This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
OUTSOURCING


Boosting the number of social enterprises delivering public services is a key Coalition aim that will impact on health as much as any other sector – but the National Audit Offi ce’s David Clarke says the DH and PCTs must think more carefully about the risks involved.


U


nder the Right to Request pro- gramme, since 2008 NHS staff have


been able to apply to their PCT to deliver services through a social enterprise they set up themselves. Although sometimes mis- used, the term ‘social enterprise’ is gener- ally defi ned as a business with social goals, whose profi ts are reinvested back into its services, and which relies on business in- come rather than donations.


It has been a slow process, with only a handful having been launched fully under that programme (which itself is now evolv- ing), although the process does now seem to be accelerating. 47 bodies are set to be in existence by the end of September 2011, delivering £0.9bn of health services a year, ranging in size from a few individuals to big concerns with more than 1,000 employees. The National Audit Offi ce investigated the


52 | national health executive Jul/Aug 11


process and the results so far, in order to inform and make recommendations on the future direction of such service transfor- mation.


Realising the risks


The NAO report did not make particularly happy reading for the scheme’s develop- ers, emphasising the amount of risk that remains with the PCT and NHS when ‘out- sourcing’ in this way, the high dependence of the social enterprises themselves on a single source of income, and the muddled objectives of the programme for which the NAO says not enough evidence is given be- yond hopeful lists of potential benefi ts.


David Clarke, director of Civil Society and Commissioning Value for Money studies at the NAO, spoke to NHE about the re-


port, which drew a number of comparisons with the ways that local authorities have handled the process of spinning out social enterprises, especially in the leisure and culture sectors – a process that the NAO believes had clearer objectives than the NHS approach.


We asked whether the differing ways in which councils and PCTs have handled this issue are more a refl ection of those organi- sations’ own priorities, than the national policy framework in which they are forced to operate.


Clarke told us: “It’s a very interesting ques- tion. It’s clear that when local authorities were spinning out – and most of those spin-outs have been in the leisure sector – the imperative for them to spin out was quite often that, if they did not do so, there


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84