RESULTADOS DESCRIPTIVOS

Since the 1990s, public services, including those for children and young people, have seen an increase in the use of market principles. The aim was to replicate the putative efficiency imposed by the price mechanism on the understanding that it would lead to cost effectiveness. Government launched a series of efficiency reviews. The first incarnation of the efficiency savings agenda ran from 2004 to 2007 and was known as the Gershon Efficiency Review. Departments ‘over-delivered’ on their efficiency-savings targets during this period, achieving £26.5 million, although studies have cast doubt on these figures.103 _{The real impact of these ‘savings’ on public services has yet}

to be quantified with some evidence suggesting that they placed already-stretched services under pressure, leading to cuts in services.104_{nef has also previously argued that the efficiency agenda runs the risk of generating false}

economies, where savings in the short term come at the expense of lower quality and, hence, poorer outcomes and greater costs in the long run. This is particularly problematic when seeking a more preventative system which requires us to look at the outcomes from public services for future generations.

What we do know is that the voluntary and community sector (VCS) is experiencing widespread cuts to preventative services for children and young people.105 _{Of 173 local authorities and voluntary and community groups surveyed in}

2007 across 60 local authority areas, 68 per cent reported cuts in the previous 12 months, with 40 per cent reporting that efficiency savings were the single greatest cause of cuts. Recent studies of the VCS in Oxford and Greater Manchester suggest similar dynamics.106,107 _{The 2009 budget has seen a ramping up of the efficiency-savings}

drive, which is likely to exacerbate matters, with Children’s Trusts recommending that they be achieved ‘through the potential for economies of scale within and outside the local area’.108

Summary

Although it was beyond the scope of this research to project the social value that will be generated by our investment proposals at the macro level, we have sought to measure the economic and social returns from investments at the micro level to give an indication of the benefits generated to a broader range of stakeholders than just the state.

Our findings indicate that if we adopt our combined approach – to improve

children’s external conditions while at the same time enhancing their psychological resources and social functioning – we will see benefits to children, their families, communities and government departments. In conclusion, we suggest our investment proposals not only make economic sense, they will also bring tangible improvements to the quality and experience of people’s lives.

But getting better at distinguishing between effective and ineffective initiatives requires a significant shift in the mechanisms we use to inform policy and service decisions. Primarily, this involves reconfiguring our commissioning and measurement frameworks to focus on outcomes. The need to be proactive about addressing the challenges head-on has become more acute by the onset of the recession. Not only have we shown that our investment proposals can generate returns at a time when public money is short, we have also shown the significant social benefits brought from promoting the factors – both ‘external’ and ‘internal’ – that equip our children and families with the capabilities and experience to ‘bounce back’ from the challenges that lie ahead.

In Section 5, we draw together a series of recommendations which, if implemented, will set in train the transition to ensure these economic and social benefits are delivered to all.

We started with four main research questions. To address them, we have combined economic analysis with SROI assessments, case study investigations with scientific literature review, and citizens’ jury findings with guidance from the Young People’s Reference Group and the Expert Learning Panel. We have shown that to be successful, policies designed to achieve positive change for children, families and communities must combine consideration of the structural factors affecting the circumstances of their lives, together with the psychological and social aspects of their well-being. In summary, we have highlighted the need to:

P Invest in targeted interventions that we know work for our most vulnerable children to improve outcomes and short-circuit the intergenerational cycle of disadvantage.

P Invest in high-quality universal services and parental provisions to build the foundations for a more equitable and well-functioning society over the medium and longer term.

P Reshape targeted and universal services so that they build on the assets and strengths of children, young people and their families as well as address their needs.

We have also demonstrated the need to remove the barriers which stand in the way of change and which hamper the scale and speed of progress that needs to be made.

Proposals for reform

Throughout our research, we have found that the challenge which faces

governments is less about building consensus on the need for change, and more about knowing the shape it should take and how it can best be achieved. Our key proposals for reform are targeted towards all levels of government throughout the UK. We recognise, however, that others – parents, carers, grandparents, siblings, friends, neighbours, community members, business leaders and more – all have a role to play in influencing the well-being and long-term outcomes for children and young people. A number of our recommendations to governments are therefore designed to enable these stakeholders to also play a positive role.

Our proposals are grouped into three ‘reform packages’, each designed to respond to the evidence on what is needed and to tackle the barriers that stand in the way. Taken together these will better enable governments to create the conditions for high well-being and positive outcomes for all, both now and over the long term. We reiterate that our focus in this project was on identifying the changes needed with regard to the role of universal and targeted service provision in supporting the transition to a brighter future. Thus, we do not rule out the potential for other reforms to improve outcomes for children, families and communities but rather focus our attention here on service level changes.

5. Backing the future: recommendations for a

successful transition

This report has presented a compelling case for a change of