The South Australian Government opened its second round of Social Impact Investments, with a focus on better outcomes for children and young people in out-of-home care, and after leaving guardianship. This follows South Australia's first social impact investment in the Aspire homelessness program delivered by The Hutt St Centre.
Interestingly, the Commonwealth Government is providing $5m as partner with the South Australian Treasury Department, as an early foray into learning and engaging in the social impact investment space.
Latitude Network is assisting with the preparation and development of an application focusing on improved outcomes from the residential care context.

The NSW Office of Social Impact Investment (OSII) is reviewing proposals from three organisations focusing on Indigenous employment and empowerment. Latitude Network was been supporting one Indigenous organisation through the 'co-development phase' where OSII collaborated with the social organisation to advise and develop a proposal together. The intent is to support organisations to prepare robust proposals that are more likely to meet Treasury's requirements and be successful through what can sometimes be an arduous 'Joint Development Phase' of financial and contract negotiations to conclude a social benefit (impact) bond legal agreement.

The Victorian Treasury is a long way through negotiations with two organisations in the 'Joint Development Phase' for its next round of social impact bond investments. This round focuses on primary and secondary school aged children who have become disengaged from school and have a variety of other complexities in their lives. Latitude Network is supporting Melbourne City Mission and the Hester Hornbrook Academy in the negotiations.

As governments and service providers around the world learn from the early years of Social Impact Bonds, a wider outcomes-based contracting landscape is emerging. Originally published in Pro Bono News.

​If there’s one thing most people in the social sector agree on, it’s that they want to “make a difference”. This underpins the desire to move from a focus on outputs (where we may not have evidence about whether we are making a difference), to a focus on outcomes that matter to the social service user.

Not-for-profit boards are starting to drive an outcomes focus because part of good governance is to know whether the organisation is doing something that works. An ideal social service system ensures all participants are aligned around improving outcomes for those who need it.

Yet, the social service system is still a long way from that goal.

There are plenty of pitfalls in this transition to outcomes: debates about what and how to measure; costs of data collection; worries about unintended consequences and cherry picking; and the political hurdles in shifting resources to prevention. Yet while difficult, these are technical problems that can be solved with good outcomes-based contract design and a collaborative, co-design approach with government.

We recently attended the ICS (Institute for Child Success) Pay for Success Conference in North Carolina – a conference to support outcomes-based learning with a focus on early childhood disadvantage. We heard from an early intervention project successfully preventing at-risk kids from requiring costly special education services at school. We heard of the shift of $100 million of social service spending to an outcomes basis in the state of Rhode Island. We learned about a project that prevents hospitalisations of high risk asthma patients through allergen removal in the home – saving lives and money. These are some of the dozens of projects in operation now that are based around outcomes.

The challenge 
How does a social or health service provider demonstrate to their funders that they can, with early intervention, achieve not only measurable improvements for the people they work with, but also long-term cost savings? And how does that organisation navigate the political and policy environment - convincing key parties, like Government, to contract to co-design and deliver a long-term, sustainable program focused on delivering real outcomes? Complex issues often fail to respond to traditional social service approaches, so many funders are looking for a new approach that incentivises outcomes. 

This is the question that Sacred Heart Mission set out to answer recently as a way of scaling-up their successful ‘Journey to Social Inclusion’ program which supports people experiencing homelessness.

What does one of these ‘outcomes-focused’ agreements look like? What is the right approach to take - what are the key considerations? Who are the key parties? What are the pieces of the outcomes puzzle and how do we get them to fit?

​The approach 
Social impact bonds, as one method for governments to commission for outcomes, hold the promise of a new way of doing things that is more focused and uses financially accountability to drive improvements. Latitude’s approach is based on understanding the full ‘value’ of solutions. Outcomes-based commissioning is a team sport and so it is necessary to understand what each prospective party wants to achieve (what they value), what they can contribute and, therefore, how much risk (and return) should be ascribed to each party. 

Once determining the most fundamental point - understanding the value you are bringing to your clients - our approach is to support your organisation to build a convincing case about the service and financial benefits of your services and solutions, and pitch that solution to key funders (governments, in particular).

The outcome With our support as key strategic and project manager, the Mission was successful in its application to join with the Victorian Government (Depts of Treasury & Finance and Health & Human Services) to negotiate one of Victoria’s first Social Impact Bonds in late 2017. These negotiations began in May 2017 and are ongoing. Sign up to our newsletter to stay in touch with the project as it progresses.

Russ Wood of Latitude Network has worked with the Mission throughout this process.

Social Impact Bonds (SIBs) are a powerful new tool to align the interests of social organisations, governments and investors around proven social impact. While this form of funding is still in its early stage, there are some principles that are emerging. It is clear that a SIB will not be appropriate for all social programs - the need for robust proof of impact attributed to the intervention, and the involvement of investors and multiple government departments makes SIBs complicated instruments.

We encourage social organisations to think about the future of outcomes-based funding for programs. With new SIB funding rounds opening up, social organisations are asking - do I have the right kind of program and support to be successful in applying for a SIB?

There are several key dimensions to consider before beginning your application for a SIB.