Private funders cannot rescue youth sector ravaged by cuts, MPs told
Andy Hillier
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
The private sector and social investment won't be able to plug the gap left by cuts in public spending on services for young people, the education select committee was warned today (30 March).
Speaking at the inquiry into services for young people, Martin Brookes, chief executive of New Philanthropy Capital, said: "The other [non-state] funders can’t provide enough protection — the scale of the cuts organisations are facing is just too acute."
Brookes added that private donors were reluctant to fund services previously delivered by the state and businesses could not be relied on to increase their investment in the charitable sector. "Corporate funding of charities is pretty weak and declining, and it gets tied in with marketing rather than general philanthropy," he said.
Louise Savell, associate director at Social Finance, said that social impact bonds held little hope for mainstream youth projects. "If government was sufficiently convinced that numbers of heads coming through the doors of a youth centre or numbers of individuals coming through a certain literacy course was indicative of future benefit to the public sector, then arguably they’d be prepared to pay for it," she said. "My guess is that they would not be prepared for that."
Instead, she said that the government and other funders would be more inclined to use social impact bonds to fund programmes where there were clear savings to society. For example, programmes that reduced antisocial behaviour or youth unemployment, or improved school outcomes.
Earlier, the committee heard evidence about the need for paid and professionally qualified youth workers. It also heard evidence from Paul Oginsky, government adviser on the National Citizen Service, about the need for the programme.
Brookes added that private donors were reluctant to fund services previously delivered by the state and businesses could not be relied on to increase their investment in the charitable sector. "Corporate funding of charities is pretty weak and declining, and it gets tied in with marketing rather than general philanthropy," he said.
Louise Savell, associate director at Social Finance, said that social impact bonds held little hope for mainstream youth projects. "If government was sufficiently convinced that numbers of heads coming through the doors of a youth centre or numbers of individuals coming through a certain literacy course was indicative of future benefit to the public sector, then arguably they’d be prepared to pay for it," she said. "My guess is that they would not be prepared for that."
Instead, she said that the government and other funders would be more inclined to use social impact bonds to fund programmes where there were clear savings to society. For example, programmes that reduced antisocial behaviour or youth unemployment, or improved school outcomes.
Earlier, the committee heard evidence about the need for paid and professionally qualified youth workers. It also heard evidence from Paul Oginsky, government adviser on the National Citizen Service, about the need for the programme.
