Location of Repository

Remodelling the third sector: advancing collaboration or competition in community-based initiatives?

By Linda Milbourne

Abstract

In the last decade, UK public agencies have increasingly been required to collaborate with non-state providers to deliver welfare services. Third sector organisations are now providers of services from early years to old age, taking a growing role in children and young people's services in socially deprived neighbourhoods. National policy has recognised third sector expertise in working with marginal groups of people. However, changing relationships with the state have drawn community organisations into new, often uncomfortable, organisational arrangements, affecting their work and their roles in relation to service users and community stakeholders.\ud \ud This article examines recent changes from a third sector perspective, drawing on data from a study of community-based organisations providing children and young people's services in deprived localities. It considers the changing environment of ‘new localism’ affecting these organisations, focusing on recent plans for local area commissioning of services.\ud \ud The article identifies some progress in supporting community services in deprived areas but illustrates how the continuing emphasis on competitive contracts and centrally driven frameworks undermines collaborative work and community trust. It argues that such mechanisms may serve short-term state interests but devalue the very community-level work, which is increasingly being promoted to address challenging social problems

Topics: geog
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Year: 2009
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.bbk.ac.uk.oai2:2854

Suggested articles

Preview

Citations

  1. (1997). 6,P .a n dK e n d a l l ,J .( doi
  2. (2007). A local-level playing field’, quoting Kevin Curley,
  3. (2002). A n h e i e r ,H .a n dK e n d a l l ,J .( doi
  4. (2005). A s p d e n ,J .a n dB i r c h ,D .( doi
  5. (2007). Annual sector report’, doi
  6. (1992). Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis: Emergence versus Forcing,
  7. (2007). C o l l e y ,H . ,B o e t z e l e n ,P . ,H o s k i n s ,B .a n dP a r v e v a ,T .( doi
  8. (2004). ChangeUp: Capacity Building and Infrastructure Framework for the Voluntary and Community Sector, London: Active Communities.
  9. (2002). Chasing the money: barriers to partnership working on short-term funded projects’,
  10. (2007). Child Poverty in Perspective, doi
  11. (2005). Children, families and inter-agency work: experiences of partnership work in primary education settings’, doi
  12. (2006). Children, Young People and Social Inclusion: Participation for What? doi
  13. (2003). Collaborative solutions or new policy problems: exploring multi-agency partnerships in education and health work’, doi
  14. (2006). Communities in partnership: developing a strategic voice’, doi
  15. (2006). Communities in partnership: developing a strategic voice’,Social Policy and doi
  16. (2006). Creating “opportunity for all?” New Labour, new localism and the opportunity society’, doi
  17. (2007). D o r l i n g ,D . ,R i g b y ,J . ,W h e e l e r ,B . ,b a l l a s ,D . ,T h o m a ,B . ,F a h m y ,E . ,G o r d o n ,D .a n dL u p t o n doi
  18. (2005). Devolution of services to children and families: the experience of NPOs in doi
  19. (2005). Disadvantaged by where you live? New Labour and neighbourhood renewal’, doi
  20. (2005). Education at the margins: a case study of voluntary provision for disaffected young people in one urban area’,
  21. Every Child Matters: Change for Children, London: Department for Education and Skills.
  22. (1989). Frameworks of Power,L o n d o n :S a g e . doi
  23. (1992). G l a s e r ,B .( doi
  24. (1998). Getting it Right Together:
  25. (2003). Globalization and Social Exclusion: Implications for Social Policy and Urban Governance,
  26. (2007). H a r a ,M .( 2007), ‘A local-level playing field’, quoting Kevin Curley,
  27. (2001). H a r r i s ,M .a n dR o c h e s t e r ,C .( doi
  28. (2002). H i l l s ,J . ,L eG r a n d ,J .a n dP i a c h a u d ,D .(
  29. (2006). How Voluntary and Community Organisations Can Help Transform Public Services,
  30. (2006). Introduction: themed section: partnerships, governance and citizenship’, doi
  31. (2009). IP address: 193.61.20.63 296 linda milbourne
  32. (2009). IP address: 193.61.20.63 remodelling the third sector 295 Carvel,
  33. (2009). IP address: 193.61.20.63 remodelling the third sector 297
  34. L u p t o n ,R . ,a n dP o w e r ,A .( 2005), ‘Disadvantaged by where you live? New Labour and neighbourhood renewal’, doi
  35. (1998). Local education governance, accountability and democracy in the UK’, doi
  36. (2000). Mainstream Services, Best Value and Social Inclusion, London: Local Government Information Unit with Warwick Business School.
  37. (2006). Making it real: a report of the pilot partnership improvement programme with voluntary and community organisations and local authorities’, Improvement and Development Agency,
  38. (2005). Mapping Local Authority Estates Using the Index of Local Conditions, London: Department of the Environment.
  39. (2005). Maximum feasible understanding – lessons from previous wars against poverty’, doi
  40. (2003). Motivation, Agency and Public Policy: Of Knights and Knaves, Pawns and Queens, doi
  41. (2005). New Labour’s approach to the voluntary sector: independence and the meaning of partnership’, doi
  42. (2005). New Localism – Citizen Engagement, Neighbourhoods and Public Services, Evidence from Local Government, London: Local and Regional Government Research Unit,
  43. (1997). Policy sociology and critical social research’, doi
  44. (2006). Promises, promises”: the experience of the voluntary and community sector within the Liverpool Children’s Fund’, doi
  45. (2007). Putting users and communities at the heart of public services’, http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/about_the_cabinet_office/ speeches/index.asp# userscomms (accessed 15/5/07).
  46. (2001). Regeneration: the role and impact of local development agencies’,
  47. (2007). Rowntree Foundation. doi
  48. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations, doi
  49. (2005). Social and political participation and inclusion’, doi
  50. (1997). Social Exclusion Unit: Purpose, Work, Priorities and Working Methods, London: Cabinet Office.
  51. (1997). Social Exclusion Unit: Purpose, Work, Priorities and Working Methods,L o n d o n : Cabinet Office.http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded:
  52. (2007). Social Inclusion for Young People: Breaking Down the Barriers,
  53. (2000). Strategies for social inclusion: promoting social cohesion or social justice?’, in P. Askonas and A. Stewart (eds), Social Inclusion: Possibilities and Tensions, doi
  54. (2000). Strategies for social inclusion: promoting social cohesion or social justice?’, inP.AskonasandA.Stewart(eds),SocialInclusion:PossibilitiesandTensions,Houndmills:
  55. (2006). Strong and Prosperous Communities, London: Office for Communities and Local Government.
  56. Sustainable Communities: People, Places and Prosperity, Five Year Plan,
  57. Sustainable Communities: People, Places and Prosperity, Five Year Plan,L o n d o n :
  58. (2003). T a y l o r ,M .( doi
  59. (2006). T i s d a l l ,K . ,D a v i s ,J .M . ,H i l l ,M .a n dP r o u t ,A .( doi
  60. (1999). The Audit Society, doi
  61. The Childcare Act, London: Department for Education and Skills.
  62. The Future Role of the Third Sector in Social and Economic Regeneration, London: Office of the Third Sector.
  63. The Future Role of the Third Sector in Social and Economic Regeneration,L o n d o n : Office of the Third Sector.
  64. (2007). The government–third sector interface in doi
  65. (2000). The mainstreaming of the third sector into public policy doi
  66. (2006). The role of nonprofit advocacy organizations in Australian democracy and policy governance’, doi
  67. (2002). The Role of the Voluntary and Community Sector in Service Delivery: A Cross-Cutting Review, London: Treasury Office.
  68. (2002). The State of Nonprofit America, doi
  69. (2004). The Third Sector in Europe, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Geddes,M.,Newman,I.,Root,A.,Thomas,D.andWoods,R.(2000),MainstreamServices,Best Value and Social Inclusion, London: Local Government Information Unit with Warwick Business School.
  70. (2002). Third Sector Policy at the Crossroads, doi
  71. (2001). Third Sector: The Contribution of Non-Profit and Cooperative Enterprise in doi
  72. (2001). Third Sector: The Contribution of Non-Profit and Cooperative Enterprise in Australia, doi
  73. (2002). Understanding Social Exclusion, Oxford: doi
  74. (2003). Understanding the Finance of Welfare, doi
  75. (2002). Unspoken exclusion: experiences of continued marginalisation from education among “hard to reach” groups of adults and children’, doi
  76. (2002). Unspoken exclusion: experiences of continued marginalisation from educationamong“hardtoreach”groupsofadultsandchildren’,BritishJournalofSociology of
  77. (2006). User outcomes and children’s services reform: ambiguity and conflict in the policy implementation process’, doi
  78. (2001). Voluntary Organisations and Social Policy in Britain, doi
  79. (2001). Voluntary organisations in a changing social policy environment’,
  80. (2007). Working collaboratively to build resilience: a CHAT approach’, doi
  81. Working with the Voluntary and Community Sector in Learning and Skills: Developing a Strategic Approach, London: Department for Education and Skills.
  82. Youth Matters: Next Steps,

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.