Open Age and New Philanthropy Capital

Open Age, the Charity I Chair, recently (7th June) organised a meeting to celebrate featuring as a case study in the recent New Philanthropy Capital report on the voluntary sector. The report led to Open Age being invited to speak on the Today programme.

The Mayor of Kensington and Chelsea hosted Open Age in his parlour.

I was given the opportunity to speak at the launch and made a few points

Context

• We have an ageing Society and are seeing significant growth in the number of oldest-old
• The Jubilee celebrations highlighted but one example of active ageing. But we know that not everyone is so fortunate and man suffer from significant heath and care challenges in old age.
• On the one hand the boroughs where Open Age Work are relatively wealthy. But there are huge wealth and health disparities. Open Age works with some of the most isolated people within the borough(s).
• There is a lot of evidence about "use it or lose it". We need to keep our mind and body active. Open Age is focussed on promoting and supporting active ageing.

Linking to the findings of the NPC report, I highlighted challenges ahead for Open Age.

Challenges
Relationship with the Statutory Sector: We benefit from a great relationship and are much more fortunate than many others in the voluntary sector in terms of funding. It is vital that the productive relationship we have with the statutory sector continue.
Funding Crises. The Economic crises, cuts in Central Government funding, Trusts with less money and a very competitive fundraising make for a challenging environment. There is less money to support our preventative work. Recent research in a London borough suggested that not impossible that in 20 years almost all of local authority funding would need to go on social care. This highlights the importance of investing in preventative health.
Risk The NPC report found that 90% of the voluntary sector are facing a riskier future. It is notable that for the last two years our trustees meetings have been dominated by issues around risk and fundraising. It is very difficult to fund core costs (Open Age have very small core team - finance, director). And it is also difficult to get the full costs recovered.
Volunteers Another key finding of NPC report was that charities were using more volunteers. Open Age always been a volunteer led organisation. We rely on volunteers to manage our reception and volunteers on the trustee board. We will always use volunteers. But it is important to note that there is a cost to volunteering. Volunteering isn't free. If we didn't support volunteers and treat them well, they would walk out on us.
Cuts The NPC report highlighted how the sector is having to make cuts/redundancies. Let me be frank. There is no guarantee that Open Age wont have to cut services this year. The organisation does not have huge reserves. NPC highlighted that 6 in 10 charities will need to dip into reserves. We may do but they wont keep us going for long. Open Age is well managed and delivering a huge amount. But it is vital that we work with statutory funders and others to try and ensure that services are not cut.


Open Age is however in a good place to meet the challenges.

• It has a fantastic staff team and great support from funders (including statutory sector)
• It attracts a lot of respect from opinion formers and decision makers.
• It runs some great projects
• It benefits from significant user involvement
• It is willing (indeed keen) to partner with others.

I finished by setting out three things we need to do to meet the challenges
FIND A BETTER WAY OF INVESTING IN PREVENTATIVE SERVICES: Investing in preventative services will save money in the long run. If we lose services like Open Age there is a risk that 5-10 years down the track you will see the cost in terms of additional social care costs. Lets find a way of working together to deliver new models, building on localism and big society. We want to work with local authorities and other commissioners.
LETS FIND WAYS OF SUPPORTING STAFF AND KEY VOLUNTEERS: We expect to work hard. And believe me, the staff and volunteers do. But the last three years have seen extraordinary pressure on the team. Our Board is forced to talk about funding at every meeting. But the bit we most enjoy is where a member of staff comes and talks through the services they provide and some of the case studies.
HELP US HELP YOU: We welcome feedback. We want to deliver for older people across London. Started off by saying we have great relationship with funders. Let's find ways of not just maintaining this but by developing it further.


The Open Age Website is available at: http://www.openage.org.uk/

Can a Big Society for all ages improve the reputation of our cities?

The summer riots across a number of English cities prompted Weber Shandwick to organise an event last week which explored the how the reputation of cities could be improved.

Increasing urbanisation is paradoxical. The seminar heard that cities have long been seen as crime ridden, dirty and dangerous (Charles Dickens is to blame apparently). And whilst they are perceived by many as good places to visit, the English seem to perceive that village life is more pleasant.

But cities exist for a reason. The exchange of ideas, cultures and experiences is far easier in a city than in a rural area. Cities drive economic growth. And despite the growth of social media, face to face contact is still extremely important.

Over the past 25-30 years the brand image of many UK cities has improved. Cities such as Manchester and Leeds have been transformed and London is playing a significant “World City” role. The seminar heard that whilst the reputation of UK cities is still not brilliant, they are improving.

But did the riots change all of this? For a couple of days across cities in England, people were afraid for their homes. In a world of 24 hour rolling news, cities and towns found themselves attracting the interest of a global audience.

Riots are not a new phenomenon. In fact one presenter pointed out that they might actually be “a necessary/inevitable evil of cities”. And we do forget about them quickly. Relatively recent riots in Paris are distant memories for many of us and the experience of them does not seem to have a long term impact on tourism.

One area of consensus in the seminar was that we don’t really know what caused the riots: “the reasons are complex” said at least three participants. Some cities, with similar characteristics to London, Birmingham and Manchester did not find themselves subject to riots. And certainly not all deprived communities saw rioting. There was an overwhelming view from delegates that the cause wasn’t spending cuts but long term and structural challenges. “Criminality, not cuts” argued one panel member.

The seminar heard slightly differing views as to the extent to which solutions lay in terms of the physical (buildings/built environment) or in terms of human capital. Some felt that “shiny buildings don’t improve the life chances of people without skills”, whilst others highlighted the importance of a good quality built environment in terms of engendering public pride. If people don't respect where they live they will trash it, argued one participant.

Government’s response to the people issue is, “Big Society”. And as one commentator pointed out, far more people were up cleaning the following day than rioting in the evening.

But ILC-UK research (1) by Dylan Kneale has highlighted significant challenges of engaging older people in the urban areas with the Big Society. The research found that those living in urban areas are less interested in politics and significantly less likely to vote in all or most local elections than those in rural areas, although much of his effect appeared driven by higher levels of disadvantage and inequality in urban areas.

The analysis of the British Social Attitudes Survey found that:
*Older people in urban areas were not as interested in politics – twice as many older people in urban areas said they had little or no interest in politics (35%) compared to older rural residents (18%).
*Not only were adults of all ages in urban areas less interested in politics, they were significantly less likely to vote in all or most local elections than those in rural areas.
*Older people in urban areas are significantly less likely to have access to the internet at home (two-fifths do) than older people in rural or suburban areas (over half do).

It’s not just about people of course. And the advocates for an improved investment in a better built environment have a strong case. Housman redesigned Paris to reduce crime for example. We are seeing increasing evidence of the case for lifetime neigbourhoods to deliver better built environment for all. The coalition Government must continue the previous Government’s work to ensure that the design of communities meets the needs of a changing demography. There is clearly a need for a long term strategy for the development of our built environment.

But as our research has highlighted, if Government is to engage Big Society in tackling the causes of the riots, they will need to invest in creating a more engaged urban community. People matter. We have to find a way of ensuring greater equality of engagement in urban areas.

One contributor to the seminar pointed out that far too often we look to Government to solve these societal ills (“do something”). There is undoubtedly a role for local and national government, but as the contributor concluded “The ‘doing something’ people should be all of us”.

David Sinclair

(This blog was also published at www.ilcuk.org.uk)

1) http://www.ilcuk.org.uk/record.jsp?type=news&ID=139

Weber Shandwick organised an event on “Restoring the Reputation of our Cities” on 7th September 2011. Speakers included: Andrew Carter, Director of Policy & Research, Centre for Cities; Chris Murray, Director, Core Cities; Tony Travers, Director of the Greater London group at the London School of Economics and Damian Wild, Editor, Estates Gazette.