CONTINUITY & CHANGE:
Refreshing the relationship between Welsh Government and the Third Sector
PAVS CONSULTATION RESPONSE – Summary Version
This paper provides a summary of the responses PAVS intends to present to Welsh Government for
each of the questions posed in the consultation document.
Chapter 1 – Outline of the current basis of the relationship between the Welsh Government and
the Third Sector
Q1: Are there any other key changes or developments in recent years that impact on the relationship
between Welsh Government and the Third Sector and should be taken into account?
Other key changes or developments that should be taken into account are:



Increasing demand for third sector services due to welfare benefit reforms and changing
demographics
Lack of growth in the Welsh economy and increasing numbers of young people who are not in
employment, education or training
Rural poverty – exacerbated by rising fuel costs, lack of public transport, limited access to
services, isolation and poor broadband connectivity

Reduction in Charity Commission services in Wales – more reliance on County Voluntary Councils
to deliver support for charities on the ground

Sustainable development - building natural, cultural, human, social and produced capital in local
communities

Increasing costs of delivering safe services and complying with legislation and regulation at the
same time as funding is being reduced
Chapter 2 – Affirming and renewing the relationship
Q2: Do you agree that the analysis of the third sector and its qualities listed above are still relevant?


Include reference to the sector’s role in sustainable development and effective public engagement
Expand qualities to include (1) Altruistic, enthusiastic and innovative and (2) Capable of mobilising
volunteers
Q3: Do you consider that the five strategic themes in 2.17 are still useful as a basis for ongoing
dialogue?



Strengthen the first theme: Increasing voluntary action – a more active commitment than
“valuing”
The fourth and fifth themes are too narrow in definition and should be changed to:
o Supporting sustainable third sector organisations
o Transforming public service delivery models
Highlight the role of the sector in co-producing citizen-directed public services
Q4: Are there other elements you would add or consider to be more useful?
PAVS proposes adding the following two themes:

Delivering innovative solutions to meet identified needs

Evaluating impact and outcomes
PAVS Consultation Response – At a Glance
Page 1
Chapter 3 – Supporting the Third Sector Infrastructure
Q5: The role of the Infrastructure is set out above. Please let us know if there is something you think
has been overlooked.

PAVS welcomes the overall affirmation of the effectiveness of the current Infrastructure
arrangements and the recognition that intermediary organisations are necessary in terms of
providing support for the sector.

Require “specialist” service providers to make use of the Wales-wide network of County Voluntary
Councils to join up services on the ground at a local and regional level

Ensure “specialist” services are truly specialist and cannot be delivered by the generic third sector
Infrastructure organisations, either independently or in partnership with other providers
The idea of the Integrated Delivery Plan is a good one as long as it is jointly owned and developed
by all members of the Infrastructure Partnership – PAVS supports an outcomes-focused
framework for the Partnership Agreement








1
In addition to the key roles of the Infrastructure summarised in the document, PAVS would add the
following:
o Brokering third sector services into statutory sector provision and identifying unmet needs
(this is particularly relevant in the area of integrated community-based health and social
care services)
o Facilitating citizen engagement
o Developing the third sector workforce (paid and unpaid)
o Lobbying and campaigning
o Networking and facilitating collaboration (brokering relationships between national charities
and small, grass-roots organisations in terms of service delivery partnerships)
o Providing HR and Finance services – low-cost, accessible “packages of support” for third
sector organisations who cannot afford to employ specialist staff
County Voluntary Councils have expertise in managing small grants programmes and have the
local intelligence to ensure such grants are invested to achieve local strategic priorities – small
grants programmes are a useful “hook” for development work
PAVS agrees with the statement that “the focus on developing the wider sector and community
action remains paramount” particularly when applied to the plethora of small, grassroots
organisations that contribute significantly to community resilience and cohesion.
PAVS welcomes the positive support for Volunteer Centres and recognition for the valuable work
they do with individual volunteers and volunteer-involving organisations. More resources are
needed to enable volunteer centres and volunteer-involving organisations to provide long-term and
in-depth support for volunteers with additional needs.
PAVS agrees that good governance is paramount, but would ask that quality assurance systems
remain proportionate and not a “knee jerk” reaction to high profile failures, such as AWEMA and
Plas Madoc, which are not representative of the wider sector.
As an independent organisation, accountable to the wider third sector through its membership
base, a County Voluntary Council is best placed to objectively and impartially articulate the voice
of the sector at local and regional strategic planning partnerships.
The current research function of WCVA should be strengthened and expanded to provide a robust
data framework to support policy development and impact assessment – a “What Works” centre1
for the third sector in Wales.
What Works Network, a national co-ordinated UK initiative that seeks to strengthen the use of evidence for policy and practice,
not only at Government level but also at the local and community levels, and indeed with end users themselves (The Guardian
Professional, Thursday 7th March 2013)
PAVS Consultation Response – At a Glance
Page 2

PAVS believes that the Infrastructure Partnership should apply a “digital first” approach when
planning its future service delivery model. There is no doubt that new technology can be applied
to various services within the Infrastructure, particularly around dissemination of information;
communication; training; consultation and regional working arrangements
Q6: How might we achieve the right balance of funding and delivery across the Infrastructure
nationally, regionally and locally?



The basis for allocating funding amongst County Voluntary Councils must continue to protect the
viability of smaller organisations operating in rural areas with low levels of population – allocating
funding at a regional level would be a reasonable option, provided local service delivery can be
maintained
Support for local organisations at a local level is absolutely critical if Wales is to develop resilient
communities and a strong civil society. For this reason, PAVS proposes that any future funding
model enhances, or at least protects, service delivery at the local level
Any radical change in funding allocation to Infrastructure partners will require a reasonable lead-in
time and could not be implemented from 1st April 2014
Q7: Do you support the proposal to develop a Third Sector Innovation Fund on the basis outlined
here?



PAVS does not support the proposal to top-slice existing Infrastructure funds, the value of which
has already been eroded over the past few years, because this will be detrimental to local services
A regional grants programme, managed at a national level, will incur administrative and
management costs which would be better spent on direct services and a competitive process will
mean some areas will lose out completely
PAVS believes that a better approach would be to define the outcomes that Welsh Government is
seeking to achieve within the Infrastructure Partnership Agreement; invest the funding at a regional
level and allow the CVCs to decide how best to use the funding to achieve the outcomes
Q8: We consider that the current Infrastructure support for volunteering is strong in many respects but
could be simplified. Do you have any suggestions for how it could be improved?
PAVS agrees that the current Infrastructure support for volunteering is strong, and is pleased to see
that Volunteer Centres are recognised as being integral to any new framework for volunteering that
might be developed.
PAVS suggests the following simplifications to the existing volunteering arrangements:

Review the role of Gwirforce – this function would be better delivered by linking with existing youth
forums at a local level, including the Youth Assembly, Youth Forums, School Councils, Youth
Bank, etc.

Merge the Gwirvol and Volunteering in Wales funding streams to provide a unified fund to support
all-age volunteering – this would simplify monitoring requirements

Allocate the grant-funding element of the merged funding stream at a regional level to enable
strategic investment in local/regional volunteering projects to meet locally identified needs
Chapter 4 - Engagement
Q9: Do you agree with the proposals for development of the Third Sector Partnership Council (TSPC)
and meeting structure?

The purpose of the TSPC needs to be clearly articulated and, if this is not possible, then there is
no strong argument for continuing to meet in this way – local groups find it difficult to engage with
this process
PAVS Consultation Response – At a Glance
Page 3





PAVS does not agree with the proposal to develop a small Strategic Leadership Group, as this
would only serve to increase the “elitist” nature of the group
PAVS proposes opening up the meetings as widely as possible through the use of social media
and video conferencing to enable third sector organisations to contribute “virtually” to the
discussion.
To allow for proper discussion of key themes (identified jointly by Welsh Government and the third
sector), TSPC meeting should last for half-a-day and, where possible, be linked to a conference or
seminar to which members of local and regional groups could also be invited
PAVS agrees that meetings should be held in different parts of Wales and that visits to local
groups could be arranged for Ministers and officials by the “host” CVC
It is important to dispel the widely held view that if you are not “at the table” then you are excluded
from decision making and have less chance of receiving funding. The need for transparency and
inclusion is paramount
Q10: The suggested framework for TSPC workstream activity seeks to increase the effectiveness of
the contribution of the workstreams. Do you have other suggestions to add to or improve the
proposal?

PAVS agrees that there should be clear and consistent terms of reference - no workstream should
be established unless there is mutually agreed clarity of purpose and outcome

The proposal in the consultation to introduce a regional dimension to the TSPC is to be welcomed.
A regional forum could bring together local, regional and national organisations to address an
agenda driven by identified needs at a local/regional level, as well as celebrating success and
sharing learning
Q11: Do you agree that the existing biannual cross-portfolio Ministerial meetings should be replaced
by a more flexible pattern of meetings with Ministers which focus on timely and specific issues of
mutual interest/concern?

It is important to retain Ministerial commitment to meet with the third sector at regular intervals
throughout the year - Ministerial meetings need to be built upon and improved, not abolished or
diluted.

Ministerial meetings should be focused on key issues that are causing real problems, allowing time
for in-depth conversations to take place with third sector organisations and members/service
users, making use of new technology to open up the discussion more widely
Chapter 5 – Working together nationally, regionally and locally
Q12: What can be done to ensure that the Third Sector’s contribution to the Programme for
Government is recognised and maximised?

The third sector is not an instrument of government and its independence needs to be maintained
– however, the sector is an important partner in delivering a fair and sustainable Wales and has
considerable synergy with the Programme for Government

Welsh Government could maximise the third sector’s contribution to the Programme for
Government by including relevant outcomes in the Infrastructure Partnership Agreement and by
including Tackling Poverty, Sustainable Development and Equalities & Social Justice as crosscutting themes
In terms of recognising the contribution of the third sector, the Infrastructure could collate data to
measure the impact of the sector’s work in relation to specific policy areas, such as tackling
poverty or climate change. The national body within the Infrastructure (WCVA) would be wellplaced to lead on this work

PAVS Consultation Response – At a Glance
Page 4
Q13: The proposal is for a greater Third Sector involvement in regional working. How would you wish
to see that achieved?



CVC planning facilitators engage local networks in regional partnerships – whatever the “regional
footprint”
PAVS would not recommend any irrevocable change of legal structures to create regional County
Voluntary Councils at this stage because of the uncertainty over Local Government reconfiguration and changes to the regional public services “collaborative organisational areas”
PAVS suggests that that the best way of ensuring third sector engagement at a regional level will
be to include regional outcomes and performance indicators in the Partnership Agreement,
supported by an appropriate investment of funding at a regional level, and allow CVCs to decide
the best option for working regionally
Q14: Do you agree that the model of commissioning set out in 5.17 should be adopted within the
Code of Practice?




PAVS supports the model of commissioning set out in 5.17 and agrees that it should be adopted –
and enforced - within the Funding Code of Practice provided it is made clear that grants can still
be used to secure services
It is important to retain an outcomes based model in whatever commissioning framework is finally
adopted, based on a process of co-production – this is the only way to achieve service
transformation
The Funding Code of Practice should also include a commitment to full cost recovery (FCR), which
must include a contribution to governance costs
Further thought needs to be given to establishing a protocol governing the separation of functions
within the commissioning cycle. Local Authorities and Health Boards routinely play a part in
service design and then go on to deliver those services in-house. The same flexibility ought to be
afforded to third sector organisations, particularly third sector intermediary bodies, otherwise the
concept of co-production is seriously undermined
Q15: Community development and community resilience is an important part of the Welsh
Government and Third Sector relationship. How would you like to see our proposals in this area taken
forward?





PAVS completely agrees with the statement in the consultation document that community groups
and local volunteers should receive the support they need to thrive and achieve their aims
Rural poverty is equally as important as urban poverty, yet is it not recognised through
programmes such as Communities First and Families First which are based on the Wales Index of
Multiple Deprivation
PAVS believes that town and community councils have an important role to play as “community
leaders”, working closely with County Voluntary Councils, LEADER groups and Communities First
Partnerships to engage local people in delivering local solutions to meet local needs
Encouraging people to volunteer in local communities is also fundamental to developing resilient
communities. Volunteer Centres clearly have a role to play in this aspect of community
development, supporting communities to choose appropriate mechanisms to get more people
interested in volunteering
Small grants can “oil the wheels” of community development
Chapter 6 – Local Compacts
Q16: Do you consider that Local Compacts, as described in this chapter, have a continuing role in
shaping the relationship between the Third and Public Sectors in Wales?

PAVS considers that local Compacts do have a continuing role to play in terms of shaping the
relationship between the third sector and the public sector
PAVS Consultation Response – At a Glance
Page 5


The main problems in terms of establishing an equal and reciprocal partnership between the third
and public sectors relate to disparities of funding and power. As a County Voluntary Council, it is
difficult to behave and be treated as an equal partner when compared to the significant financial
and human resources of the Health Board and Local Authority
PAVS accepts that good Compact arrangements help to address these imbalances but they must
be equally binding on all partners, without the usual “get out” clauses that are applied when things
become problematic
Q17: Do you agree with the proposal (Option 2) to develop existing frameworks to impose greater
control or influence over local compacts and only introduce new statutory obligations if this approach
fails over time?

PAVS agrees with this proposal, but only on the basis that Welsh Government sets out clear
guidance and declares its intention from the outset to introduce new statutory obligations if this
approach fails

It would also be helpful if funding streams that are currently “passported” through statutory
partners could be moved to County Voluntary Councils – this would certainly encourage a more
enthusiastic commitment to joint working from public sector colleagues

PAVS believes that Compacts will only work if all parties are willing to make them work – being
forced into this through legislation is likely to achieve the opposite effect – we therefore do not
agree that Compacts should be statutory
Chapter 7 – Framework documents
Q18: Do you agree that the Voluntary Sector Scheme should be revised on the suggested basis?
PAVS agrees that the Voluntary Sector Scheme should be revised to take into account any changes
that might come about as a result of the current consultation. Care will need to be taken that the
essence of the Scheme remains intact and that any changes are properly considered to minimise the
chance of “unintended consequences” arising in future.
Q19: Do you agree that the Code of Practice for Funding the third sector should be strengthened and
updated? Are there particular issues you think should be addressed in the revision?
PAVS agrees that the Funding Code of Practice should be updated in light of the various changes that
have taken place since it was first published, particularly around commissioning, tendering and
procurement. The following issues should be addressed in the revision:

Advance payments for third sector organisations

Full cost recovery

Proper reimbursement of volunteer expenses

Proportionate financial monitoring arrangements
Q20: Do you agree that the existing Action Plan should be superseded by the Integrated Delivery
Plan, Annual Report and Workstream Framework?
In principle, PAVS supports the idea of replacing a static action plan with a more dynamic planning
process that includes the production of an annual Integrated Delivery Plan (developed jointly by Third
Sector Infrastructure partners); an Annual Report on the Voluntary Sector Scheme and structured
reports from the TSPC workstreams.
PAVS Consultation Response – At a Glance
Page 6