Life Cycle UK
SOCIAL RETURN ON INVESTMENT
Summary Report
Karen Bell
May 2013
0
Table of Contents
Research Summary……………...................................................................................................... 3
Introduction……….......................................................................................................................... 5
Overview......................................................................................................................................... 5
Methodology and Result…............................................................................................................ 6
Rationale…...................................................................................................................................... 6
Research Design……..................................................................................................................... 7
SROI Result..................................................................................................................................... 7
The Theory of SROI........................................................................................................................ 7
Stakeholder Scope......................................................................................................................... 7
Mapping Outcomes........................................................................................................................ 8
Proxy Valuations............................................................................................................................ 8
Inputs............................................................................................................................................... 8
Outputs............................................................................................................................................ 8
Assumptions................................................................................................................................... 9
Impact on the beneficiary.............................................................................................................. 9
What would happen in the absence of Life Cycle UK? ............................................................. 9
Concluding notes………….......................................................................................................... 10
References…………………………………………………………………………………………………10
Appendix....................................................................................................................................... 11
Table 1: Stakeholder Scope........................................................................................................ 11
Table 2: Theory of Change.......................................................................................................... 12
Table 3: Calculating Proxies....................................................................................................... 13
Table4: Outcomes........................................................................................................................ 15
Table 5: Attribution...................................................................................................................... 16
Table 6: Deadweight..................................................................................................................... 17
Table 7: Impact Map..................................................................................................................... 18
1
Research Summary
This report presents an estimate of the social return on investment created by Life Cycle UK, a
Bristol-based national charity that educates and enthuses people about cycling so as to bring
about personal, social and environmental improvement. Since 1996, the organisation has helped
people to gain the confidence to make cycling part of their everyday lives. In particular, disabled
people, those experiencing mental health issues, offenders, older people and disadvantaged
young people, are targeted.
The University of Bristol has researched and written this report as part of the Proving Our Value
project. Proving Our Value aims to assist voluntary and community organisations to better
communicate the impact of their activities to funders, commissioners, government, and the public 1.
A technique known as Social Return on Investment (SROI) has been used to value the social
activities of the organisation. This method demonstrates how much social return is expected from
each pound invested. The technique involves undertaking stakeholder analysis and thorough
examination of management information data to:
• Understand the change that occurs as a result of an organisation’s activities
• Ensure that inputs and outputs are fully comprehended
The input data used for the benchmark analysis was the financial and in-kind backing that the
organisation had received. We wanted to explore whether there were significant returns on this
investment. The output figures are based on the management information data, used alongside
monetary proxies.
The outcomes for each stakeholder group were as follows 2:
Beneficiary/Client: Improved sense of well-being, improved health, more stimulated and inspired,
more self-confidence, less isolation, less anxiety and depression, independence, safer cycling,
new skills.
Friends and family: Increased peace of mind, knowing loved one is improving their physical and
mental health.
Local community: Less polluting traffic; less bicycles going to landfill; social cohesion.
Life Cycle volunteers: Satisfaction in achievements leading to greater sense of well-being. Skills
development.
Life Cycle paid staff and management: Job satisfaction, development of skills.
1
Proving Our Value is a research programme organised by South West Forum and funded by the Big Lottery.
These outcomes were highlighted in the referral and data documents provided, as well as the interviews with management,
volunteers and service users.
2
2
Government: Alleviating pressure on mainstream physical and mental health services; meeting
Government objectives in terms of improving wellbeing.
Partnership organisations (e.g. HMP Bristol, Bristol City Council, Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health
Partnership NHS Trust (AWP)); assists them in meeting organisational goals.
‘I hadn’t been on a bike for 27 years and the people at Life Cycle got me a bike
with lights and a protective jacket for £25. They trained me to ride it and we rode
together to my house…so I started to ride a bike again…It has really helped me
when I’ve been depressed – the exercise, the freedom, seeing things you could not
see from a car or bus. When I go on the bike, it really lifts me…’ (Life Cycle UK
service user, May 2013)
Social Return on Investment (SROI) is a framework for measuring and accounting for a broad
concept of value. The use of SROI has helped to value the impacts of Life Cycle UK’s practice and
to understand where value is created. Positive and negative, as well as intended and unintended
changes, have been considered. The social change that this analysis explored and estimated the
value of includes:



Those that use Life Cycle’s services report on substantial improvements in their quality of
life as a result of activities, including in terms of their mental health (self-esteem, mood,
outlook on the future); social networks (new friends, better relationships, meeting a wider
range of people); and overall sense of freedom and independence.
The unique service that Life Cycle UK provides in that it works with such a diverse range of
needs
The integration of personal, social and environmental goals.
‘It’s a fantastic service. Everything is positive…They have encouraged me to cycle, shown
me new routes, helped me get fitter, and I’ve met new people. The rides are one of my few
social interactions. I like all the workers, they are really good people and are so considerate
to everyone…’ (Life Cycle UK service user, May 2013)
The SROI Calculation:
The results of the research gave
an SROI Ratio of £1 : £ 8.05
SROI RATIO
£1 : £8.05
For every £1 invested in Life Cycle UK,
there is a social return of £8.05
3
The return observed can be attributable to the following:
•
•
•
•
•
2,186 people directly engaged with Life Cycle over the course of the last year.
An evident need for this service, as service users have explained.
The duration of outcomes, as the impacts of improvements to physical and mental health
could last a lifetime.
The extent of outcomes, with the entire community impacted by the work.
Life Cycle UK’s organisational model which emphasises a personalised service, inclusion
and empowerment.
The research has shown that there is evident value in the operation of Life Cycle UK with regards
to improvements in the quality of lives of the main service beneficiaries and their friends and
families. Increased levels of funding would enable the organisation to expand the service.
Introduction
Overview
Life Cycle believe that cycling has individual, social and environmental benefits. It is convenient,
healthy, low stress, low cost, low carbon, low resource and highly sociable. The organisation’s
mission is to help as many people as possible experience these benefits, and to overcome the
barriers, real and imagined to getting started. They organise group cycle rides as well as several
projects to ensure cycling is accessible to as many people as possible. The aims of these projects
‘The people on the cycle rides are so friendly. You meet so many other people and the
volunteers are excellent. Sometimes I’ve been quite down and they have been really good.
It’s just what you need …’ (Life Cycle UK service user, May 2013)
are to restore confidence, build fitness levels and provide social interaction
Current projects include:
Two’s Company - This is Life Cycle’s longest running project, organising tandem rides where
experienced cyclists are paired up with disabled people. It has grown and developed over the last
five years and there are now at least 25 rides a year. This includes an annual ride and barbecue in
the Forest of Dean and a weekend cycling and camping on the Tarka Tail in Devon.
Bike Minded - This project works with people with mental health and emotional issues. By
enabling people to get out into the countryside and experience the joys and freedoms that cycling
offers, people can take part in a sociable, healthy activity and improve their mental wellbeing.
4
Silver Cyclists – This scheme helps older people get back on their bikes, enhancing their fitness
and decreasing isolation.
Bike Back - Life Cycle takes donations of unwanted bicycles from the public and takes them to
Bristol Prison, where, with the help of prisoners, they clean and refit the bikes, giving them a new
lease of life. Experienced mechanics work with prisoners teaching, them mechanical skills and
helping them to refurbish bikes to a high standard. Once fixed, the bikes are sold at affordable
prices with the intention of helping Bristolians on lower incomes to get a bike and start cycling.
Methodology and Result
Rationale
There have been significant recent cuts to public funding (Ferry and Eckersley, 2011) and third
sector organisations are encouraged to show their impact in order to retain funding. The
Government are also implementing a payment by results scheme in order to re-allocate funding
within the third sector. Therefore, it is important to be able to show evidence of social value.
Social value estimation enables us to get a better idea of how organisational value is created and
the impact to the various stakeholders.
Research Design
Not-for-profit organisations don’t seek financial gain but, rather, look to improve welfare and social
value. Every action and activity creates or destroys value and this is what needs to be measured
and accounted for when conducting an evaluation. Social Return on Investment (SROI) is a new
technique in the science of management and one which allows for an estimation of a Third Sector
organisation’s social value. SROI uses financial proxies that look to value the changes that apply
to different stakeholders. The result is a ratio that indicates how much value the organisation has
created for each pound invested. The result will be represented as £1:£X.
The inputs for the study are based on investment and funding and the outputs are based on
stakeholder analysis, with outcomes and proxies determined through literature and management
information data.
SROI Result
The result of the research was a ratio of £1:£8.05. This would indicate that for every £1 invested,
there is a social, economic and environmental return of £8.05. The focus of the study was to
capture the benefits to primarily the service users. The result demonstrates a significantly high
value in Life Cycle UK’s operations. The most likely reason for the result would be the strong
involvement of the local community and the high levels of motivation and commitment of Life Cycle
UK’s volunteers and service users.
5
The Theory of SROI
Social return on investment is built on the structure of a cost benefit analysis, but furthers the
estimate to incorporate social factors. SROI follows seven key principles:
• Involve stakeholders – essential in developing understanding of value and change
• Understand what changes – gain an overview of the process from inputs to outputs
• Value the things that matter – include data and information that is relevant to the activity
• Only include what is material – i.e. related to the study and that which can be valued
• Do not over-claim – only claim that which can be attributed to the available evidence
• Be transparent – all assumptions must be accounted for
• Verify the result – the analysis has to be thorough and robust with an accurate result.
An SROI analysis contains the following distinct elements:
1. Establishing the scope and identifying key stakeholders,
2. Mapping outcomes,
3. Evidencing outcomes and valuing them,
4. Establishing Impact,
5. Calculating the SROI
Stakeholder Scope
The first stage of an SROI is to select the stakeholders that are directly influenced by the work of
an organisation - with justification (see Table 1: Stakeholder Scope in appendix). The science
behind SROI is the use of a ‘theory of change’. In order to draw conclusions about specific
interventions and organisation value, it is important to comprehend the change that is taking place
for each stakeholder. Stakeholders in this study were confirmed by Life Cycle UK’s management
and selected through analysing the theory of change. The main methods of involving stakeholders
in this study were face-to-face interviews and participation in activities.
Mapping Outcomes
Once the stakeholders have been decided, the impact of the intervention in relation to each
stakeholder is calculated. Through interaction, we were able to deduce the change occurring for
each stakeholder group and used this to help gain a clearer understanding of the outcomes of the
service. The outcomes to the beneficiary were highlighted in the Life Cycle UK management
information data. The outcomes to other stakeholders were drawn from literature, previous studies
and agreed with members of Life Cycle UK (see Table 2: Theory of Change in appendix).
Proxy Valuations
The next stage of the calculation was to place values on the highlighted outcomes. Firstly, we
analysed the outcomes to see whether there was a direct market substitution or cost saving, which
could be determined through the use of indicators. Where there were non-monetary outcomes that
couldn’t be measured, literature and previous studies were used, as well as the SROI Networks
6
VOIS database. The indicators came from the interviews with people engaged at Life Cycle UK
and through the other qualitative and quantitative data. An example of a proxy calculation would
be improving confidence; the market cost of substituting the outcome could be the cost of a
confidence workshop. A full list of outcomes and proxies are shown in the appendix (see Table 3:
Calculating Proxies in appendix).
Inputs
Drawing upon the initial set up of the SROI calculation, the inputs needed to be calculated. Over
the last year, Life Cycle UK had received £300,000 in grants and donations. Sources of income
included a major grant from Bristol City Council (cycle training contract); grants from charitable
trusts/foundations and other grant-giving bodies, such as the Big Lottery Fund and Quartet
Community Foundation and public donations. Other than the income received by Life Cycle UK,
the only other input that had value, that was unaccounted, was the time given by the volunteers.
The number of volunteer hours over the year was then multiplied by the national minimum wage
(£6.19). This came to £30,950. Therefore, the total inputs were: £330,950.
Outcome
Using the management information data available, we were able to estimate outcome
percentages. The interviews and documents gave an outline of the outcomes for the people that
had been directly involved in, or impacted by, Life Cycle UK over the last year (see Table 4:
Outcomes in appendix).
Assumptions
It is important to consider other areas that may have had an influence on the outcome and these
figures are taken into account in the assumptions. ‘Attribution’ (see Table 5: Attribution in
appendix) looks at how much of the change is a result of the organisation and ‘deadweight’
considers what would have happened in the absence of the organisation. Most deadweight
calculations will be relatively low, as you can assume there would be no change in well-being over
the short space of intervention time (see Table 6: Deadweight in appendix). Further statistics for
attribution and deadweight are based upon literature and previous SROI studies. Displacement
looks into value being moved from elsewhere – though the majority would show 0% and the
Pareto exchange would not leave someone else worse off (calculated here as Net Present Value –
NPV). The final assumption is ‘drop-off’, looking at the rate at which the benefits decrease. For
outcomes that last longer than one year, it is likely that the effect of the outcome will be less over
time. It will be influenced by other factors and it could be less attributable to the activity. This is
calculated by deducting a straight percentage from the outcome each year. For this SROI‐
evaluation we have assumed a drop off percentage of one third (33%) for outcomes with a more
psychological element, such as coping skills, life skills, confidence, self-esteem, people skills, and
relationships.
Impact Map and SROI calculation
Using the outcomes, proxies, output numbers and assumptions, the output figure could be
calculated using an impact map (see Table 7: Impact Map in appendix) to give the final SROI
ratio of £1: £8.05.
7
Impact on the Beneficiaries
Qualitative Analysis
The service provides benefits at a personal and community level. It is highly valued by its direct
beneficiaries in terms of increasing health and fitness, improving skills and enhancing
independence.
What would happen in the absence of Life Cycle UK?
Other organisations that work on cycling issues, including Bristol Cycling Campaign tend to attract
experienced and committed cyclists and focus on improving cycling provision. The deadweight
case for Life Cycle UK is that, without this service, there would be more instances of isolation and
depression, poorer physical health and more cars on the road.
Concluding notes
This report presents a basic SROI which uses a minimum amount of data to identify outputs and
relies on previous reports to estimate financial proxies. Though we believe the study has been
carried out to a very high standard, it may not be as accurate as a very sophisticated SROI
analysis, based on long term analysis of an organisation. The SROI ratio should also be seen as
specific for each organisation and does not lend itself to cross-organisational comparison,
particularly when the methods used, and judgements made, are not identical.
The concluding result of the research conducted by the University of Bristol is that there is
substantial social and economic value in the operation of Life Cycle UK, as indicated by the SROI
ratio. Life Cycle UK has been very effective in improving the quality of life for local people.
Potential funders can use this report to help them understand the value of the work that Life Cycle
UK does and the positive changes created for service users and the wider community. The project
provides important facilities and services which may well become more effective through further
commissioning.
References
Ferry, L. and Eckersley, P. (2011), Budgeting and governing for deficit reduction in the UK public
sector: act one ‘the Comprehensive Spending Review’. Journal of Finance and Management in the
Public Services, 10, 1, pp. 14-23.
8
‘I’ve got so much fitter because of coming on the Life Cycle rides. When you are with
others, you tend to go further so you gradually get fitter…’ (Life Cycle UK service user, May
2013)
‘What I really like is to see how exited people are when they arrive for a ride. It’s the
highlight of everyone’s day or week, or even month for some of us…’ (Life Cycle UK service
user, May 2013)
9
Appendices
Table 1: Stakeholder scope
Stakeholder
What changed for them?
Group Size
Number
Involved
Improved sense of well-being, improved health,
more stimulated and inspired, more selfconfidence, better relationships, less isolation,
less anxiety and depression, independence,
safety, new skills
Job satisfaction, development of skills
2,186
3
14
1
Satisfaction in achievements leading to greater
sense of well-being
50
0
Increased peace of mind, knowing loved one is
increasing health and fitness
5,000
0
Using management
information data,
informal discussions
Impacted by
presence of local
services
Represent wider
society
Social cohesion; safer roads; improved
environment
X
X
Less people requiring help, free up resources to
address other concerns
X
X
Partnerships
Organisations
Cross referrals,
receive services
X
X
Health
Organisations
Some beneficiaries
may seek less help
from health
organisations,
freeing up resources
Awareness of community needs; alleviates
pressure on services; assists them in meeting
organisational goals. Better levels of services due
to support from Life Cycle UK
Less people requesting help – freeing up
resources
X
X
Using management
information data,
informal discussions
Outsource, common
trends in previous
studies
Using management
information data quants and quail.
Informal discussions
Secondary research
Life Cycle UK
service users
Life Cycle UK
staff and
management
Life Cycle UK
volunteers
Friends and
family
Local
community
Govt.
Reason for
Inclusion
Regular users of the
Life Cycle services
Conduct work with
beneficiaries,
organise and help
deliver the service
Conduct work with
beneficiaries, help
deliver the service
Impacted by the
change to the
primary stakeholder
Method of involvement
How?
Who?
Using management
Current service
information data,
users
interviews and
discussions
Using management
information data,
interviews and
discussions
Interviews and
informal discussions
Current staff and
management
All the volunteers
that work at Life
Cycle UK
Family and friends
of current service
users and
volunteers
Residents of Bristol
Bristol City Council,
National
Government
e.g. Avon and
Somerset Police;
HMP Bristol, AWP
NHS, etc
0
Table 2: Theory of Change
Stakeholder
Life Cycle
UK service
users
Inputs
Participation is
voluntary, therefore
assume exogenous
value
Activity
Adult cycle training; youth cycle
training and maintenance
workshops; older people cycle
training and rides; bike surgeries;
supported bike rides for people
experiencing mental and
emotional distress or other
disabled people; cycling advice
and information.
Plan, implement and monitor Life
Cycle UK services
Outputs
High numbers attending events;
identifying local issues;
Outcomes
Increased social interaction, sense of
belonging, leading to less loneliness, anxiety
and depression. Improved relationships and
community. More confidence and
independence. Sense of achievement.
Independence. Safety. Development of
skills.
Life Cycle
UK staff and
management
Life Cycle
UK
volunteers
Friends,
family
Time (work and travel)
Achieve goals, deliver work plans
Salary, satisfaction in achievements,
development of skills
Time (work and travel)
Plan, implement and monitor Life
Cycle UK services
Time (immeasurable
sunk £0)
Friend or family member has less
worry as a result of Life Cycle UK
High level of involvement; advocacy,
organisation, support given. Achieve
goals
Friend or family member improves life and
feels better about self and others.
Satisfaction in achievements leading to
greater sense of well-being, development of
skills
Improved relationships. Greater wellbeing
Local
community
Participation is
voluntary, therefore
assume exogenous
value
Responding to requests
for services
Community events, activities,
services and facilities
More opportunities for social contact –
bonding and bridging; safer cycling;
environmental improvement
Stronger and more connected community;
more people cycling safely; less pollution
Life Cycle UK services
Increase in number of people with a
greater sense of well-being.
Freeing up resources associated with social
problems.
Partnerships
Orgs.
Support. New members
Support from Life Cycle UK
Improvement in the service offered as a
result of partnering with Life Cycle UK
Better levels of service provided as a result of
partnering with other organisations
Health Orgs.
Inputs regardless, sunk
Life Cycle UK – emotional and
practical support
Less anxiety and depression and less
associated physical health issues
People not reporting to GP's with anxiety and
depression or associated physical problems
Govt.
1
Table 3: Calculating Proxies
Stakeholder
Outcomes
Indicator
Proxy
Source
Life Cycle
UK service
users
Members make new friends, form
better and stronger relationships,
and are less lonely
Mental stimulation, a more
positive outlook, and reduced
levels of anxiety and depression
Self-reported statements of feeling
supported, connected to others etc
The average spending on
recreational and cultural services
Social Impact
Scotland
Self-reported statements of having
developed a more positive outlook and
feeling less stressed
Weekly stress counselling
sessions
Social Impact
Scotland
£2,080.00
More confident and active in
community, leading to a better
quality of life
Through achievements
members gain a greater sense of
self-worth and fulfilment
Self-reported statements of more
confidence and involvement
Quality of Life Index indicator for
community life
Social Impact
Scotland
£1,037.34
Self-reported statements of pride in
achievements and realising that they
can make a difference and overcome
problems
Self reported statements of increased
skills, safety and independence
A meaningful job working 5 hours
per week
Social Impact
Scotland
£2,563.60
Cost of not for profit basic bicycle
training and maintenance course
in UK
Cost of management training
course (Cert HE Charity and
Social Enterprise Management)
Cycle Training
UK
£100.00
Angela Ruskin
University
£8,300.00
£1,195.00
Independence. Safety.
Development of skills.
Life Cycle
UK staff and
management
Life Cycle
UK
Volunteers
Friends and
family
Estimated Total
Value
£769.60
New skills
Self reported statements of employment
related skills acquired or developed
Greater job satisfaction
Self reported statements of job
satisfaction
Improved well-being
Self-reported enhanced wellbeing and
confidence as a result of this project
Value of increased confidence
and improved mental health
SROI Network
The new interests and motivation
leads to improved relationships
Individuals reporting better relationships
as a result of this project
Cost of relationship counselling (6
sessions)
Social Impact
Scotland
£255.00
Greater wellbeing of service users
means that family members worry
less about their loved one
Individuals reporting greater wellbeing
as a result of this project
Counselling for stress related to
concerns
Social Impact
Scotland
£480.00
2
Local
community
Govt.
Partnerships
Orgs.
Health Orgs.
Stronger and more connected
community
Stronger and more connected
community
Cost of providing two state funded
community development workers
(average JNC rates)
Less harm from pollution,
congestion and accidents
Evident that less use of cars will reduce
pollution, congestion and road traffic
accidents
Cost of pollution, congestion and
accidents in UK proportioned to
Bristol population
Freeing up resources associated
with social problems
Better levels of service provided
as a result of partnering with other
organisations
Service users have less need to
report to GP's
Health, pollution, safety etc
Self reported statements of more
successful operating as a result of
engagement with Life Cycle UK
Self reported statements that
beneficiaries have less need to attend
GP surgery.
JNC Youth and
Community
Worker pay
scales
Automotive
Council UK
£56,922.00
£100,000,000.00
Covered in other sections i.e. health orgs, community
Value of improved learning and
operations for an organisation
Stonebridge.UK
£309.09
Average annual cost per person
of addressing health problems
Personal Social
Services
Research Unit
£593.50
3
Table 4: Outcomes
Outcomes
Service users
Better relationships and less isolated
Feeling more positive and less anxiety and depression
More confidence and involvement
Sense of achievement
Skills, safety and independence as a result of cycling
Staff and management
New skills and job satisfaction
Volunteers
Improved well-being
Friends and family
Improved relationships
Less worry about their friend/family member
Local community
Stronger and more connected community
Less environmental harm – pollution, congestion, accidents
Government
Freeing up resources associated with social problems
Quantity
Prop.
Value
Drop Off
328
328
874
874
1,530
15%
15%
40%
40%
70%
£769.60
£2,080.00
£1,037.34
£2,563.60
£100.00
10
70%
£8,300.00 33%
40
80%
£1,195.00
33%
1,500
2,500
30%
50%
£255.00
£480.00
33%
33%
1
100%
100%
£56,922.00
£100,000,000.00
33%
33%
33%
33%
33%
33%
33%
COVERED IN OTHER SECTIONS
Partnership organisations
Better levels of service provided as a result of partnering with
other organisations
1
100%
£309.09
33%
Health organisations
Individuals not reporting to GP's because of improved
conditions
1
100%
£593.50
33%
4
Table 5: Attribution
ATTRIBUTION - How much of the outcome is due to the organisation?
Value
Service users
Better relationships and less isolated
Feeling more positive and less anxiety and depression
More confidence and independence
Sense of achievement
Skills, safety and independence as a result of cycling
Staff and management
New skills and job satisfaction
20%
20%
20%
20%
80%
80%
Volunteers
Improved well-being
30%
Friends and family
Improved relationships
Less worry about their friend/family member
50%
50%
Local community
Stronger and more connected community
Less environmental harm – pollution, congestion, accidents
Government
Freeing up resources associated with social problems
0.1%
0.1%
NA
Partnership organisations
Better levels of service provided as a result of partnering with other organisations
30%
Health organisations
Individuals not reporting to GP's because of improved conditions
30%
5
Table 6: Deadweight
DEADWEIGHT - What would have happened if the intervention never took place?
Value
Service users
Better relationships and less isolated
Feeling more positive and less anxiety and depression
More confidence and independence
Sense of achievement
Skills, safety and independence as a result of cycling
Staff and management
New skills and job satisfaction
5%
5%
5%
5%
2%
20%
Volunteers
Improved well-being
20%
Friends and family
Improved relationships
Less worry about their friend/family member
5%
5%
Local community
Stronger and more connected community
Less environmental harm – pollution, congestion, accidents
Government
Freeing up resources associated with social problems
0%
5%
NA
Partnership organisations
Better levels of service provided as a result of partnering with other organisations
0%
Health organisations
Individuals not reporting to GP's because of improved conditions
10%
6
Table 7: Impact Map
Stakeholder
Service users
Staff and
management
Volunteers
Family and
friends
Local
community
Government
Partnership
organisations
Health
organisations
Outcome
Better relationships and less isolated
Feeling more positive and less anxiety and depression
More confidence and independence
Sense of achievement
Skills, safety and independence as a result of cycling
New skills and job satisfaction
Quantity
Proxy
Deadweight
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.02
0.2
Attribution
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.8
0.8
Displacement Impact
0
£47,961.47
0
£129,625.60
0
£172,260.68
0
£425,711.42
0
£119,952.00
0
£53,120.00
328
328
874
874
1,530
10
£769.60
£2,080.00
£1,037.34
£2,563.60
£100.00
£8,300.00
Improved well-being
Improved relationships
40
1,500
£1,195.00 0.2
£255.00 0.05
0.3
0.5
0
0
£11,472.00
£181,687.50
Less worry about their friend/family member
Stronger and more connected community; social
cohesion
Less environmental harm – pollution, congestion,
accidents
Freeing up resources associated with social problems
Better levels of service provided as a result of
partnering with other organisations
Individuals not reporting to GP's because of improved
conditions
2,500
1
0.05
£56,922.00 0
0.5
0.01
0
0
£570,000.00
£569.22
1 £100,000,000.00 0.05
0.01
0
£950,000.00
£480.00
1
£309.09 0
0.3
COVERED IN OTHER SECTIONS
0
£92.73
1
£593.50 0.1
0.3
0
Total output
Total input
NPV
£160.24
£2,662,612.86
£330,950.00
5.25E-08
SROI ratio
£8.05
0
Notes
1
Annual cost of congestion for UK are £12bn; road accidents cost £9.3bn, and poor air quality costs between £4.5 and £10.6bn. Automotive Council UK (2011) ‘Intelligent
Mobility: A National Need?’ http://www.smmt.co.uk/2011/12/automotive-council-report-calls-for-new-approach-to-tackle-road-congestion/
1