Policy Governance & Accountability - Non Profits
Qualityworld
Aiming for transparency
Quality improvement activity in the voluntary sector continues to develop. Through its agenda for action, the National Council for Voluntary Organisations' Quality Standards Task Group (QSTG) is helping voluntary organisations to use quality systems effectively. Jane Hatfield, project manager, and Rona Parsons, policy officer with QSTG, describe current activity and look to the future
The introduction of best value to local authorities, a sceptical public and 'funders' (organisations, such as trusts, corporations, and central and local government, which proffer income to the voluntary sector) who want value for money, has contributed greatly to the pressure on organisations over the last decade to demonstrate the quality and effectiveness of their work. In response, many voluntary organisations have striven to gain external recognition with, for example, IIP, or carried out self-assessment using tools such as the EFQM excellence model1 and the QA system PQASSO.
The last decade was marked by a conspicuous cultural change in voluntary organisations: a significant increase in the internal motivation to continuously improve, and a greater customer focus to ensure satisfaction from service users and other stakeholders. Staff members and volunteers are now conscious of wasted effort error, negligence and slipshod work.
Active interest
An independent board of senior practitioners from the voluntary, public and private sectors, QSTG was established in 1997 to encourage voluntary organisations to use the most appropriate quality systems and focus on continuous improvement.
To map the use of quality systems in the voluntary sector, QSTG surveyed 150 organisations in August 1999, using a questionnaire, interviews, workshops and a literature review to gather data.
The subsequent report, 'In pursuit of excellence - measuring quality in the voluntary sector'2, showed a surprisingly high level of activity around quality issues. While 36 per cent of organisations were using published standards, and over 50 per cent were developing their own standards, the majority were using 'off-the-shelf quality systems (particularly IIP, PQASSO and the excellence model), although many were in the early stages of using them.
As one measure of the impact of its work QSTG was keen to monitor the take-up of major quality systems through the registration bodies or 'owners' of the various standards and systems. However, this proved difficult, since most do not currently have a separate classification for voluntary sector organisations. Rough figures were obtained for the original report and were updated in August 2000. In particular, it has been difficult to obtain accurate numbers of voluntary sector organisations with ISO 9000. Where figures were obtained, they showed positive trends, year on year. Investors in People UK has committed to upgrading its database in 2001, to allow accurate data to be collated on the number of voluntary organisations to have achieved the standard.
The research revealed that voluntary organisations take a pragmatic approach to existing quality systems, often adapting them to suit their own needs. One such organisation, Ockenden International, tailored PQASSO to its requirements: 'We are adapting and rephrasing the standards so they are relevant to our own organisation.' The Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations has developed its own framework 'the big picture' - using the excellence model concepts of 'enablers' (what organisations do) and 'results' (what they achieve), for organisations to self-assess:
direction
processes
stakeholder satisfaction
Stakeholders, for example, are defined as end users, paid staff, volunteers, funding contributors, partner organisations and those with key influence.
Birmingham Voluntary Service Council based its 'quality first' programme (for very small voluntary and community organisations without paid staff) on PQASSO. An exciting recent step has seen this programme adopted by a Russian community development organisation, Dobraya Volya. With funding from the Department for International Development, it is now being translated for use as part of a quality programme in Ekaterinberg, Siberia.
Although the general trend is encouraging, the extreme diversity of the sector and its often idiosyncratic approach to quality has resulted in a complicated mix of standards.
Blooming hybrids
There are potential dangers in the number of quality systems and hybrids currently in use; funders choosing between charities may find it difficult to compare and assess whether they are spending their money wisely. QSTG is currently working on a report which explores the role funders can play in encouraging quality improvement. Early findings suggest there may be added complications; few funders share a common quality language or agenda. QSTG will encourage all funders to sustain quality improvement in the sector by assisting in the development of appropriate support to carry out quality measurement and, in some cases, training in action-planning.
Given that some funders are insisting on quality standards (at least ten local authorities have made PQASSO a condition of funding), pressure is growing to develop mutually acceptable quality measures and funding regimes.
New developments
In addition to individual organisations working on quality improvement, there have been a number of recent sector-wide initiatives: the development of a donor's charter, the piloting of a social auditing tool, publication of the second edition of PQASSO, the launch of a self-assessment workbook on the internet3 and continuing development of a benchmarking database.
Demystifying the theory and practice of quality improvement, which can alienate many people, has become a key driver for QSTG. This is a challenge, particularly where models have been developed for other sectors. However, some voluntary organisations want to use systems that have been tried and tested outside the sector, which allows the possibility of benchmarking with different types of organisations.
Finding a system or measure to suit subsections of larger charities, let alone the whole voluntary sector, has proved difficult. However, the donors' charter, which is being developed by the Institute of Charity Fundraising Managers, aims to do just this. Like the quality mark introduced by the Legal Services Commission in 1999, which is an endorsement for agencies from all sectors that provide legal advice and information, it will set out the minimum standards of professionalism expected from fundraisers. Over 80 voluntary organisations have already achieved the quality mark or applied for recognition.
Control versus empowerment
The question remains whether the introduction of quality systems and standards to the voluntary sector will empower organisations to improve themselves, in line with their own values, or whether standards will be imposed (by funders or through peer pressure) and used to control the market? Organisations providing social or healthcare under contract from local and health authorities (a significant percentage of the sector) are far more vulnerable to being 'controlled' in this way. There is evidence that a number of local authorities are demanding that voluntary organisations use PQASSO as a condition of their funding. Some organisations welcome this, provided it is done in partnership; others, feeling that the voluntary sector should be in control of its own quality improvement, are furious.
There can be a serious tension between the increasing need for organisations to demonstrate openness with stakeholders and their need to improve performance or service delivery. Though the motivation for using a quality system or for developing or using standards often encompasses both, experience suggests that many organisations prefer to take some time (up to a few years) to improve their working methods without public scrutiny; the media is quick to pick up on charities that make mistakes. In addition, some quality systems are biased towards improving accountability over improving performance.
Despite the increase in the UK voluntary sector's uptake of off-the-shelf quality systems, there has been relatively little evaluation of practical success. The growth in use of PQASSO, with little marketing, suggests that positive experiences are driving a word-of-mouth popularity. However, research with funders reveals that they are wary about whether systems 'work' in practice, and that choosing the right one, as well as committing the time necessary to bring them to fruition, concerns many voluntary organisations.
Certification schism
According to our research, the sector is divided about whether self-assessment or approach. Some argue that unless improvement is internalised and internally motivated, it is worthless; others insist that an assessment must stand up to outside scrutiny. Social auditing may bridge this gap, as not only does it require self-assessment and demand engagement with stakeholders to develop performance indicators, but it can also involve external verification and publication of results against performance indicators. As yet, it is relatively unknown outside the NGO (non-governmental organisation) or internationally focused part of the sector.
This debate links to the efficacy-versus-accountability tension, as individual donors, supporters and some funders are likely to be more convinced by external verification, whereas improvements in performance usually stem from a genuine culture of self-improvement.
Here to stay - the issue that won't go away! Demands to see evidence of improvement in all sectors will not go away and the use of quality systems and standards in the voluntary sector will undoubtedly increase. There may be growth in the development and use of consumer-focused standards, based on service standards, rather than a concern with the nature of the organisation behind its service (ie applying to statutory, private and voluntary organisations alike). It is likely that obtaining this sort of service-specific, externally verified standard will be linked to funding, as is the case with the quality mark.
A key area of concern for the public is fundraising standards; the donors' charter may not be enough to satisfy donors and there may be pressure to develop a fundraising standard for the sector. Some work on this has already been done, but there are concerns that this might become yet another advantage for the wealthier charities with resources to invest in an externally verified standard.
Rehab for voluntary organisations
Finally, there is likely to be an increasing focus on outcomes, where the ability to be pro-active in measuring voluntary organisations' outcomes is crucial. Signs are encouraging (for example, in the drugs and alcohol field) that the benefits of trying to measure outcomes far outweigh the risks.
While some may criticise the diversity of quality activity as indicating a lack of focus, it is encouraging that the voluntary sector no longer appears to question the validity of work on quality improvement. It now looks for support from funders, regulators and other stakeholders to ensure that the whole sector and its beneficiaries can begin to reap the benefits.
Case Studies
Case study 1: the RSPB
Case study 2: the YMCA
Notes:
(1) A guide to the model, Excellence in View, has been developed specifically for the voluntary sector. It is priced £10 and is available from Hamilton House Mailings, tel: 01536 399 016,fax: 01536 399 012
(2) Copies of the full report, priced £10, are available from Hamilton House Mailings. A free summary can be downloaded from the NCVO website: www.ncvo-vol.org.ukwww.ncvo-vol.org.uk
(3) 'The QSTG Self-Assessment Workbook' can be downloaded free from the NCVO website www.ncvo-vol.org.uk. Printed copies priced £5 are available from Hamilton House Mailings.
Jane Hatfield is project manager of QSTG. Prior to joining the group, Jane worked in the HIV/AIDS field with the all-party parliamentary group on AIDS. She has experience of voluntary sector services in the NHS and of development work in the voluntary and community sectors.
Rona Parsons is policy officer with QSTG. Previously, she was responsible for piloting the excellence model within the Royal National Institute for the Blind. She has marketing experience in the private sector.
QSTG contact information:tel: 020 7520 2540e-mail: qstg@ncvo-vol.org.ukWeb: www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/main/about/does/qs.html
Note (January 2005): The QSTG website can now be found at http://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/asp/search/microsites/main.aspx?siteID=3&sID=29
© Qualityworld February 2001
Aiming for transparency
Quality improvement activity in the voluntary sector continues to develop. Through its agenda for action, the National Council for Voluntary Organisations' Quality Standards Task Group (QSTG) is helping voluntary organisations to use quality systems effectively. Jane Hatfield, project manager, and Rona Parsons, policy officer with QSTG, describe current activity and look to the future
The introduction of best value to local authorities, a sceptical public and 'funders' (organisations, such as trusts, corporations, and central and local government, which proffer income to the voluntary sector) who want value for money, has contributed greatly to the pressure on organisations over the last decade to demonstrate the quality and effectiveness of their work. In response, many voluntary organisations have striven to gain external recognition with, for example, IIP, or carried out self-assessment using tools such as the EFQM excellence model1 and the QA system PQASSO.
The last decade was marked by a conspicuous cultural change in voluntary organisations: a significant increase in the internal motivation to continuously improve, and a greater customer focus to ensure satisfaction from service users and other stakeholders. Staff members and volunteers are now conscious of wasted effort error, negligence and slipshod work.
Active interest
An independent board of senior practitioners from the voluntary, public and private sectors, QSTG was established in 1997 to encourage voluntary organisations to use the most appropriate quality systems and focus on continuous improvement.
To map the use of quality systems in the voluntary sector, QSTG surveyed 150 organisations in August 1999, using a questionnaire, interviews, workshops and a literature review to gather data.
The subsequent report, 'In pursuit of excellence - measuring quality in the voluntary sector'2, showed a surprisingly high level of activity around quality issues. While 36 per cent of organisations were using published standards, and over 50 per cent were developing their own standards, the majority were using 'off-the-shelf quality systems (particularly IIP, PQASSO and the excellence model), although many were in the early stages of using them.
As one measure of the impact of its work QSTG was keen to monitor the take-up of major quality systems through the registration bodies or 'owners' of the various standards and systems. However, this proved difficult, since most do not currently have a separate classification for voluntary sector organisations. Rough figures were obtained for the original report and were updated in August 2000. In particular, it has been difficult to obtain accurate numbers of voluntary sector organisations with ISO 9000. Where figures were obtained, they showed positive trends, year on year. Investors in People UK has committed to upgrading its database in 2001, to allow accurate data to be collated on the number of voluntary organisations to have achieved the standard.
The research revealed that voluntary organisations take a pragmatic approach to existing quality systems, often adapting them to suit their own needs. One such organisation, Ockenden International, tailored PQASSO to its requirements: 'We are adapting and rephrasing the standards so they are relevant to our own organisation.' The Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations has developed its own framework 'the big picture' - using the excellence model concepts of 'enablers' (what organisations do) and 'results' (what they achieve), for organisations to self-assess:
direction
processes
stakeholder satisfaction
Stakeholders, for example, are defined as end users, paid staff, volunteers, funding contributors, partner organisations and those with key influence.
Birmingham Voluntary Service Council based its 'quality first' programme (for very small voluntary and community organisations without paid staff) on PQASSO. An exciting recent step has seen this programme adopted by a Russian community development organisation, Dobraya Volya. With funding from the Department for International Development, it is now being translated for use as part of a quality programme in Ekaterinberg, Siberia.
Although the general trend is encouraging, the extreme diversity of the sector and its often idiosyncratic approach to quality has resulted in a complicated mix of standards.
Blooming hybrids
There are potential dangers in the number of quality systems and hybrids currently in use; funders choosing between charities may find it difficult to compare and assess whether they are spending their money wisely. QSTG is currently working on a report which explores the role funders can play in encouraging quality improvement. Early findings suggest there may be added complications; few funders share a common quality language or agenda. QSTG will encourage all funders to sustain quality improvement in the sector by assisting in the development of appropriate support to carry out quality measurement and, in some cases, training in action-planning.
Given that some funders are insisting on quality standards (at least ten local authorities have made PQASSO a condition of funding), pressure is growing to develop mutually acceptable quality measures and funding regimes.
New developments
In addition to individual organisations working on quality improvement, there have been a number of recent sector-wide initiatives: the development of a donor's charter, the piloting of a social auditing tool, publication of the second edition of PQASSO, the launch of a self-assessment workbook on the internet3 and continuing development of a benchmarking database.
Demystifying the theory and practice of quality improvement, which can alienate many people, has become a key driver for QSTG. This is a challenge, particularly where models have been developed for other sectors. However, some voluntary organisations want to use systems that have been tried and tested outside the sector, which allows the possibility of benchmarking with different types of organisations.
Finding a system or measure to suit subsections of larger charities, let alone the whole voluntary sector, has proved difficult. However, the donors' charter, which is being developed by the Institute of Charity Fundraising Managers, aims to do just this. Like the quality mark introduced by the Legal Services Commission in 1999, which is an endorsement for agencies from all sectors that provide legal advice and information, it will set out the minimum standards of professionalism expected from fundraisers. Over 80 voluntary organisations have already achieved the quality mark or applied for recognition.
Control versus empowerment
The question remains whether the introduction of quality systems and standards to the voluntary sector will empower organisations to improve themselves, in line with their own values, or whether standards will be imposed (by funders or through peer pressure) and used to control the market? Organisations providing social or healthcare under contract from local and health authorities (a significant percentage of the sector) are far more vulnerable to being 'controlled' in this way. There is evidence that a number of local authorities are demanding that voluntary organisations use PQASSO as a condition of their funding. Some organisations welcome this, provided it is done in partnership; others, feeling that the voluntary sector should be in control of its own quality improvement, are furious.
There can be a serious tension between the increasing need for organisations to demonstrate openness with stakeholders and their need to improve performance or service delivery. Though the motivation for using a quality system or for developing or using standards often encompasses both, experience suggests that many organisations prefer to take some time (up to a few years) to improve their working methods without public scrutiny; the media is quick to pick up on charities that make mistakes. In addition, some quality systems are biased towards improving accountability over improving performance.
Despite the increase in the UK voluntary sector's uptake of off-the-shelf quality systems, there has been relatively little evaluation of practical success. The growth in use of PQASSO, with little marketing, suggests that positive experiences are driving a word-of-mouth popularity. However, research with funders reveals that they are wary about whether systems 'work' in practice, and that choosing the right one, as well as committing the time necessary to bring them to fruition, concerns many voluntary organisations.
Certification schism
According to our research, the sector is divided about whether self-assessment or approach. Some argue that unless improvement is internalised and internally motivated, it is worthless; others insist that an assessment must stand up to outside scrutiny. Social auditing may bridge this gap, as not only does it require self-assessment and demand engagement with stakeholders to develop performance indicators, but it can also involve external verification and publication of results against performance indicators. As yet, it is relatively unknown outside the NGO (non-governmental organisation) or internationally focused part of the sector.
This debate links to the efficacy-versus-accountability tension, as individual donors, supporters and some funders are likely to be more convinced by external verification, whereas improvements in performance usually stem from a genuine culture of self-improvement.
Here to stay - the issue that won't go away! Demands to see evidence of improvement in all sectors will not go away and the use of quality systems and standards in the voluntary sector will undoubtedly increase. There may be growth in the development and use of consumer-focused standards, based on service standards, rather than a concern with the nature of the organisation behind its service (ie applying to statutory, private and voluntary organisations alike). It is likely that obtaining this sort of service-specific, externally verified standard will be linked to funding, as is the case with the quality mark.
A key area of concern for the public is fundraising standards; the donors' charter may not be enough to satisfy donors and there may be pressure to develop a fundraising standard for the sector. Some work on this has already been done, but there are concerns that this might become yet another advantage for the wealthier charities with resources to invest in an externally verified standard.
Rehab for voluntary organisations
Finally, there is likely to be an increasing focus on outcomes, where the ability to be pro-active in measuring voluntary organisations' outcomes is crucial. Signs are encouraging (for example, in the drugs and alcohol field) that the benefits of trying to measure outcomes far outweigh the risks.
While some may criticise the diversity of quality activity as indicating a lack of focus, it is encouraging that the voluntary sector no longer appears to question the validity of work on quality improvement. It now looks for support from funders, regulators and other stakeholders to ensure that the whole sector and its beneficiaries can begin to reap the benefits.
Case Studies
Case study 1: the RSPB
Case study 2: the YMCA
Notes:
(1) A guide to the model, Excellence in View, has been developed specifically for the voluntary sector. It is priced £10 and is available from Hamilton House Mailings, tel: 01536 399 016,fax: 01536 399 012
(2) Copies of the full report, priced £10, are available from Hamilton House Mailings. A free summary can be downloaded from the NCVO website: www.ncvo-vol.org.ukwww.ncvo-vol.org.uk
(3) 'The QSTG Self-Assessment Workbook' can be downloaded free from the NCVO website www.ncvo-vol.org.uk. Printed copies priced £5 are available from Hamilton House Mailings.
Jane Hatfield is project manager of QSTG. Prior to joining the group, Jane worked in the HIV/AIDS field with the all-party parliamentary group on AIDS. She has experience of voluntary sector services in the NHS and of development work in the voluntary and community sectors.
Rona Parsons is policy officer with QSTG. Previously, she was responsible for piloting the excellence model within the Royal National Institute for the Blind. She has marketing experience in the private sector.
QSTG contact information:tel: 020 7520 2540e-mail: qstg@ncvo-vol.org.ukWeb: www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/main/about/does/qs.html
Note (January 2005): The QSTG website can now be found at http://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/asp/search/microsites/main.aspx?siteID=3&sID=29
© Qualityworld February 2001
posted by T at 5:35 pm
