Moving to an Outcomes
Framework for the Youth Sector –
January 2012
The Young Foundation
for the Catalyst Consortium, the Department for Education’s strategic
partner for young people
Slide 1
The Young Foundation 2012
Introduction
Slide 2
The Young Foundation 2012
What’s the problem?
Not all youth sector
providers are:
• Considering their impact as
part of their core business; or
• Presenting outcomes in a
consistent way.
The sector lacks a common language and
good process for sharing knowledge
Not all commissioners are:
• Specifying social outcomes
in tenders; or
• Accounting for social impact
in a ‘smart’ way when buying
goods and services.
Slide 3
The Young Foundation 2012
Not all investors are:
• Accounting for social impact
in a way that is appropriate
for the youth sector when
making investment
decisions; or
• Asking investees to report on
their social impact.
What’s our ambition for the framework?
1.
Accepted by key champions amongst
commissioners, providers and social investors
2.
Bold, yet flexible
3.
Straight forward to use whilst also reasonably
robust
4.
Based on a coherent ‘theory of change’
5.
Enabling benchmarking of ‘value added’,
taking forward knowledge on ‘what works’
6.
Use of a common language to promote
consistent measurement of the difference
services make for young people
Slide 4
The Young Foundation 2012
How might the outcomes framework be used, and by whom?
Audience
Why might they use the
framework?
Commissioners (e.g. Local
Authorities)
•
•
•
Providers (e.g. youth
services)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Investors (e.g. central
government, philanthropists)
•
•
•
Slide 5
The Young Foundation 2012
What attributes do they need the
framework to have?
To target resources effectively
to local needs
To intelligently commission a
range of services which
‘speak’ to one another
To share best practice
•
•
•
Allows comparability across providers
Clear to understand
Reliable/evidence based/robust
To demonstrate the
difference made for young
people
To articulate value
To improve services for
young people
To grow the evidence base
To build consensus
To benchmark the difference
they make to young people
•
•
•
•
•
Flexible and adaptable to their context
Easy to use
Affordable
Low resource intensity
Recognised by central/local government,
commissioners and investors
To help decide between
competing priorities
To inform investment
decisions
To understand the potential
of the sector
•
•
•
•
•
Allow comparability across providers
Low resource intensity
Clear to understand
Reliable/evidenced based/robust
Sit alongside existing impact
measurement tools
Outputs of the framework
• Typology of outcome areas
• Case studies on how outcomes
framework can be put into practice
• Table highlighting a small number of
established tools
Slide 6
The Young Foundation 2012
How have we developed an answer?
• Focus groups (young people,
commissioners, funders etc)
• Advisory group (Dartington, London
Youth, Substance etc)
• Expert panel (Cumbria Youth Alliance,
Norfolk County Council etc)
• Literature review
• Consultation with providers
Slide 7
The Young Foundation 2012
Assessment of key
outcome areas
Slide 8
The Young Foundation 2012
Key to our approach is a link between capabilities,
intrinsic and extrinsic outcomes …
Increased
Protective
Factors
Personal
Development
Social
Development
Educational
Development
Slide 9
The Young Foundation 2012
Results In
Intrinsic Outcomes
(individual well-being)
Producing
Decreased
Risk
Factors
Extrinsic Outcomes
(wider social good)
… that can be summarised as a relationship between long-term
outcomes, interim indicators, social & emotional capabilities
Slide 10
The Young Foundation 2012
… which is supported by a strong evidence base …
Slide 11
The Young Foundation 2012
At the heart of the Outcomes Framework are seven
clusters of capabilities
Slide 12
The Young Foundation 2012
Using the Outcomes
Framework
Slide 13
The Young Foundation 2012
Stages in using the Framework
Slide 14
The Young Foundation 2012
Case study: provider working with victims
of bullying
Slide 15
The Young Foundation 2012
Case study: provider working with victims
of bullying
Slide 16
The Young Foundation 2012
Matrix of tools
Slide 17
The Young Foundation 2012
Approach to assessing tools
• We have collated information
on commonly-used and
referenced measurement tools
and techniques
• Information includes an
overview of which clusters are
covered; the cost of using the
tool; and the robustness of the
underlying evidence base
Slide 18
The Young Foundation 2012
Provisional version (not complete)
Slide 19
The Young Foundation 2012
Contact
Neil Reeder
neil.reeder@youngfoundation.org
Bethia McNeil
bethia.mcneil@youngfoundation.org
Slide 20
The Young Foundation 2012