Commissioning

Attributing outcomes in payment by results contracts

When outcomes are the basis for payment, it is important that the provider receiving the payments is responsible for achieving the outcomes. Targets should not be unduly influenced by external factors (such as the state of the economy for Work Programme type schemes) or by the work of other agencies who are not receiving payment from the contract.

UK aims for £1billion Social Impact Bonds

It’s no surprise that the government is such a strong supporter of social investment; at a time when investment in public services is being cut substantially year after year, #socinv is a key source of extra funding.

Understanding the market for payment by results

commissioners are urged to consider whether potential providers have sufficient financial resources to bid for a contract which requires considerable initial investment and where payments are delayed until the achievement of outcome measures has been verified.

Can payment by results transfer risk?

It is not possible to transfer all risk, be that risk reputational, practical or financial. Commissioners retain their responsibility for local citizens receiving a good quality and effective service.

Can payment by results stimulate innovation?

00000 PbR and innovation This is the fifth post in a blog series looking at the lessons I’ve learned from a recent review of the payment by results literature. One of the main reasons that proponents of PbR champion the approach is because of its potential to stimulate new answers to old problems. But do PbR schemes stimulate innovation? [button-blue url=”http://www.russellwebster.com/Lessons%20from%20the%20Payment%20by%20Results%20literature%20Russell%20Webster%202016.pdf” target=”_self” position=”left”]You can download the full literature review here[/button-blue]  [divider] New answers to old problems? Politicians and social investors have …

Can payment by results stimulate innovation?Read More »

Can payment by results improve outcomes?

The idea is that by commissioning outcomes rather than outputs, commissioners allow provider to work in any way they see fit, safe in the knowledge that if the outcomes are not achieved, they do not have to make payment. But do PbR schemes achieve better outcomes?

Why commission by payment by results?

00000The rationale for PbR This is the second post in a blog series looking at the lessons I’ve learned from a recent review of the payment by results literature and it focuses on understanding the different rationales for the PbR approach to commissioning. [button-blue url=”http://www.russellwebster.com/Lessons%20from%20the%20Payment%20by%20Results%20literature%20Russell%20Webster%202016.pdf” target=”_self” position=”left”]You can download the full literature review here[/button-blue] [divider] One of the main things which became clear to me from reviewing the literature was that commissioners used the PbR approach for …

Why commission by payment by results?Read More »

Payment by Results: Lessons from the Literature

The association of many PbR schemes with very robust cost-cutting and/or the privatisation of previously public markets has caused considerable controversy and confusion which has enabled researchers working from the same data to reach opposing conclusions about the same initiative.

Prisons and prevention

New IPPR report advocates devolving responsibility for low level offenders to local authorities and City mayors. But do we need another probation service?

The official history of Transforming Rehabilitation so far

There have been concerns about the pace of change, about the danger of fragmentation and about IT systems. The MoJ has emphasised the importance of the voluntary sector in the CRC partnerships; however, they have been concerns about lack of clarity for that sector about what their role will be.

Payment by results is not a free lunch

There’s no free lunch. Yet across the country, advocates of Pay for Success (PFS), or Social Impact Bonds (SIBs), serve up this alternative private financing model as a cost-free, risk-free silver bullet to support critical, yet underfunded, public services.

Final evaluation of Peterborough prison PbR pilot

The pilot was widely claimed to have been set up to stimulate innovation, although it was based on a previous model already developed by St Giles trust. Nevertheless, the SIB funding was found to be flexible and allowed staff to use a personalised budget approach to resolve issues for individual service users as well as incentivising engagement.

Close your account?

Your account will be closed and all data will be permanently deleted and cannot be recovered. Are you sure?

Select Language

Keep up-to-date on drugs and crime

You will get one email with a new article every day.

Scroll to Top