Hosted by: Funded by: Issues in evaluating the distinctive contribution and impact of the ‘third sector’ Malin Arvidson Stephen McKay Domenico Moro.

Ho

sted

by:

Fu

nd

ed b

y:

Issues in evaluating the distinctive contribution and impact of the ‘third sector’

Malin ArvidsonStephen McKayDomenico Moro

Contents

1. Researching the third sector workforce2. Frameworks for evaluation of Third

Sectors Organizations

Distinctive features: employment and workforce

• Small size (2.6% of employment) and uncertainty about boundaries

• Importance of volunteering as a labour input

• Role of philanthropy … but also contracts from public sector

How many people does the sector employ?

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 200918,500,000

19,000,000

19,500,000

20,000,000

20,500,000

21,000,000

21,500,000

22,000,000

400,000

450,000

500,000

550,000

600,000

650,000

700,000

750,000

800,000

Private

21,443,949

20,378,707

VCS

777,909LFS - employees in private and voluntary and community sector

(VCS)

Employees - distinctiveness• Percentage of workers in the VCS rises quite strongly with

age (Proportion of workers in the VCS in 2008)

Employees - distinctiveness• Percentage of workers in the VCS according to their

education. (Proportion in 2008)

Degree

or equiva

lent

Higher

educ

GCE A Le

vel o

r equiv

GCSE gr

ades

A-C or equiv

Other quali

fications

No qualifica

tion

Don't know

National

.0%1.0%2.0%3.0%4.0%

Voluntary - VCS

Employers - distinctiveness

• Many part-time jobs (2008)

Private Public VCS0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Part-timeFull-time

Growth of the sector: 1997-2010Q

2Q

3Q

4Q

1Q

2Q

3Q

4Q

1Q

2Q

3Q

4Q

1Q

2Q

3Q

4Q

1Q

2Q

3Q

4Q

1Q

2Q

3Q

4Q

1Q

2Q

3Q

4Q

1Q

2Q

3Q

4Q

1Q

2Q

3Q

4Q

1Q

2Q

3Q

4Q

1Q

2Q

3Q

4Q

1Q

2Q

3Q

4Q

1Q

2Q

3Q

4

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

LFS - average hours worked in a week Voluntary and Community Sector vs Private

Private

VCS

Under-employmentVCS Total

Would like to work longer hours

2007 – q1 7.4% 7.5%

2010 – q1 10.4% 10.1%

Part-time because cannot find a full-time job (among part-time staff)2007 – q1 9.8% 9.1%

2010 – q1 16.0% 14.3%

Industries affected by the recession-Private

• These are suffering the most

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q12007 2008 2009 2010

80.00%

85.00%

90.00%

95.00%

100.00%

105.00%

82.17%

88.23%

93.51%

100.00%

89.12%

Manufacturing Construction Wholesale, retail & motor trade Financial intermediation

Industries

• Health, social work, education and real estate cover 93.5% of VCS employment

• Using the SIC 92 classification– In 2008, of 100 workers in VCS• 62 were working in health & social work• 13 were in other social / community• 10.5 in education• 8 in real estate

• Growing industries all with strong VCS presence are still growing

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q12007 2008 2009 2010

95.00%

100.00%

105.00%

110.00%

115.00%

120.00%

125.00%

130.00%

107.56%

124.35%

112.10%

100.00%101.94%

Real estate, renting & business activ. Education Health & social work Other community, social & personal

… within these industries VCS is doing better than private sector.

Relative growth of selected industries from Q1 2007 to Q1 2010 Real estate, renting & business activ.

Education

Health & social work

Other community, social & personal 107.56%124.35%

112.10%

101.94%

109.62%

136.62%106.97%156.92%

PrivateVCS

2. Framework for evaluation

• Ideas of value – Created, instrumental, and intrinsic value

• Theory of change approach• Cost-Benefit analyst approach– Value for money – Efficiency– Savings

Social Return on Investment (SROI)

• General move from input/output focus• Now: outcome, impact and theory-of-

change approaches• ‘value for money’, savings, and added value

are important concepts• The project Measuring Social Value is

behind SROI UK, funded by OTS, running from 2008-2011

Social Return on Investment (SROI)

In relation to an organisational evaluation:• an adjusted cost-benefit-analysis• allows for social, environmental and financial

values to be appreciatedThe SROI project is envisioned to contribute to:• reducing inequality• preventing environmental degradation• improve well-being

SROI: Strengths

Strengths:• ideally engages stakeholders that come

from very different backgrounds• clarifies the organisation’s theory of change• encourages better understanding of

concepts such as drop-off, deadweight, and attribution

SROI: Weaknesses

Weaknesses:• based on imprecise ideas about pricing and

savings• does not recognise the different dimensions

of ‘value’• leaves ample room for discretion and

manipulation

TSRCwww.tsrc.ac.uk

Existing papers• Paper 28: The growing workforce in the voluntary and

community sectors, Domenico Moro and Stephen McKay• Paper 27: Impact and evaluation of the third sector, Malin

Arvidson • Paper 26: Business or the Third Sector, Andrea Westall• Paper 25: Value and the Third Sector, Andrea Westall• Paper 14: Economic analysis and the third sector, Andrea

Westall

TSRCForthcoming papers• Stephen McKay and Domenico Moro, Recession and the ‘third sector’

Workforce consequences, TSRC Working Paper• Stephen McKay and Domenico Moro, Is job satisfaction really higher in

the voluntary sector? A longitudinal analysis. TSRC Working Paper• Stephen McKay, Domenico Moro, Arvidson, M. and F. Lyon; The

promises and problems of SROI, TSRC Working Paper• Stephen McKay, Domenico Moro, The economic value of volunteering,

TSRC Working Paper• Rebecca Edwards, Graham Smith and Milena Büchs (forthcoming)

Mainstreaming the Environment: The Third Sector and Environmental Performance Management, TSRC Working Paper

• Arvidson, M. and F. Lyon (forthcoming) Reporting social impact: practices, processes and power, TSRC Working Paper