Introduction: outcome-based payment and the reform of public services

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Albertson ◽  
Chris Fox ◽  
Chris O’leary ◽  
Gary Painter ◽  
Kimberly Bailey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Impact ◽  
Social Outcomes ◽  
Reform Agenda ◽  
The Public ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Social Impact Bonds ◽  
Perverse Incentives ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Outcomes Based Funding ◽  
Corporate Profits

This book examines outcomes-based commissioning as an important element of the public service reform agenda, focusing on Payment by Results (PbR) and Social Impact Bonds (SIBs) in the UK (also known as Pay for Success (PFS) or outcomes-based funding and Pay for Success financing in the US, respectively). It considers whether PbR/PFS and SIBs/Pay for Success financing drive efficiency and innovation in the delivery of social outcomes, and whether attempts to reconcile corporate profits and social goods may lead to perverse incentives and inefficiency. It also analyses the impact of PbR and SIBs on not-for-profit and smaller players in the market for social outcomes. This introduction provides an overview of outcomes-based commissioning, the distinction between PbR/PFS and SIBs/Pay for Success financing, some key questions raised by outcomes-based commissioning, and the chapters that follow.

Payment by Results and Social Impact Bonds

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Albertson ◽  
Chris Fox ◽  
Chris O'Leary ◽  
Gary Painter
Keyword(s):  
Capital Investment ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Social Outcomes ◽  
For Profit ◽  
The Us ◽  
Social Impact Bonds ◽  
Social Goods ◽  
Outcomes Based Funding ◽  
Corporate Profits ◽  
The Impact

Over recent years there has been increasing interest in ‘Payment by Results’ (PbR) — Pay for Success (PFS) or outcomes-based funding in the US — as a model for outcomes-based commissioning in the public sector. Social Impact Bonds (SIBs) — Pay for Success financing in the US — are a class of PbR where the finance needed to make the contract work is provided by private finance, rather than the service provider. This short book asks whether and under what circumstances PbR/PFS and SIBs/PSBs are an efficient way to unlock new capital investment and advance social goods. It considers whether PbR/PFS and SIBs/Pay for Success financing drive efficiency and innovation in the delivery of social outcomes, and whether attempts to reconcile corporate profits and social goods may lead to perverse incentives and inefficiency. It also analyses the impact of PbR and SIBs on not-for-profit and smaller players in the market for social outcomes.

scholarly journals Social Impact Archaeology: Pontefract Castle and the Gatehouse Project

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brendon Wilkins
Keyword(s):  
Social Impact ◽  
Social Values ◽  
Theory Of Change ◽  
The Public ◽  
Evidence Framework ◽  
Standards Of Evidence ◽  
Professional Field ◽  
Collaborative Platform ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

Archaeology is said to add value to development, creating a deeper sense of place, community identity as well as improving health and wellbeing. Accentuating these wider social values has been welcomed by a profession keen to broaden its public relevance and legitimacy and protect its seat at the table in modern cultural life, but how much, if at all, do the public actually benefit from developer-led archaeology? Benefits to individuals and communities from archaeology projects are often abstract, intangible and difficult to attribute, and the discipline arguably lacks a satisfactory frame of reference around which it can express and design for these additional social values. Drawing on the language of social impact investing, this article will explore how the UK-based collaborative platform, DigVentures, has addressed this challenge. It introduces a 'Theory of Change' and 'Standards of Evidence' framework to account for the impact of development-led archaeology programmes, illustrating the causal links between activity and change through the case of the Pontefract Castle Gatehouse Project. It is complemented by a short documentary film exploring the spectrum of digital and physical opportunities for participation by the public alongside a team of highly experienced professional field archaeologists, demonstrating how development-led archaeology can be designed to accomplish far more than answer a planning brief.

scholarly journals Does a Payment-for-Outcomes Model Improve Indigenous Wellbeing? Commissioning Agencies and Social Impact Bonds in New Zealand

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Louise Humpage
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Policy Innovation ◽  
Social Outcomes ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Improved Outcomes ◽  
Social Impact Bonds ◽  
Funding Mechanisms ◽  
The Government

Commissioning agencies and social impact bonds are two examples of New Zealand’s shift towards payment-for-outcomes funding mechanisms over the last decade, as the government attempted to improve both policy innovation and social outcomes. This article highlights that although the commissioning agencies have been more successful than social impact bonds, neither has completely achieved these goals of innovation and improved outcomes. This is particularly concerning given Indigenous Māori are disproportionately impacted by both policies. Discussion concludes by highlighting some of the problems associated with applying a payment-for-outcomes model to Indigenous Peoples, given these funding mechanisms are becoming increasingly popular in other settler nation states.

scholarly journals Social impact bonds and fast policy: Analyzing the Australian experience

2020 ◽  
pp. 0308518X2094152
Author(s):  
Jacob Broom
Keyword(s):  
Social Services ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Document Analysis ◽  
Impact Investing ◽  
Political Debates ◽  
Social Impact Bonds ◽  
Australian Experience ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Scholarly Attention ◽  
Do So

Social impact bonds (SIBs) are attracting an increasing amount of critical scholarly attention. As an outcomes-based mechanism for financing social services, SIBs financialize social policy through the logic of impact investing. Responding to calls for attention to the politics of SIBs’ development, and breaking with the literature’s focus on cases from the UK and USA, this article explores the emergence of SIBs in Australia. It employs the concept of “fast policy,” which theorizes why and how policies move across borders, and describes the contemporary conditions that enable them to do so. Using document analysis, the article explores the discursive devices and practices used to justify the “pulling in” of SIBs to states in Australia. It finds that key actors in the Australian social impact world justified SIBs’ adoption using their synergy with powerful, popular policy discourses and practices, rather than engaging in political debates about their desirability. The Australian experience illuminates the power of intermediaries and the investors they represent over the design and proliferation of SIBs, as well as the roles played by austerity politics, policy experimentalism, and fast policy infrastructures in producing a context in which SIBs could be made real.

Review of the evidence for outcome-based payment systems

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Albertson ◽  
Chris Fox ◽  
Chris O’leary ◽  
Gary Painter ◽  
Kimberly Bailey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Performance Management ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Payment Systems ◽  
Performance Management Systems ◽  
Current State ◽  
Social Impact Bonds ◽  
Us Findings ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

This chapter reviews the current state of evidence on what works in outcomes-based commissioning using published evaluations of Payment by Results (PbR) and Social Impact Bonds (SIBs) in the UK and SIBs in the US. Findings from these evaluations are arranged under the following broad headings: designing and commissioning, development of markets, performance management, innovation, the role of incentives, and overall outcomes. The evaluations address issues such as the complexity of PbR commissioning models compared to other commissioning exercises, the impact of PbR on the market for social goods, and the development of new or enhanced performance management systems as a result of outcomes-based commissioning. Two areas of innovation are also highlighted: innovation in service design and delivery, and innovation in financing.

scholarly journals Cancer Prevention Using Machine Learning, Nudge Theory and Social Impact Bond

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 790 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daitaro Misawa ◽  
Jun Fukuyoshi ◽  
Shintaro Sengoku
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Machine Learning ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Behavioral Changes ◽  
Medical Field ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Consciousness ◽  
Successful Case ◽  
Social Impact Bonds ◽  
The City

There have been prior attempts to utilize machine learning to address issues in the medical field, particularly in diagnoses using medical images and developing therapeutic regimens. However, few cases have demonstrated the usefulness of machine learning for enhancing health consciousness of patients or the public in general, which is necessary to cause behavioral changes. This paper describes a novel case wherein the uptake rate for colorectal cancer examinations has significantly increased due to the application of machine learning and nudge theory. The paper also discusses the effectiveness of social impact bonds (SIBs) as a scheme for realizing these applications. During a healthcare SIB project conducted in the city of Hachioji, Tokyo, machine learning, based on historical data obtained from designated periodical health examinations, digitalized medical insurance receipts, and medical examination records for colorectal cancer, was used to deduce segments for whom the examination was recommended. The result revealed that out of the 12,162 people for whom the examination was recommended, 3264 (26.8%) received it, which exceeded the upper expectation limit of the initial plan (19.0%). We conclude that this was a successful case that stimulated discussion on potential further applications of this approach to wider regions and more diseases.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document