From the comments, it seems that there are four main themes influencing levels of optimism and which recur throughout the survey: Ongoing and anticipated future local authority funding cuts, no inflationary uplifts, and the culture of more for less. Staffing including the living wage, the cost of sleepovers, holiday pay, travel time; pension costs and pension deficits Procurement and competitive tendering: contract values; procurement practices; the frequency of tenders The impact of different policy initiatives, including: SDS and the inconsistency or lack of implementation; integration of health and social care and its focus on structure over outcomes; and the slow shift to preventative spend There were also a small number of comments noting opportunities for growth, for example in terms of new areas of service development, and even in the potential of health and social integration and increased direct payment work through SDS. Overall, comments in the survey as well as the focus group highlighted the increasing volatility of the environment in which providers are working and the resulting impact on decent sustainable services. Many respondents referred to the demand on resources that comes with increasingly difficult recruitment and retention of qualified staff; complexity and frequency of procurement exercises; and the implementation of a range of policy and legislative changes coming from the Scottish Government and Westminster. As a result, organisations are largely to ‘running standstill.’ Part 2 Financial Trends Income trends overall optimism is in short supply, nevertheless, it is not all doom and gloom. Nearly 50% of respondents reported that income has risen since the last survey. In fact, 80% of respondents said income was either holding steady or increasing. Is this contradictory? Why would income levels be steady or increasing when the sector is under such severe pressure from all sides? Is this a positive indication of good management and overall resilience? Or, are there other explanations that paint a more complex picture? some services, gain some more, so whilst it looks like a settled picture, “Lose in fact we have lost good services and good staff” From the comments, we know that some of the reasons for an increase in income were because of service development or an increase in existing service delivery, diversifying funding streams, and in one case an increase in SDS business. Many respondents commented that the increase in income was marginal and incremental.
From the comments, it seems that there are four main themes influencing levels of optimism and which recur throughout the survey: Ongoing and anticipated future local authority funding cuts, no inflationary uplifts, and the culture of more for less. Staffing including the living wage, the cost of sleepovers, holiday pay, travel time; pension costs and pension deficits Procurement and competitive tendering: contract values; procurement practices; the frequency of tenders The impact of different policy initiatives, including: SDS and the inconsistency or lack of implementation; integration of health and social care and its focus on structure over outcomes; and the slow shift to preventative spend There were also a small number of comments noting opportunities for growth, for example in terms of new areas of service development, and even in the potential of health and social integration and increased direct payment work through SDS. Overall, comments in the survey as well as the focus group highlighted the increasing volatility of the environment in which providers are working and the resulting impact on decent sustainable services. Many respondents referred to the demand on resources that comes with increasingly difficult recruitment and retention of qualified staff; complexity and frequency of procurement exercises; and the implementation of a range of policy and legislative changes coming from the Scottish Government and Westminster. As a result, organisations are largely ‘running to standstill.’ Part 2 Financial Trends Income trends overall optimism is in short supply, nevertheless, it is not all doom and gloom. Nearly 50% of respondents reported that income has risen since the last survey. In fact, 80% of respondents said income was either holding steady or increasing. Is this contradictory? Why would income levels be steady or increasing when the sector is under such severe pressure from all sides? Is this a positive indication of good management and overall resilience? Or, are there other explanations that paint a more complex picture? “Lose some services, gain some more, so whilst it looks like a settled picture, in fact we have lost good services and good staff” From the comments, we know that some of the reasons for an increase in income were because of service development or an increase in existing service delivery, diversifying funding streams, and in one case an increase in SDS business. Many respondents commented that the increase in income was marginal and incremental.
Report-on-the-findings-of-the-CCPS-Business-Resilience-Survey-2015.v10-1.docx