnerable people in the City.

Outcome 2; A constructive dialogue between sectors is established and valued 

The voluntary sector has a wealth of experience that can be of great benefit to policy-makers in the statutory sector, by contributing to effective policy development. The voluntary sector also has a key role in enabling the voice of the community to be heard.  This applies particularly to some excluded groups who may be reluctant to engage with statutory partners through: A joint approach to widen our collective reach. A commitment to finding practical ways to maximise voluntary sector representation on key decision-making groups.

Outcome 3; Strong voluntary sector infrastructure that can support high quality services and volunteering   

In order for voluntary sector organisations to contribute successfully to the delivery of high quality services, they need support which meets the needs of a wide range of types of groups in different stages of their development. Through: Increasing the opportunities for communication and collaboration between the voluntary sector and its partners, including the private sector,  via mainstreaming of the successful elements of the Transforming Local Infrastructure Project.

Outcome 4; Commissioning and funding frameworks that are needs led and offer value for money

In the current economic climate it is vital that we work together to establish a robust financial relationship by developing innovative ways of funding services, supported by quality assurance and monitoring.  A joint commissioning and funding framework will help partners take a considered and consistent approach to funding and contracting with the voluntary, community and private sector. 

Priority actions could include: A review of how to improve joint commissioning, given that we have new commissioners emerging, such as the Clinical Commissioning Group or To introduce an integrated commissioning and funding framework by September 2013.

Outcome 5;   A city wide asset strategy that recognises the social value in communities taking ownership of their facilities and empowers people to take an active role in creating what they know is needed in their community.   

Priority actions could include: Joint mapping of assets leading to a directory of spaces 

Thougths..?

Guardian article on the national trust - pros and cons of "going local"..

Here's an editorial from the guardian in 2010 on the national trust..

"It is difficult to conceive of a body as conservative (with a small c) as the National Trust undergoing its very own cultural revolution. Smashing the liberal bourgeoisie is not the first thought that leaps to mind as you munch your way through a slice of coffee and walnut cake in the orangery. But their new strategy, Going Local, which the trust unveils this morning, would represent something of a sea change in the culture of a body dedicated to preserving heritage, and with it healthy servings of tradition. 

The idea of re-establishing the involvement of local communities in the great houses and parks in their midst has much merit. Nearly one-third of the £3m needed to rescue Seaton Delaval Hall in Northumberland, one of England's finest stately homes, was raised locally. So why shouldn't a former miner write in the guidebook about the coal on which much of the Delavals' wealth was founded? 

(and here's a comment underneight that sums up the (equally valid IMHHO) counterview..)

@Pinnington

10 February 2010 4:08AM

The idea of re-establishing the involvement of local communities in the great houses and parks in their midst has much merit.

"What do you mean 're-establish' local community involvement? You mean as underpaid servants, ground-keepers, labourers? 'Re-establish'? What are you talking about? What is 're' about it?

A 'National Trust' that sought to reinvent itself for the contemporary world would surely be concerned not only with matters relating to the preservation of aristocratic and bourgeois icons but also with matters relating to the sustainable development of iconic structures upon which our great grandchildren would gaze with pride.

We may appreciate the grandeur of the great gardens and gazebos paid for by slavery and oppression but will we bequeath, to the 'National Trust', artefacts and architectures that tell a more egalitarian and less imperialist story? What will be the 'Jenkins Legacy' other than the re-preservation of stories of inequity? Do tell!

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/10/national-trust

Notes from Barriers to Engagement event in July 2012..

Aim: how to “dismantle the barriers to people engaging in a city”

Or “how to make our institutions more like us/ work for us”

Apathy = "without pain"

Learned helplessness  = learned rationally not to try

• Map out how the “engagement” process looks like from a user point of view..?
• What are their motivations for attending..?
• Can we use “volunteering as staff development?”
• “choice based architecture”
• Teach the problem away

Sortition – representative community democracy (on the hawkesworth estate? Major of hawkesworth?) 20 people drawn lots on how the city progresses.

 

Driven by citizens

Driven by structures

Engagement

Or association

Mapping out entry points:

• Networks socially mapped
• Growing social capital
• Skills, relationship

Barriers to Engagement list:

1. past experiences
2. beauracracy/ staff structures
3. local communication methods – noticeboards
4. capability and capacity of staff
5. no time ticking on an issues (chronic rather than acute issues)
6. cynicism
7. don’t understand the decision making structures
8. suspition of certain institutions
9. specifics groups harder to engage (younger/ BME)
10. cronyism – usual suspects
11. lack of a strong cause
12. jargon
13. cultural barriers over processes
14. time to engage
15. measureing progress
16. the way we are viewed/ boxed in
17. assumptions of identity

Drivers of engagement	Engagement forcefield	Barriers to engagement
Politics		Cuts
innovation		Confidence & capability
Lack of cash		Travel
Deprofessionalisation of orgs		Money
Cronic health & social lcare		information
Better services in tough time		Culture of host orgs

An irreverent history of the institution of the National Trust..

I'm not really interested in stately homes, so I'm not suggesting this is the definitive truth, but i want to look at where our national institution is going in context of a brief biased history. If this is not for you try the book on the right.. ;-)

• 1893 formed by an odd marriage of social reformers and establishment elites.
• 1930s gets given land from early enthusiasts
• 1960s gets given country houses in lue of death taxes
• 1980s spends millions renovating land and buildings
• 2000s gets commercial and offers days out for masses

So where next?

There will always renovation needing doing, but much less than previously as the large scale stuff is done, and without new acquisitions (with happen but won't be on the scale of previous ones) and maintainance costs comparatively are low with the current sound business model.

So?

1. There are some interesting ideas going round about relevance (more on this later, but have a look at soho stories)
2. the next 10 years will be bumper years as more people retire early and relatively affluently enjoy their leisure time and are able to volunteer for the organisation. They are also likely to have assets on death which can be offered as legacies.
3. the commercialisation, professionalism and branding of the organisation has polarised the previous core. the old trustees, the old guard are unhappy with the streamlining of trustee boards etc
4. the new membership may see membership as an entry ticket more than membership. Brand profile shows diminishing recognition for the logo, and increased perception of the brand in certain contexts. But it may mean we have fewer members who buy membership every year for life. and we will see people who visit Historic Houses association instead (alternating years is quite popular)
5. a shift from country living to urban living. penetration in urban areas is much lower. immigration means more people in cities, and more of the type of demographic who don't visit old crumbling stately homes. if these are the future. Current models of engagement like school visits, and previous projects with BME orgs (for example) may not have the sense of relevance to sustain new audiences.
6. we may see a dip in interest in the old towards the modern sometime over the next 15 years. once everyone has had their fill of 18th Century furniture, and family trees etc..

The biggest danger imho is that this institution becomes irrelevant. It is incredibly powerful right now, and is doing some great things. I am interested in how it acts as a platform for others deciding its future. I think it needs to be built on people's passions. I think it is changing from an organisation to  a movement, and in which case its needs to change what it does as well as how it is perceived. I think it is doing both..

This is a long term game.

Stuart Lee's mixed thoughts on the National Trust

Here's Stuart Lee's mixed thoughts on the national trust in 2011 - i've been a bit selective on pulling bits out (its basically having a go at the talking benches), but there's some interesting things in there.. 

"I joined the National Trust in a spirit of class hatred, and keep my membership card on a shelf next to my CD reissues of the first four Crass albums. I used to be breathless with pleasure at the thought that these massive country piles no longer belonged fully to the bucktoothed scum who inherited them, living in poverty in one wing while Daily Mail readers stamped dog muck and Shippams paste into their carpets. The professional posh man Julian Fellowes last week identified such prejudice as the last acceptable hatred. Hostility he and his oyster-guzzling friends experience would be unacceptable if directed towards the poor. But making jokes at Fellowes's expense is quite different to mocking the disenfranchised. Like all posh people, he was utterly delightful and entirely incapable of deliberate malice. Why, one could listen to them for hours, going on about what they imagine life is like.

"I have mellowed over the years, and now part of what lures me to National Trust properties is not hatred of the posh, but the sadness of these places and their stories, their quiet and dignified tragedy. Fellowes says he believes that the quest for social equality is a pointless folly. Certainly, the cultural and political achievements of the denizens of the Trust's inherited homes, understood through the artefacts they left behind, would seem to reveal them as our natural betters, if only because they had the resources to pursue finer things for their own sake.."

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/05/national-trust-stewart-lee

What can we learn from the London games about volunteering..?

So LOCOG tells us 40% of 250,000 people who applied to volunteer for the 2012 games had never volunteered before. 


Think about that. 


And compare it with hundred of volunteer recruitment campaigns over the last 10 years. The London volunteers were prepared to pay for their own lodgings, travel and much more. The people who put together this programme were prepared to spend £1,000 a head. Not £8 a head on a Christmas lunch. Whatever you think of this - we are entering a very different world on volunteering. So why the marked difference between the do-gooding, and the feeling-part-of, the obligation and the celebration?


Ok, the pull of the games is different from the pull of helping out at a hospice, running a scout group or being a trustee of a user led organisation. I get a bit nervous working for the national trust that volunteering is a bit of fluff, that its not life-changing, wondering round some garden, or explaining conservation techniques in some peat bog. Also i find LOCOGs triumphalism a bit nauseating. So lets find somewhere between.  

• There are a large number of people who, when they volunteer their time, want to do something with more impact than holding a hand, or keeping a church door open. 
• Lots of these people don’t currently volunteer and beyond the baby boom bulge of the next 10 years (and increase of people with time on their hands, and in good health) 

As far as I know the national trust is alone in undertaking huge research into the motivations of its volunteers. When we know what they want, we can hopefully build a better offer. But lets not pretend we can sidestep a lot of the existing volunteer centres, and volunteer recruitment campaigns and succeed overnight. Lets stop asking people to put their hands up in obligation, lets get the data on what motivates people, give them more of what they want, and build a fun sense of mutualism that fits better with the 21 Century. 

My book reviews of Nudge, Tribes, & Here Comes Everybody..!

Nudge: Nudge is the science of how people actually behave - not how we want or think they behave. What about collection tins shaped like seaside games, bins that thank dog walkers for clearing up mess, or reduce the public flow round certain parts of properties based on nudges in behavioural patterns..? Could this help us normalise and positively reinforce pro-social behaviour, which could help us mainstreaming volunteering beyond the 30% civic core. 

Tribes: Thinking in Tribes creates self motivated subcultures. The tribe decides where the end goal is and how to get there. Leadership can come from anywhere, with the facilitated role of “keeping the balloon in the air”. Is it ok if everyone isn’t on-board right from the beginning..?

Leadership plain & simple: Can be summarised as: Think, Talk, Do.. ;-)Do you think "we are up to something together"..? Test your Leadership muscles:

1. ×          What's your shadow of a leader?
2. ×          Build BIG relationships
3. ×          Analyse the gaps between yourself "just surviving" and "at your best". then look for the trigger points

Here comes everybody: My favourite book in the whole world. Clay Shirky expanded on it with a video called “organising without organisations” which is 20 mins of brilliance! Has links to microvolunteering, mass-amateurisation, and crowdsourcing. Lots to think about in how we create a movement from hundreds and thousands of individual parts.Does this offer is new forms of non hierarchical collaboration with massive disruptive potential..?

10 Ways to Sell Your Ideas the Steve Jobs Way.. (By Michael Gass)

10 Ways to Sell Your Ideas the Steve Jobs Way.. (By Michael Gass)

Plan your presentation with pen and paper. Begin by storyboarding your presentation. Steve Jobs spent his preparation time brainstorming, sketching and white-boarding before he creating his presentation. All of the elements of the story that he wants to tell are thought through, elements are planned and collected before any slides are created.

1. Create a single sentence description for every service/idea. Concise enough to fit in a 140-character Twitter post. An example, for the introduction of the MacBook Air in January, 2008, Jobs said that is it simply, “The world’s thinnest notebook”.
2. Create a villain that allows the audience to rally around the hero—you and your product/service.  A ‘villain’ doesn’t necessarily have to be a direct competitor. It can be a problem in need of a solution.
3. Focus on benefits. This is important for ad agencies to remember. Your audience only cares about how your service will benefit them so lead with benefits rather than agency credentials and capabilities.
4. Stick to the rule of three for presentations. Almost every Jobs presentation was divided into three parts. You might have twenty points to make, but your audience is only capable of retaining three or four points in short-term memory. Give them too many points and they’ll forget everything you’ve said.
5. Sell dreams, not your services. Steve Jobs didn’t sell computers. He was passionate about helping to create a better world. That was the promise that he sold. For example, when Jobs introduced the iPod in 2001, he said, “In our own small way we’re going to make the world a better place.” Where most people see the iPod as a music player, Jobs saw it as a tool to enrich people’s lives.
6. Create visual slides. There were no bullet points in a Steve Jobs’ presentation. Instead he relied on photographs and images. When Steve Jobs unveiled the Macbook Air, Apple’s ultra-thin notebook computer, he showed a slide of the computer fitting inside a manila inter-office envelope. Keep your agency presentation’s that simple.
7. Make numbers meaningful. Jobs always put large numbers into a context that was relevant to his audience. The bigger the number, the more important it is to find analogies or comparisons that make the data relevant to your audience.
8. Use plain English. Jobs’s language was remarkably simple. He rarely, if ever, used the jargon that clouds most presentations—terms like ‘best of breed’ or ‘synergy’. His language was simple, clear and direct. So don’t use agency speak when presenting, “integration, proprietary process, etc.”
9. Practice, practice, practice. Steve Jobs spent hours rehearsing every facet of his presentation. Every slide was written like a piece of poetry, every presentation staged like a theatrical experience. Steve Jobs made a presentation look effortless but that polish came after hours and hours of arduous practice. Agencies often are forced to rely on spontaneity to provide creative energy for a pitch because they have spent all of their time on putting together the presentation and leave little or no time for rehearsal. Most unrehearsed pitches end up falling flat.

By Michael Gass.. 

http://designtaxi.com/article/101046/Steve-Jobs-Presentation-Tactics-for-Ad-Agencies/

knocked off brand pictures.. (try and take some of these to the olympics) #london2012

http://thechive.com/2008/12/03/name-brand-knock-off-fail-30-photos/

A culture change at the national trust..?

Here's some quotes from the national trust strategy document Going Local (and the reason i joined the organisation - to work on volunteering & community invovement):

"This strategy means nothing less than a cultural revolution for the Trust. It demands a new mindset and a new way of working."

1. A small, determined pressure group has evolved into today’s mass movement. It belongs to you whether we’ve paid a subscription or not.
2. We were founded more than a century ago for the benefit of the whole nation, including those who still feel that the National Trust is for some reason ‘not for people like us’.
3. we want wherever possible to make our answer ‘yes’ not ‘no’.
4. Each property must nurture a web of human links.
5. We must challenge the perception that we are some sort of exclusive club for connoisseurs.
6. we will change our mindset from owning places for people, to owning places with them.
   We must renew these relationships to foster a greater sense of shared ownership.
7. Some people still feel that the Trust is exclusive or remote. We will involve them in our decisions and challenge our own tendency to act as proprietors not facilitators.
8. We’re developing open dialogues with local communities about new uses for our properties.
9. We are rethinking how we use our land in a more creative way.
10. By the early 1990s the village school, shop and pub in Cwmdu, near Llandeilo, Carmarthenshire, had closed – a real loss to this rural community. The Trust bought the rundown terrace, which included a pub, shop and two dwellings, to help preserve the hamlet, working together with the local community.
11. It’s time to move from a hierarchical approach.
12. We are starting: new opportunities for public access to our land for food production.
13. We pledged 1,000 new allotment ‘growing spaces’ by 2012 as part of our Food Glorious Food campaign. We gave away 750,000 packets of seeds and held over 1,100 food events.
14. We want to put all our places back a the centre of community life
    we will ensure our properties are more widely available for local community groups for activities and meetings; — hold regular social events for neighbours and friends in the locality; — encourage dialogue and local participation in decision-making; — advocate local procurement and recruitment policies to bind our places more closely to their surroundings.
15. We have begun to shift from a preoccupation with ownership towards maximising the benefits we can offer, especially to our nearest neighbours
     Thirty plots at the thriving community allotment scheme at Gibside are being used by community groups and local people,
16. We have begun to foster better cooperation with our neighbours and local organisations.
17. We are a rare thread of continuity in an unstable world.

Thoughts..?

Excellent money making ideas.. #giving #philanthropy

I'm very impressed. @onemanstweet has come up with some excellent money making ideas.

His best has to be
"penny for a pound".
So. its
a 1p piece.
with a pin on the back.
to pin it to your shirt.
and it costs £1
and the money goes to local debt advice orgs..
#genius
(there is also reputedly a £5 version made out of a 5p piece - called, obviously, "five-for-a-fiver"..)

He's also done pencils with slogans on such as "this item is not available in your countyr" and "this machine kills fascists".. Here's some pics of his cards.. they're all retailing in @youremporium in York.

Priest Holes, secret chambers & hiding places.. #notontopic

Inspired by a visit to Oxburgh Hall on the way back from Norfork I am a little obsessed by priest holes, so i have made a target to visit the six best ones in the country during 2012. I think there's something in here i like about people trafficing ahead of the olympics, contraband, smuggling off the yorkshire coast, and generally links with modern persecution and religious intolerance..

1. Oxburgh Hall, Norfolk. One of the finest remaining examples of Nicholas Owen’s work. Visitors can enter the hideaway and imagine how the hunted priests felt (National Trust). Call 0044 (0)1366 328258 for admission details.
2. Baddesley Clinton, Warwickshire. This is a medieval moated manor with Elizabethan interiors and three priest holes, one reached through the sacristy (National Trust). 0044 (0)1564 783294.
3. Stonor Park, Oxfordshire. See the priest hole where the Jesuit martyr Edmund Campion hid. He also wrote and printed at the house. 0044 (0)1491 638587.
4. Moseley Old Hall, Staffordshire. See the priest hole in the Kings Room. This is an Elizabethan house that would later become famous for its association with King Charles II – see the bed where he slept (National Trust). 0044 (0)1902 782808.
5. Harvington Hall, Worcestershire.  Four priest holes – all built around the central staircase – are almost certainly the work of Nicholas Owen. 0044 (0)1562 777846.
6. Speke Hall, Merseyside. Discover the priest hole in one of the most famous Tudor manors in England. 0044 (0)151 4277231. (all from here)

And lastly here's two good links with pictures (don't read the whole thing) and more on secret rooms.

What do people want to use their intelligence for..?

If we assume people are getting more intelligent year on year (this is disputed of course) then we are entering the most fertile mass intelligence period in history. The UK population is collectively hugely educated and arguably more equally educated, thanks to a massive middle-class thanks to globalisation, than ever before.

Which raises the question -What do people want to use their intelligence for..? I have two options:

1. To increase their earning potential (& therefore their own personal welfare)
2. To increase social justice (& therefore other peoples' welfare)

If the possibility of number two are being blocked by unfair structures and the possibility of number one gets slimmer as the western world gets comparatively poorer. If we were to realise our complete affluence, and organised structures to use it well, then we could focus on the second.

So, what kind of world do we want to use this new mass of intelligence to build ..?

What can we learn from The Fighter about behaviour change..?

You know the plot, its the same for loads of movies. Loser decides to turn his life around and has one last shot at the title. 

I was in Armley prison a few weeks ago and one of the things that stuck with me was at the average age of 'turnaround point' was 33 years old. Third sector organisation like CounterPoint do a lot of work at these pivot points. I'd also argue that things like Big Lottery Fund's PeoplePowerChange are essentially aiming at helping people reach their pivot points.

So what can we learn from The Fighter (or The Wrestler, or Rocky, or Raging Bull, or....) about behaviour change..?


Well........... It's completely at odds with our current model of social change. We currently have a system that pays professional intermediaries to look after other people. Maybe i'm being harsh but we encourage people to admit they can't cope (and therefore  need help), and we incentivise the professionals to maintain some level of need. And when the turnaround for the individual happens? Who takes the credit for this turnaround? Not the individual, but the project.

But in the films, the individual makes the change by...

    * A sudden switch on moment
    * Reaching rock bottom
    * Going against his family and friends
    * Getting a new girlfriend
    * Having someone to do it for (normally a kid)
    * Finding the one thing they're good at
    * Having a shot at the title.
    * Losing at least once on route
    * The individual has to lead the change.


So instead of worrying about the process (in which we can only ever support the individual to make the change) maybe we should worry more about the end. How about concentrating our efforts on jobs and housing for people leaving prison..?

The future of our neighbourhoods visioned..

I'm living in an area that recently got Big Local funding (£1m over 10 years) and might soon start working in another one, so its really interesting to be able to compare a professional view of people-led-change with a personal one. More on this later, but for now, here's what a successful kirkstall in leeds might look like (according to the kirkstall vision). See what you think..


View Big Local Trust in a larger map

The morning sun filters through the triple-glazed windows of Abi’s live/work building as she drinks her organic Kirkstall Apple Juice and sets her biometric wrist band to confirm she is about to start her daily jog. Out of the door she crosses Kirkstall Boulevard, taking care not to get in the way of the family who are cycling to school along one of the many designated green cyclo-paths that run through the area and into the city centre. Heading for her usual route, a 3 kilometre physio-track through the beautiful and verdant Kirkstall Valley Park, she passes the communal veggie gardens, reminding herself to pick a handful of free herbs on the way home.


Twenty minutes later she is at her compumodule, checking her Lifebook Page and starting the morning’s study session via a supraspeed web link connecting her with the local UniCollege in Abbey Grange. Today’s 
edutraining session includes a videolink conference with partner courses in Wakefield, Mumbai and Sao Paulo.


Having learnt all about bio-sensitive river regeneration techniques, she takes a short walk past the Eco-leisure Pod to the Kirkstall Korner Kafe, where she meets her friend Sanjit for lunch, dining on trout caught earlier that day in the River Aire. After lunch Abi goes to the Burley Community Hub, where she is a part-time volunteer helping active older people such as John, who she helps use the latest computer software that enables him to keep in touch with his son, a mining technician on Moonbase Ten.


After a couple of hours at The Hub, she gets back on her Biocycle and rides home through the tree-lined streets full of children playing and young people having fun doing their gardening and community sports activities in the inter-linked pocket parks. She stops off  at the Abbey Grounds, under which the former A65 road had been sunk some twenty years ago, to check on the site for her stall at the next bi-monthly Kirkstall Festival. This is the event where she and her friend Bernie, a fellow member of The Kirkstall Development Trust, sell the flowers they grow on their green roofs for charity. Abi then calls at the Ecomarket in the Kirkstall District Centre for her weekly shop. Her choice of seasonal food, nearly half of which has been produced in the Kirkstall Valley, is captured on her hand-held scanner, to be packed and delivered later by the store. They also collect her recycling at the same time. 


An elderly neighbour has told her of the days when people actually went in ‘their own cars’ to the supermarket! Abi can also scarcely believe parents even used to drive their kids to school. After dinner Abi decides to go out into the city centre, but not before listening to the daily report from her l at’s energy monitor which tells her how much electricity her apartment block has generated and sold to the Kirkstall Regional Grid today. She thought of walking into the centre, as this has long since become a very pleasant thing to do. She decides to catch the Sola Train from Kirkstall Station, after popping in to the converted St Anne’s Mill Centre for Creativity just in case her mate Katie wants to come along for a drink. After a good evening out, she catches one of the all-nite Trolley Buses home.


Abi loves living in Kirkstall. She moved here five years ago from Sheffield, having seen the place on the national news when it won a prestigious Euro Award for the most improved, sustainable and visionary neighbourhood in the country. That’s why she doesn’t mind  when her friends call her by her new nickname and is proud to occasionally be known as ‘Kirkstall Abi'..


So is it helpful to have a different life visioned, or will it turn people off with its twee vision of a possible reality..?

David Barrie: 'Finding new ways to associate'. from The Lost Lectures on Vimeo.

What would Wainwright say about private ownership in the lake district..?

I have always spent quite a bit of time in the lakes. My family have long owned a dilapidated shack with access to the south side of the lake. Since boyhood I have seen the lake stuffed full of motorboats, pleasure cruisers and canoe-laden Scouts, all enjoying themselves.
But these days I see no-one.

The houses by the side the lake have become so exclusive that they can only be owned by people who are too busy to go there. Either that or they sit on someones' property portfolio as a "growth asset".

The  third most popular tourist destination in England are the pleasure cruisers who ply the lake. And all the millions of tourists on these boats see is the shoreline of these footballers wives' mansions. Millions of photographs return to all corners of the globe with title like 'Wordsworth's lakes' or Wainwright's view' and all the photographs actually show are empty temples to money.

I am not jealous of other people's successes, I just wish that houses in impossibly privileged locations were used a bit more. I'm sure the Scouts would make the most of the opportunity of a place to go for some solace..

Anyway I think that between private ownership and public access lies something - and I am thinking about how i might put some of those principles into practice.

I am, with a few other people, buying a few square feet of lakeland access. You could almost touch both sides of it with your arms outstretched but i means you could keep a boat there. The idea is to put it into Trust (so that i cannot be sold) but that we keep the access relatively open. They'll be a google-docs calendar of availability, and people will have to book in, but anyone is welcome to use it. I want to be able to control what happens to it (by putting it into trust so it can't be sold) but i want anyone to be able to use it.

This absolutely seems to be the future of public service. I don't care who owns it, but i want access. I don't want to own my local swimming pool, but i want a say in its running. I care less about private ownership, and more about private use..

Google map of voluntary orgs in york..

(I'm proud of getting this done this last year - and thanks to John Haw who actually did it..)

View Voluntary organisations in york in a larger map

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..?