<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Blog &#187; Big Society</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/tag/big-society/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog</link>
	<description>Institute for Government Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 13:23:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Cameron&#8217;s Big Society speech: a day for mutual learning?</title>
		<link>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/2667/camerons-big-society-speech-a-day-for-mutual-learning/?source=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/2667/camerons-big-society-speech-a-day-for-mutual-learning/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 May 2011 16:39:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kate Blatchford</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New models of governance and public services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Localism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/?p=2667</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Big Society has always been synonymous with David Cameron. He sees the Big Society as his raison d&#8217;etre for being Prime Minister and, as we argued in One Year On, he is alone in the cabinet in being comfortable talking about it. Today&#8217;s speech reaffirms his commitment and emphasises that it is still very much a Cameroonian project. Nevertheless, despite prime ministerial backing the Big Society is on shaky ground. The idea still generates huge amounts of scepticism and cynicism. This month a ComRes poll revealed that only 30 per cent of people understood what the term Big Society actually meant, compared with 40 per cent in February. Evidently, there is still work to be done. A cabinet project? In particular, the Big Society is yet to be embedded as a cross-Whitehall agenda. The new policy announcements we learned today included removing paper work for gift aid donations up to £5,000 and rewarding social-action neighbourhood groups with additional money. These are all new policies that are being implemented by Number 10 and the Cabinet Office. The fact that new policies were announced is testimony to how far a project can get on the back of prime ministerial conviction. With [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/2667/camerons-big-society-speech-a-day-for-mutual-learning/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Banking on the Big Society</title>
		<link>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1960/banking-on-the-big-society/?source=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1960/banking-on-the-big-society/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 2011 10:54:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Adrian Brown</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New models of governance and public services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Localism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/?p=1960</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There’s a lot being invested in the Big Society. The banks are dipping into their pockets to help capitalise a ‘Big Society Bank’. The investment community is being invited to support emerging social investment vehicles such as social impact bonds. And individuals are being encouraged to invest in ‘Society ISAs’. But one person has more invested in the idea than anyone else &#8211; the Prime Minister. After three torrid weeks for the Big Society, the PM made a speech yesterday designed to inject some much needed momentum into the idea. I understand that this is actually week one of a three week offensive linked to the core Big Society themes, which will involve the PM making high profile speeches and visits. They are: encouraging social action reforming public services empowering communities Social investment This week the emphasis is on encouraging social action including the launch of a strategy designed to encourage social investment. We learned some more details about how the Big Society Bank would operate (it will be a wholesale bank working with ‘social finance intermediaries’) but also some of the complications that are already cropping up (the bank will require approval from the European Commission before it can [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1960/banking-on-the-big-society/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The end of the beginning for the Big Society</title>
		<link>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1761/the-end-of-the-beginning-for-the-big-society/?source=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1761/the-end-of-the-beginning-for-the-big-society/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2011 09:49:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Adrian Brown</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New models of governance and public services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Localism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/?p=1761</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On Monday, the Times led with &#8216;Big Society in crisis as economy weakens&#8216;. [paywall] On Tuesday, Sir Stuart Etherington, NCVO chief executive, warned that the Big Society risks being &#8216;one Big Disappointment&#8216; if charities aren’t given the funding they need as a new survey revealed that nearly three quarters of supported housing charities face ‘disproportionate’ cuts. On Wednesday, research from Deloitte suggested that most councils are &#8216;baffled&#8217; by the Big Society agenda and so have understandably failed to implement anything. Regardless of what happens on Thursday and Friday, this isn’t looking great and some commentators are questioning whether the government is losing its nerve. The beginning of the end? Are we witnessing the beginning of the end of the Big Society? Despite the growing scepticism, the Prime Minister seems as keen as ever on the idea describing his agenda for public service reform as &#8216;a Big Society approach&#8216; just last week. I first blogged about the Big Society last August. Since then the idea has become more refined. The three related strands of social action, community empowerment and public service reform have been explored in depth. Behind each of these headings there now lies a host of initiatives, some led by government, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1761/the-end-of-the-beginning-for-the-big-society/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Payment by results in public services</title>
		<link>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1685/payment-by-results-in-public-services/?source=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1685/payment-by-results-in-public-services/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:27:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ian Moss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New models of governance and public services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Commissioning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Services]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/?p=1685</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Government will soon publish a white paper that will set out its direction on delivery of public services. The Institute published a short introduction to some of the difficult problems faced in the design of new commissioning arrangements in December. On 20 January, the 2020 Public Services Trust held an event to launch their toolkit for commissioners. New markets could be used as an opportunity to give providers scope to join together contracts where similar services are being provided to similar users with similar needs. Commissioning, done smartly, could end the need for separate silo based contracting in health, employment, reoffending and skills. It provides an opportunity for commissioning to succeed where the machinery of Whitehall often fails – to allow single providers to offer services to support a range of departmental outcomes to individual users. By agreeing on common approaches across Whitehall, there is the potential for services that are more user friendly and better value for money. Better commissioning To take advantage of this opportunity, Whitehall needs to become a better commissioner. It should look carefully at: New skills. This is a complex task that requires understanding of the needs of end users, the capacity of the market [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1685/payment-by-results-in-public-services/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Are Social Impact Bonds the answer to the fiscal crisis?</title>
		<link>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1633/are-social-impact-bonds-the-answer-to-the-fiscal-crisis/?source=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1633/are-social-impact-bonds-the-answer-to-the-fiscal-crisis/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:58:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Adrian Brown</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New models of governance and public services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Commissioning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Services]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/?p=1633</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Social Impact Bonds (SIBs) have been causing a “frenzy” of interest in Whitehall over the past few months. Hardly surprising given the current fiscal challenge and their apparent ability to attract external investment to our public services. If you are unfamiliar with SIBs, see our beginner’s guide to Social Impact Bonds. Putting it into practice There is only one SIB in existence at the moment (in the world) which is focused on reducing re-offending in Peterborough prison. The Ministry of Justice has agreed to pay for a reduction in the re-offending rates of short-sentence prisoners. On the back of this a group investors have stumped up £5 million to pay for a range of services focused on areas such as employment and housing to help offenders as they are rehabilitated. In truth, implementing SIBs requires a lot of hard work and negotiation between three different parties (commissioners, investors and the providers of services). In particular, there are three main challenges that must be overcome. Challenge 1: the savings must be bankable Firstly, the government needs to be able to stop spending money on something like welfare payments or healthcare. The problem is that savings can often be distributed, for example across [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1633/are-social-impact-bonds-the-answer-to-the-fiscal-crisis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Social Impact Bonds: a beginner&#8217;s guide</title>
		<link>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1662/social-impact-bonds-a-beginner%e2%80%99s-guide/?source=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1662/social-impact-bonds-a-beginner%e2%80%99s-guide/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:57:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Adrian Brown</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New models of governance and public services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Commissioning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Services]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/?p=1662</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At face value my offer is fantastic news. The more sceptical amongst you might ask how certain is that future payment. For example, if it is only 50% likely then the deal is only break even (ignoring inflation). Any worse than that and you’ll lose money. At this point I’ll have to admit that the £100 isn’t a certainty. Fair enough, I say, let me sweeten the deal a little more. I’m so confident about the future saving that I’m prepared to spend the £50 myself, right now, out of my own pocket. All I ask is that you sign a contract agreeing that if the full saving does materialise you’ll pay me £60 (to cover the £50 I spent plus £10 for my trouble). This really is a no-lose situation. In the worst case scenario you save nothing, but have spent nothing. In the best case scenario you get £40 for doing nothing. Early intervention This week’s review of Early Intervention (PDF, 1.2MB) by Graham Allen MP is the latest report to suggest this kind of financing mechanism as a possible solution to a previously intractable set of problems. Allen focuses on the first few years of a child’s [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1662/social-impact-bonds-a-beginner%e2%80%99s-guide/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The curse of the decentralising minister</title>
		<link>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1061/the-curse-of-the-decentralising-minister/?source=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1061/the-curse-of-the-decentralising-minister/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:14:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bill Moyes</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[A more effective Whitehall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Accountability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Society]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/?p=1061</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There is no shortage of straight talking about the ambition to turn government on its head and the need for a radical shift in accountability. Launching the government’s business plans, the Prime Minister repeated his determination to &#8220;be the first government in a generation to leave office with much less power in Whitehall than we started with.&#8221; But can ministers withstand the pressure to respond that comes from standing at the despatch box, sitting in front of a select committee, or being stopped in the corridors of power? And, even if Ministers want to let go, will Parliament let them? As part of a project looking into ministerial accountability, the Institute will be addressing these issues and exploring how the curse of responsibility without power can best be managed. An end to the state driving outcomes from the top down The accountability of ministers to parliament for the actions (or inaction) of the department they head remains a hinge of the unwritten constitution. As the scale of change in Whitehall emerges, traditional avenues of accountability will need to be squared with ministers&#8217; determination that the proverbial bedpan rattling on a distant hospital floor should no longer be heard in Whitehall. Instead [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1061/the-curse-of-the-decentralising-minister/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The feeling&#8217;s mutual</title>
		<link>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1084/the-feelings-mutual/?source=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1084/the-feelings-mutual/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:53:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Adrian Brown</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New models of governance and public services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Localism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mutuals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Services]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/?p=1084</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How do the words &#8216;mutual&#8217; and &#8216;co-operative&#8217; make you feel? For many, they conjure up positive feelings of togetherness and community. Everyone loves John Lewis and we can all understand how giving people a direct stake in an organisation they work for, or are served by, is a good idea. What about words like &#8216;management&#8217; and &#8216;bureaucracy&#8217;? I’ll bet the association is significantly less positive. It goes without saying that words like &#8216;cuts&#8217;, especially when closely associated with &#8216;front-line&#8217;, play very badly indeed. So broadly, everyone feels jolly positive about mutuals and if they can help reduce management and bureaucracy while reducing the need for front-line cuts then it is pretty easy to see why they are very popular with the government. The mutual moment The government&#8217;s big idea is to give public sector employees (or the communities they serve) the right to take over the ownership and management of public services. This frees up services from the bureaucracy of the wider system and allows public sector workers to focus on the people they are serving. Morale, efficiency and quality are driven up while absenteeism, waste and errors are driven down – at least the theory goes. Francis Maude has been [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1084/the-feelings-mutual/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Business plans shift responsibilities for outcomes away from ministers</title>
		<link>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1031/business-plans-shift-responsibilities-for-outcomes-away-from-ministers/?source=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1031/business-plans-shift-responsibilities-for-outcomes-away-from-ministers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2010 16:28:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Riddell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[A more effective Whitehall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Accountability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transparency]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/?p=1031</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[David Cameron launched today what he called a &#8220;power shift&#8221; from Whitehall to individuals and local communities. Behind the 30 to 40 page Business Plans announced by each department lies an attempt to answer a perennial question: how to push through, and sustain, a programme of reform? The shift is significant though not quite in the manner claimed since the Government is moving to concentrate on activity and process rather than results and performance. During the New Labour years, the emphasis was on central  monitoring of key priorities, via the Delivery Unit, and a range of targets about outcomes (notably via public service agreements agreed with the Treasury, by which performance was judged and managed). These were backed up by unpublished delivery plans. There was a later, only partially successful, attempt during the Blair years to shift away from the centre by creating more diversity of provision and greater choice of services. What today&#8217;s change means Today’s change is twofold. First, there will be a movement away from targets for policy outcomes to a focus on the processes and timing of reform. The Business Plans are all about activities: when will a change occur and who is responsible. Politically, the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/1031/business-plans-shift-responsibilities-for-outcomes-away-from-ministers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No 2 to No 10: taking MINDSPACE to Downing Street</title>
		<link>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/764/no-2-to-no-10-taking-mindspace-to-downing-street/?source=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/764/no-2-to-no-10-taking-mindspace-to-downing-street/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 2010 10:39:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Halpern</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Better policy making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[behavioural economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Society]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/?p=764</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Behavioural Insight Team – or &#8216;nudge&#8217; unit, as Ministers call it – is about applying behavioural economics and social psychology to policy in a systematic way. In the words of the coalition agreement, it is about &#8216;finding intelligent ways to encourage support and enable people to make better choices for themselves&#8217;. It builds directly on the Institute&#8217;s MINDSPACE report, originally commissioned by the previous government. How nudges can make a difference Though behavioural economics has a long history, it has better known in recent years through books such as Cialdini&#8217;s Influence; Thaler and Sunstein&#8217;s Nudge, and Ariely’s Predictably Irrational. Richard Thaler is also working with the team, while Sunstein is working with Obama in Washington [see link below]. Will nudges change the world? No, at least not alone. But given that most policy issues have a strong behavioural component – from healthy lifestyles to crime, and from carbon footprints to paying our taxes – they can make quite difference. When behavioural approaches are combined with the social network effects and transparency, they can be genuinely transformative. The link with social networks – &#8216;Big Society&#8217; – comes from the fact that other people are normally the most powerful influences on us – [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/764/no-2-to-no-10-taking-mindspace-to-downing-street/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

