next »

[Cris Thompson]

we are looking with the local authority at what training is going to help porganisations adapt to the brave new 'personalised' world - we are currently looking at two strands - consortia & tendering training
ie what is the reality of consortia, what is a PQQ, what is due diligence, what makes a winning tender etc

& the adapting for the free market - individual budgets / personalisation training
including training for frontline staff , looking at a checklist of progress to personalisation, mapping the service users journey to and through your service,

what would help you? and would you prefer 'bite sized' over lunch seminars to a full days training?

Finally do you need more training about these developments for your mangement committee?

[Mary Cannon]

I think both those areas of training are important.  Consortium / partnership training is something that I think we need to put a lot of effort into in order to protect and enhance the role of smaller community based groups who may be involved with only one community of interest. 

This community of interest could be local area based, or user group based, or ethnic group based, or activity based, or a combination of these and other community bases.  These smaller groups bring knowledge and experience of their community base, as well as having strong contact and communication on the ground and in those communities.  They usually have a strong user focus, having users or community members involved in their governance and operation. 

We should be aiming to support their activities most effectively and efficiently, and consortiums and partnerships are crucial ways of doing this.

The other key issue is to try to create a level playing field for smaller groups with these strengths.  Some national VCS groups have a team or at least one person whose role is to find opportunities, complete PQQs, write tender documents and produce presentations.  Smaller groups don't have those staff or time resources, nor do they often have the experience to work their way through some of these processes.

As the part-time CEO of a local group, my time is spent juggling priorities, and time spent on getting to grips with tenders is time not spent on running the organisation, or producing the monitoring information, or making sure the bus tickets are photocopied for the quarterly return, or doing one of many other necessary activities to keep the funding and run the organisation for the benefit of our community of interest.

I agree that there's also a need for us all to learn about individual budgets, personalisation etc.  We need to learn about the approach, the language, how it will affect what we do, and how to do it!

As far as training in general is concerned, please could we look at training in the areas that are mandatory, compulsory or highly necessary in the contract or grant agreements?  I'm thinking about Safeguarding Adults and Children obviously, but also about things like training in for example:

1.  first aid,
2.  how to set up and use monitoring systems, including what to monitor and how to do it, and by the way wouldn't it be good if local funders could agree on which ethnic groups we should monitor?!
3.  developing and using simple financial procedures eg petty cash, budget allocation etc.

Perhaps training in some of these activities could be best accomplished by someone who's skilled and experienced spending time with the staff / volunteers / trustees within the groups or organisations showing people how to develop and use their systems?  Certainly a variety of approaches, including bite sized short sessions, one or multi day training, and on the job support and training could be used for various purposes and activities.

Apologies for the essay!

[Cris Thompson]

Posted on behlaf of Patricia Salt - City & Hackney Alcohol Forum

I am keen to attend any training that will enable the agency I work for to continue providing a local service. However, I think that more than training is required, discussion with local commissioners is essential. Commissioners are required to look at the cost of a service and if someone can do it cheaper then they seriously consider it. How do you cost the time and commitment that local organisations bring to Hackney, making it a place where people work together, rather than a place where commissioned services work in silos?

 

If the Hackney VCS is working hard to ready itself for tendering, consortium and personalization, etc, I’d like some input from Hackney that reassures me that when the time comes that they seriously consider the added value that local agencies bring and don’t just go for the cheapest option. I have close connections with a service in Camden, who worked closely with their commissioner to achieve local targets, add value and integrate the service into the local community. When the service was put out to tender at the end of last year a national VCS agency was awarded the contract because they submitted a tender for considerably less money. The commissioner made have made huge savings in the short term, but has made a considerable loss in the longer term, as they no longer have a dedicated local provider who cares about the provision of services in Camden.

 

I would like to see commissioners making strenuous efforts to keep well integrated and effective service. For example: they could include a section in the bid for the local knowledge of and contribution to the local area and score past performance and experience.