Roma Hooper of Make Justice Work sees commissioning as the key issue for payment by results

Share This Post

Share on twitter
Share on facebook
Share on linkedin
Share on email

In this latest in a series of short video interviews on payment by results, Roma Hooper, founder of Make Justice Work, gives her views on PbR in the criminal justice sector.

Roma argues that setting a level playing field for large and small organisations and making sure that commissioning does not squeeze out innovation are the main issues to get right if PbR is to improve the effectiveness of initiatives tackling re-offending.

Do you agree?

Make Justice Work has produced an interesting discussion document on PbR, Just Results, which can be downloaded for free.

You can follow Make Justice Work on Twitter – @Justice Campaign

 

You can see all the video interviews in this series with a wide range of viewpoints pro and con PbR from different perspectives here.

Share This Post

Share on twitter
Share on facebook
Share on linkedin
Share on email

Related posts

Infographics
PbR jargon demystified (4) S-Z

Last in a series of infographics which demystify the jargon and technical terms associated with the payment by results commissioning model.

Payment by Results
PbR jargon demystified (1) A-F

First in a series of infographics which demystify the jargon and technical terms associated with the payment by results commissioning model.

Payment by Results
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?

Payment by Results
What did we learn from the Doncaster prison PbR reoffending pilot?

Sodexo and NACRO are the new partnership running the South Yorkshire Community Rehabilitation Company and it will be interesting to see whether they can have a positive impact on reducing the reoffending of released prisoners – their results will also be subject to a payment by results contracting approach, this time using both a binary and frequency (but not severity of offence) payment model.

Payment by Results
Whether to use payment by results? (NAO 2)

Are the NAO’s features a copper-bottomed guarantee of an effective PbR scheme? Or are you more in agreement with me that the attraction of PbR is the chance to move away from the straight-jacket of contemporary procurement and stimulate fresh approaches, under-written by the knowledge that if a provider fails, the commissioner doesn’t have to pay?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

keep informed

One email every day at noon