Date post: | 18-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | dale-gilmore |
View: | 213 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Greater Manchester: Social Enterprises
Social Enterprise Lead at New EconomyAngeliki Stogia
Today we will cover
• Key challenges in Greater Manchester (GM)• GM Social Enterprise research: key findings
Mini break
• Social Innovation Driver tendering opportunity
Impact of financial downturn
• The recession had a significant impact in GM:• Increased unemployment• Increased demand for public services
• Yet there remains significant problems from pre-recession:• Economic inactivity• Poverty• Skills gap• Poor health• Lack of joined-up services
The Greater Manchester Strategy
GM – currently a cost centre for UK - £22bn public spending Vs £17bn tax generated – ambition to close then reverse gap. Long-term economic growth and ensuring residents able to contribute to and benefit from growth are critical.
“By 2020, the Manchester city region will have pioneered a new model for sustainable economic growth based around a more connected, talented and greener city region where all our residents are able to contribute to and benefit from sustained prosperity”
The new economic reality
Researching Social Innovation
• Particular focus on social enterprise• What is the scale and nature of opportunity to deliver GMS?• What are the resources to realise opportunity?• What has been achieved elsewhere and transferrable
experience• Supporting PSR• Scale and ambition
How can we maximise the contribution of social enterprises and social entrepreneurs to delivering the GMS?
Definition: social enterprises supported must
• Have explicit social aims and ethical values • Principally re-invest in the business/community rather than
distributed to owners/shareholders• Be enterprise oriented • Have social ownership • Be accountable to their stakeholders and the wider
community for their social/enviro/economic impact• Be subject to an 'asset lock'
Community enterprise
Serving a particular geographical community or community of interest
Social Firms
Integrating people who might otherwise find it difficult in the mainstream job market
Co-operatives
Organisation owned, controlled, and run for the benefit of their members
Public sector spin-outs
Independent social enterprises set up to deliver services that were previously provided by public sector organisations
Trading arms of charities
Enterprise started by charity or non-profit that generates revenue for the organisation
Business with social mission
Provides products/ services for community good
Business with social objectives
Hires marginalized people in good employment opportunities
Business with social objectives
Businesses with social objectives as central as their economic objectives
Business with social objectives
Businesses with social objectives as central as their economic objectives
Methodology• Literature review• Social enterprises in GM
• Telephone surveys• Face to face interviews • Social investors survey• Review of infrastructure support
• Financial analysis of social enterprises in GM• Social investor surveys• Data sample analysis
• Support model analysis• Best practice nationally and internationally• Site visits, interviews, 1-2-1s
Emerging GM profile (literature review)
• Employs 23 FTEs• Heavily reliant upon volunteers for day-to-day activities• Half turnover more than £100,000 per year• Earns 75%+ income through trade (with consumers, public
agencies, other businesses and other social enterprises in that order) – in a large minority of cases topping this up with grants and donations
• Led by a management/governance team that reflects location in which the enterprise is based and provides products that meet specific local needs
• Makes efforts to measure social impact
Social Enterprise survey: SWOT
Flexibility to innovate, supportive local links, skilled and committed staff, SMT and directors
Lack or resource/ capability, firefight Vs plan development, low profile of networks and clients
Expanding to cover new areas, new client base, geographical coverage, work more with private sector
Funding cuts, competition (socent/private sector)
S
W
O
T
Social Investors Survey
• Number and range of investment funds is increasing rapidly • Variety of investments on offer (grants, loans, equity or
quasi-equity)• Gap in relation to the provision of unsecured loans below
£50,000• Vast majority (90%) of lending in form of secured loans• Investor activity in GM appears to average 10-20
investments per year• Limited evidence available on the demand for investment
Existing social enterprise ecosystem
• Multitude of initiatives/actors at national, regional, GM level• Varying issues to address, places to get support
• National bodies/initiatives/organisations, regional, GM and local• Growing number of stakeholders interested in the agenda• Tried tested approaches: e.g. workspaces, hosted startups• Traditional business support services, VCS, Universities, RPs• Consultancies, legal firms, accountancies, feelancers etc
Social enterprise support in GM:fragmented, patchy, unfocused, generic, bog standard, ignorant
GMCVO social enterprise business support focus group
Key findings• Social enterprise comes in different shapes, sizes and stages of
development• Higher proportion of enterprises constituted as coops or
community benefit organisations and more CICs in GM than elsewhere in the NW
• Majority of social enterprises very much smaller than headline figures usually quoted would suggest
• Excluding larger social enterprises the first decade of life appears to be a key barrier to get through for smaller social enterprises
• Excluding larger social enterprises, median income in GM is only one third of the £50K average for the NW with accumulation of fewer assets
Implications for GMS delivery
• Lack of an overall picture of capacity/capability of social enterprises
• Lack of understanding and strategic direction• Duplication of effort, overlap of activity• Limited opportunity for collaboration• Fragmentation
Examples of support
The opportunity: Social Innovation Driver
Coordinated support for social enterprise in GM• Scale the impact of social enterprise in GM
• Develop an offer for social enterprise business support in GM• Enhance capacity of social enterprises to develop innovative solutions• Coordinate, collaborate, advocate
SID: Inclusive social enterprise support partnership that will be financially self sustaining• Coordinate and enhance the quality of business support• Support high quality learning that meets the needs of social
enterprises/entrepreneurs• Leverage structured support and infrastructure creating real
opportunity
Caveats….
• European Commission sign off the EU programme• Delays starting the programme
• Different managing bodies (DWP/DCLG)• Must be tendered separately (ERDF and ESF elements)
• Capacity to process the Invitations to Tender • Delays on the tendering timetable
Stakeholders engaged
Stakeholders engaged
SID activity (ERDF)
• £1m ERDF in GM*• Provision of advice and specialist support services to social
enterprises in GM• Business support specific to the needs of social enterprises• Supporting social enterprises to measure and evidence impact
of innovative solutions• Support in contract, procurement and investment readiness,
prototyping and support in accessing social investment• Clusters for smaller social enterprises
SID activity (ESF)• £2m ESF in GM*• Learning and training opportunities that improve the skills and
productivity of the social enterprise workforce• Leadership and management training and activity to encourage new
social entrepreneurs • Funding to support social enterprise volunteers through ILMs and
accredited or non-accredited training • Mentoring, peer support, support for value based partnerships and
coaching• Promoting social enterprise and raising its profile in GM
* Applicants need to provide their own match funding for the activity. Match must be identified and secured before European funding is awarded
OutputsERDFIntermediate and intensive business support 50Social enterprises signposted to existing provision 200Social enterprises engaged with 400
ESFParticipants engaged with* 1000Unemployed 400Economically Inactive 400Young People 15-25 300Employed 200
* participants can fall in more than one category
Indicative Timetable
Launch of CallStage 1 from submissionConfirmation of Stage 1 outcomeStage 2 applications invitedStage 2 submissionsConfirmation of Stage 2Activity can commenceProject activity end date
• Informal agreement of the OP likely in February
• OP programme sign off June 2015 (earliest)
• Theoretically can launch calls in March and agree projects, at risk
• Contracts formally issued after formal adoption of the OPs
Questions..
• Further ideas to tackle the challenge?• Missing out any key activity?• How can you engage with the social innovation driver?
Thank you!
www.neweconomymanchester.com
@neweconomymcr