Strategic Public Social Partnership model: report

3. Assessing the progress of the Strategic PSP Model in Scotland

The themes emerging from the analysis of the data are presented in the following sections explaining what the outcomes were, how these were achieved, and the influence of context in each case. This section provides firstly an overview of the six Strategic PSPs, reflecting on their specific development and differences. Secondly, what worked and what did not work in relation to the Strategic PSP model in Scotland is discussed, organised in line with the outcome patterns and generative mechanisms recognised, and also in terms of their relevance at three different 'levels': the organisational level; the partnership level; and the structural level.

3.1 Background to the Strategic Public Social Partnership Model

Public Social Partnership ( PSP) refers to partnership working at strategic, development and delivery levels, involving collaboration between actors from different sectors of the economy – in this case from the public and Third Sectors in the main – to design services appropriate to the needs of service users ( SEEN, 2000). In Scotland, from 2006 onwards, a number of pilot projects were established to test procurement opportunities allowing Third Sector organisations to meaningfully contribute to the design and the improvement of public services. As part of wider attempts to grow the 'enterprising' (or trading) part of the Third Sector, through attempting to offer longer-term financial security for social enterprises, and, indeed, improving public service provision, a significant amount of investment was directed towards this aim.

In 2006/07, three pilots were tested with the aim of improving collaboration among the public and Third Sectors in designing services. The EQUAL Social Economy Scotland Development Partnership provided funding and support for this first round (European EQUAL Community Initiative programme). Later, between 2009/10, the Scottish Government funded a programme to develop PSPs across the country, built around the concept of co-planning. Ten pilots were identified, and they underwent three stages of development. Initially, Third Sector organisations worked with public sector commissioners to design a service. Consortia of Third Sector organisations then delivered the service as a short-term pilot, refining the service to maximise community benefit. Finally, the service (designed involving service users and developed to maximise community benefit) was tendered for longer-term delivery ^[9] .

The Scottish Government's Guide to Forming and Operating Public-Social Partnerships defined a PSP as, "A strategic partnering arrangement which involves the Third Sector earlier and more deeply in the design and commissioning of public services" (Scottish Government, 2011). In 2012, the Scottish Government's Third Sector Unit ^[10] supported the development of six further Strategic Public Social Partnerships (Strategic PSP) to be involved in the re-design and delivery of 'new' services in specific strategic sectors. Moreover, three Change Fund streams ^[11] were created by the Scottish Government to help drive a shift towards preventative spending by promoting partnership working between public and Third Sector organisations (and the private sector) in delivering new services in three areas: early years, criminal justice and care for older people. This research focuses specifically on the learning derived from the experience of the six Strategic PSPs.

The six Strategic PSPs

The six Strategic PSPs are all very different. They commenced at different points in time and are thus at different stages of development. They are located in diverse contexts, in terms of both geography and sectors, including: prisoner throughcare support; community transport; mental health; health and social care; day services; and recovery from heavy substance dependency. There is also significant variation in the way that the six Strategic PSPs are governed, involving different agreements and led by different institutions. For most, the leadership has been acquired by public sector organisations ( i.e. East Renfrewshire Health and Social Care Partnership; NHS Lothian; and Strathclyde Partnership for Transport ( SPT)), while in only two cases the Third Sector organisations have emerged as the lead partner. In the case of Elevate, although NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde was the initiator of the Strategic PSP, the lead elected is Glasgow Council on Alcohol. A different rationale has been used as the basis for their development in each case: for example, some of them have been established to design new services, while others to rethink existing services and to increase the voice of service users in public services. In addition, while all Strategic PSPs have been funded by the Scottish Government Third Sector Unit, a few have also attracted a mix of public ( e.g. NHS and/or local council) and other funds ( e.g. Big Lottery and Robertson Trust).

The six Strategic PSPs are:

• HMP Low Moss – Prisoner Support Pathway. Established in 2012, this Strategic PSP aims to develop and test a new approach to improving the throughcare support of offenders serving a short-term sentence;
• NHS Lothian - Established in 2013 with the initial aim of re-designing rehabilitation services. This Strategic PSP now includes five distinct projects each with a social partnership focus aimed at re-designing living well care, using sport to address health inequalities, and re-designing a specialist service for people who have experienced complex trauma;
• East Renfrewshire Health and Social Care Partnership ( HSCP) – Supported Living Services. Established in 2012, this Strategic PSP aimed to review and re-design supported living services for people with learning disabilities;
• The Life I Want ( TLIW) was established in 2012. This Strategic PSP was established to increase the voice of adults with learning disabilities in planning and designing health and social care services, and promoting awareness about adult learning needs;
• Strathclyde Partnership for Transport ( SPT) – Community Transport was established in 2013, with the aim of developing and testing demand-responsive transport services and building the capacity and capability of the community transport sector; and
• Elevate was established in 2016. Elevate aims to increase employment and training opportunities for people in recovery from drug and/or alcohol dependence.

Overall, the Scottish Government has invested £2,759,368 in the Strategic PSP models from 2012 to date. As well as financial support, the Strategic PSPs have also benefited from extensive support from the Ready for Business ( RfB) Consortium through the Developing Markets for Third Sector Providers contract ('Developing Markets contract') ^[12] . This was awarded to the RfB Consortium by the Scottish Government covering the period from November 2011 to March 2017 (total value of £5.1 million over the duration of the contract). The RfB Consortium consisted of a two-tier structure, with a governance group involving Social Firms Scotland, SENSCOT (Social Entrepreneurs Network Scotland) and CEiS (Community Enterprise in Scotland), and a project partnership including MacRoberts solicitors, KPMG and Social Value Lab. Latterly, Sustainable Procurement Ltd was also involved. The involvement of private consultancy firms was not new; indeed, PricewaterhouseCoopers supported the development and implementation of the 10 PSPs developed in 2009/10 through a dedicated Scottish Government PSP programme.

As part of an initial 'developing the market' phase, the Consortium delivered awareness raising events in many parts of the country, introducing Community Benefit Clauses and PSPs. In the later phase, however the focus changed to more 'hands-on' support, such as facilitating the design of governance structures, the construction of Memoranda of Understanding, and stimulating the process of actually designing the particular activities that form a PSP (this latter activity led by KPMG and Social Firms Scotland). Through this one-to-one support, RfB members also pulled in specialist support when required in legal and other matters. Finally, some members of the RfB Consortium also stimulated a range of strategic engagement opportunities, acting as brokers within the various PSPs, as well as within some of the partner organisations.

In their early stages of development, contact with representatives of the Ready for Business ( RfB) Consortium was essential to the adoption of the Strategic PSP model, either because they heard about it through a RfB event or they directly engaged with members of RfB who suggested the Strategic PSP was the appropriate model. For example, for NHS Lothian the idea of using the Strategic PSP model came from "[…] earlier conversations [the lead] had been having with [ RfB] that we could do this as a public social partnership; that made absolute sense." For the Strathclyde Partnership for Transport Strategic PSP, the idea of using the model came from the lead who "[…] had come across the PSP model. And thought that the model actually fitted in with what [the lead] was trying to do, both in terms of developing the community transport sector, but more importantly SPT in relation to the transport it provides."

Table 3 shows the budget invested by the Scottish Government for each of the Strategic PSPs. Some of the Strategic PSPs, as previously outlined, have also received funds from other organisations. For example, Low Moss Strategic PSP was successful in attracting £280,511 from the National Lottery, Robertson Trust and the local council. Strathclyde Partnership for Transport invested/ring fenced a further £101,459.00 for the Strategic PSP, and similarly in the East Renfrewshire Strategic PSP, the local authority invested a further £135,000. Elevate Strategic PSP received an additional £165,000 from NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.

Table 3 – Scottish Government funds

PSP	Start Up 2012-13	Pilot (Yr 1) 2013-14	Pilot (Yr 2) 2014-15	Pilot (Yr 3) 2015-16	Pilot (Yr 4) 2016-17	Pilot (Yr 5) 2017-18
Low Moss Prison	£51,139	£183,000	£200,000	£200,000	£311,000	-
NHS Lothian Strategic PSPs	-	£64,792	£65,272	£65,272	£230,000	£150,000
East Renfrewshire HSCP (final year of funding 2015-16)	£21,857	£27,095	£43,712	£43,712	-	-
'The Life I Want'	£18,000	£157,856	£112,793	£112,793	£50,000	£50,000
SPT Community Transport	-	£29,329	£78,223	£78,223	£130,000	£85,000
Elevate (start up in 2016-17)					£100,000	£100,000
	£90,996	£462,372	£500,000	£500,000	£821,000	£385,000
Total across all PSPs in all years						£2,759,368

Origin and development

Different rationales have been the basis of both the origin and development of each of the Strategic PSPs. Some of the partnerships such as East Renfrewshire, Elevate and some of the projects included in the NHS Lothian PSP were created to re-design services, and were aimed at improving service quality and more collaborative ways of working, often in response to policy developments. For example:

"A lot of our models [of working] were historical and didn't necessarily work as well as they should…a lot of the models that were there were to suit an old model and not so much individuals. But things are much more inclusive with the personalisation agenda, things like that. We needed to be focusing much more on individual outcomes rather than just keeping three people in a house together. So that was kind of where the PSP came from, with SDS [Self-Directed Support] legislation, the personalisation agenda, and just moving forward to much more modern thinking." [East Renfrewshire]

Other partnerships used the Strategic PSP model as a vehicle to include more organisations in service provision and offer an increase in opportunities to beneficiaries and service users, as in the case of Elevate and NHS Lothian:

"So, we wanted to see better outcomes… So, we had a vision for a Public Social Partnership where we could bring in more partners and offer more opportunities." [Elevate]

"So we were hoping that as a partnership, as a PSP, that that would facilitate trying to get people the help they need more quickly." [River Centre – NHS Lothian]

In other Strategic PSPs, the partnership was established to increase organisational learning between the Third and public sectors and to improve the capacity of community organisations to potentially provide future services. For example, in the case of SPT Community Transport, the partnership aimed to increase standards of services and quality of community transport organisations, particularly to enable their future provision for a specific part of the population (most notably older people).

The origin of the Low Moss Strategic PSP related to the possibility of developing a different (and new) service in a recently constituted setting such as the recently re-developed HMP Low Moss. The PSP model was used to encourage the public and Third Sectors to work together to collaboratively plan and deliver a new service aimed at addressing the specific unmet needs of short-term prisoners:

"So, the director says to the new governor: don't make it just like another prison. Try and think of different ways of doing things, because clearly for lots of people that come into prison the way we do it just now just isn't working. So that led to him inviting in loads and loads of Third Sector and other bits of the justice sector, other bits of the public sector and saying: what's your proposition for us? What can you do for us to make Scotland a safer place?" [Low Moss]

In The Life I Want Strategic PSP, the main aim was initially to address the gaps caused by closure of some services for adults with learning disabilities. Over time, however, the Strategic PSP has evolved into a vehicle to increase the voice of service users in policy development and service delivery:

"The purpose of it was to look at alternative provision to day services in Glasgow, because there was already a plan in place to close day centres, and it was to look at alternative options for people. […] The involvement of NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde increased during the time of the partnership. And at the end of year two it was decided that if the partnership was to continue, it should be much more people-led than it had been up until now." [The Life I Want]

Progress to date

The six Strategic PSPs are at very different stages of development. Some no longer receive funding and have finished the formal part of their Strategic PSP commitment. East Renfrewshire, for example are still meeting and trying to embed their collaborative ways of working within the wider context. In Low Moss Strategic PSP, the new service developed has been tested and evaluated and has evidenced results in terms of reducing re-offending and improving the health and well-being of short-term prisoners. However, at the time of writing this report there was no commitment to commission the service in its current format.

To note, in April 2017, the eight Community Justice Authorities ( CJAs) in Scotland were dis-established as part of a restructuring of community justice provision (under the Community Justice (Scotland) Act 2016. CJAs had previously been the vehicle by which the Scottish Government's funding for community justice activity was distributed, in response to local need and priorities. North Strathclyde CJA had been a public sector partner to Low Moss PSP, and following its closure, the Scottish Government has engaged directly with Low Moss PSP regarding funding. Consideration of the future commissioning and funding of offender throughcare activities at HMP Low Moss will be incorporated into a wider process examining the future delivery of such services across Scotland (alongside the national and regional throughcare activities delivered by PSPs established under the Reducing Reoffending Change Fund).

The Strathclyde Partnership for Transport Strategic PSP is also at an advanced stage of development, in which the capacity of community organisations has improved through training new drivers for Community Transport providers, developing a framework for scheduled bus services, and by winning an award in the market-builder category at the Social Enterprise Scotland Awards for their D1 training programme. This Strategic PSP is at the stage of exploring how to grow the involvement of community transport organisations in providing specific transport services, such as for older people to access health services.

NHS Lothian has evolved into working on other projects, such as the Rivers Centre (re-designing specialist trauma services) and the GameChanger project involving a partnership with Hibernian Football Club. The NHS partner is committed to using community-based services in the future, and considers the PSP as a model to produce Community Benefit outputs.

The Life I Want and Elevate Strategic PSPs are more recent. The Life I Want has seen a change in the partnership model in the last two years favouring a user-led model, where Values Into Action Scotland and People First – two membership organisations involving adults with learning disabilities – are in charge of planning and developing services. Some services, such as training for improving the quality of services in the NHS and employability courses are in a more-advanced stage, while others such as building checks to ensure accessibility for disabled people and technological support for health and well-being ( i.e. an app that will enable improved health and well-being for disabled people) are in a pilot phase. Elevate, the most recent of all of the Strategic PSPs, is testing pilot services to understand how to integrate different (around 35) providers and offer a better integrated process for people recovering from alcohol and drug dependency, which has training and employability opportunities as the ultimate goal.

Background to the Strategic PSP Model and progress to date - Summary of key points:

- From 2006 onwards, a number of projects were established to test procurement opportunities in allowing Third Sector organisations to contribute to the design of public services.

- In 2012, the Scottish Government Third Sector Unit supported the development of six Strategic PSPs to re-design and deliver new services in strategic sectors: prisoner throughcare support; community transport; mental health; health and social care; day services; and recovery from heavy substance dependency.

- There is considerable variation among these partnerships in the stages of development, geography and sector contexts.

- In terms of governance arrangements, for most, the leadership has been acquired by public sector organisations, while in two cases Third Sector organisations have emerged as the lead partner.

- A different rationale has been used as the basis for their development in each case: for example, some have been established to design new services, while others to rethink existing services and to increase the voice of service users in public services.

- This variety has, however, helped us to unpack what circumstances might be favourable for the further development of the Strategic PSP model, such as the presence of a lead with knowledge and understanding of the Third Sector, legislative underpinning and early commissioning targets.

3.2 Impact of the Strategic PSP Model – what has been achieved

Each Strategic PSP met their initial objectives/outcomes in relation to re-design or development of services (see Appendix 3 for a full list of objectives/outcomes by each Partnership). The stakeholders interviewed perceived a number of different outcomes resulting from the adoption of the Strategic PSP model. Some of these outcomes were unintended, often linked to the learning process each underwent as a result of working in partnership.

At the organisational level, the outcomes can be grouped into two broad themes: the delivery of the outcomes or objectives that each Strategic PSP had set out to achieve; and the organisational learning of both public and Third Sector organisations. At the partnership level, the model enabled the development of a collaborative environment among the variety of partners involved through stimulating trust among partners. Finally, in wider terms, such as public service provision (the structural level), it can be argued that the Strategic PSP model has been a key mechanism by which co-production in public service design and delivery has gained recognition, albeit changes in the policy environment, dissemination work carried out by RfB and years of experimentation through PSP pilots since 2006, have also contributed to increase the recognition of the model.

Figure 1 – What has worked: outcomes

Each of these outcomes/achievements is explored in more detail in the following sections.

Outcomes and objectives

By and large, each Strategic PSP set out to improve the quality of services (new or re-designed) in order to better address the needs of their beneficiaries. In order to achieve this outcome, most Strategic PSPs have undergone a process of designing and testing pilots (see Appendix 3) of new ways of working - among new partners - and providing solutions to emerging problems, as indicated by the quote below:

"So the pilot we've been doing for the past 18 months, it's meant we've had people sat around a table and going this isn't working, how can we come in with solutions, how can we respond to that, or do we need to … so there's been lots of flex which I think has been really important. We still stick to the core principles of the model but it gives us some … we've tested some things out and gone no actually, what we need there is this, and we've been keeping a learning log, so I've got a five page learning log at the moment, about all the things we've learnt." [Strategic PSP partner – Public Sector Representative]

In some cases, pilot projects were discontinued after their implementation was unsuccessful. For example, despite an initial community request for an additional bus route service, the SPT Community Transport realised after piloting the new route there was no take up for this service, and therefore it was discontinued.

Much of this experimentation reflects the nature of the specific partnership and their overall objectives. Some Strategic PSPs such as NHS Lothian and SPT Community Transport were established to strengthen relationships between the public sector and Third Sector, increase confidence and capability of the community sector, and expand the adoption of co-production processes, for example:

"One [aspect of the PSP] was around transport services and things like My Bus, things like community bus services which are timetabled, normal bus services, health and social care, etc.. The other part over time, which is key, was the capacity building side with the sector. And we did a mapping exercise, which was the very first thing we did with the PSP." [ SPT Community Transport]

East Renfrewshire Strategic PSP completed and mainstreamed the new re-designed services. According to their evaluation report ^[13] , the services improved outcomes for individuals who accessed supported living. This Strategic PSP was referred to as a 'good practice example' in social care in an Audit Scotland report (Audit Scotland, 2016).

NHS Lothian Strategic PSP rolled their partnership model out in five different areas. They developed different PSPs, each addressing various societal needs and pursuing different aims. Low Moss Strategic PSP demonstrated through their evaluation a reduction in the re-offending rates of short-term prisoners (involving more than 600 prisoners in the last four years) and an improvement in the health and well-being of people involved (such as reduction in use of illegal drugs, improvements in self-esteem and confidence levels). Elevate has piloted and tested the first training and employability scheme for their beneficiaries. Thirty-five people were involved in their training programme, of which 17 then secured jobs. Finally The Life I Want has led on the establishment of training processes for more than 50 NHS staff, increased awareness about adult learning disabilities at several events and developed communication materials.

Organisational learning

Organisational learning both in and between the public sector and the Third Sector was identified as one of the most important andunintended outcomes of the partnership process, and SPT – Community Transport best exemplifies this. Building on the findings of the Scottish Government Environment and Infrastructure Committee (2013) inquiry into community transport which had found providers to be lacking basic quality standards, this Strategic PSP model acted as a conduit to build the capacity of the community transport network in the area and, through providing quality training for drivers, to raise the quality standards to a level whereby providers can now deliver the transport services they were contributing to design. Providers have also improved their ability to schedule services and therefore be recognised increasingly as credible providers by SPT and commercial providers. The Strategic PSP model enabled community transport organisations to develop and professionalise, and also to better connect them with each other. In the words of one focus group participant:

"[The relationship between the Strategic PSP partners] is very amicable. We do contact each other, not only at meetings but by email if we've got a query. […] And whenever we've got a problem we ask others Have you had this problem? What is it?"[Third Sector Stakeholder]

The learning processthat the Strategic PSP model encouraged also helped organisations to build their confidence:

"I think for the Third Sector, there's always been a challenge for them around the commissioning and procurement processes and winning work and how it doesn't often work for them: it's the bigger organisations who are better equipped to win competitive processes. So the ability to get involved in the process and influence service design I think was really important for them. And, as we worked through, the ability to build those relationships and learn from others, again, was an important factor."[Third Sector Stakeholder]

With the support of the Strategic PSPs, some Third Sector organisations were able to increase the quality of the services and to acquire experience and confidence to participate in procurement and tendering exercises. A learning exchange process between public sector officials and Third Sector practitioners was also identified, as reflected in the quote below:

"We were also able to share the learning with all the people that were there. We had buy-in from all the various providers 'cause I don't really necessarily know that we would have thought to do it in that way. There was a huge benefit for us which was about the learning that came out for everybody. You wouldn't have got that and we wouldn't have done the things that we've done if we hadn't used that model." [Strategic PSP Partner - Public Sector Representative]

Working side by side in designing and delivering new services helped to integrate a wide variety of skills and capabilities. For example, in the case of Low Moss Strategic PSP, public sector officials and Third Sector practitioners were working in the same team, sharing the same offices and spaces. Moreover, they felt part of the same organisation. This allowed an exchange of culture and an increase in experience and skill levels, as highlighted by the manager of the partnership:

"See the public sector officers here, they are in my team, so they get all the experience and all the benefits of the social care sector. We get the benefits of their culture so obviously they are public sector officers, they are not social workers, mental health workers and so on. But as a team we have got loads of experience between us."[Strategic PSP Manager – Third Sector Representative]

The experience that public sector officials acquired in working in partnership with the Third Sector improved their professional skills, changing, for example, their approach in managing the needs of beneficiaries. Public sector representatives suggested that working with the Strategic PSP helped prison officers to better understand the difficulties faced by short-term offenders during the transition period between the prison and release:

"That experience of having worked there and knowing what goes on outside in the community makes them, I believe, a better public sector officer, gives them something of a professional development edge."[Strategic PSP Partner - Public Sector Representative]

Improving relationships among partners

A changing relationship between public sector and Third Sector organisations and among Third Sector organisations was also outlined. Increasing trust among partners enabled partnerships to develop and improved the dynamic between public sector commissioners and Third Sector providers. This is exemplified in the conversations among the Third Sector providers of one of the Strategic PSPs during a focus group:

"[Respondent 1]: I think the relationships are stronger amongst providers than in the past. You came to meetings and you didn't really share anything, you didn't really get to know people. And I think that has been much improved.

[Respondent 2]: I think it [the Strategic PSP] gave the providers a certain amount of strength as well, you know because it's not been all rosy in the garden, there's been a lot of ups and downs and whatever but not with the providers.

[Respondent 3]: I think there was a mindset change though with regard to the local authority because prior to the PSP when you came to the old providers meetings it was very much a –

[Respondent 2]: Dictated.

[Respondent 3] - dictated to by the council, this is what you will do and don't rock the boat. Whereas with the PSP there seemed to be a change of mindset and it was more of a partnership, wouldn't you agree?

[Respondent 2]: Yeah I'd absolutely agree that the word partnership, you know, is there in the title and I think it's been played out in reality as well."

As a result of being involved in the Strategic PSP, providers have developed new personal and organisational networks to explore new opportunities and engage in collaboration. For example, organisations involved in Elevate Strategic PSP noted that being part of this experience was helping them to increase their contacts, establishing a more collaborative relationship with organisations they were previously in competition with:

"I think that what's happening is more people, even in my own line of work, organisations where we would have met with previously they really wore an official pin, like my own personal network has expanded significantly. That network is people that we go to for advice or for guidance to say, we're working with such and such, do you think that you could enhance what their offer is and get them to work together collaboratively."[Strategic PSP Partner- Public Sector Representative]

A similar message emerged in the focus group with partners' in East Renfrewshire Strategic PSP, of which the extract below is an example:

"Respondent 1: I think in the past probably providers wouldn't necessarily have told other providers, you know, well I'm doing this in case somebody else got ideas, we just…

Respondent 2: Aye, you kept your own corner and what have you. Whereas now I think that's different, people do share experiences so I think that's been a really good thing.

Respondent 3: Yeah, there was three different providers went to one thing and two just went -

Respondent 4: it's not for us.

Respondent 3: So actually it took the competition right out of it and we –

Respondent 4: because you knew by listening that oh no that's ... and that was, I thought this is great.

Respondent 3: I can't do this myself or we can't do it ourselves ...I suppose for me the kind of main part that I've really appreciated in this group is the joint working and joint thinking. Sometimes if you hit a bit of a wall with something, you tend to learn off of some real discussions around medication, some of this kind of sleepover stuff, we've even attended kind of many tender things for business together do you know and it's not like we're in competition with each other, it's like we really are a support to each other."

Competition appears to have decreased between those Third Sector providers involved in the Strategic PSP. For example, in The Life I Want, one of the representatives of the Third Sector providers suggested that the partnership was genuine, in so far that the Strategic PSP model has helped to transform services from individual to collective ownership of solutions:

"What the PSP model does is teaching people that it's a good thing to share practice and that we can all build on making that practice better for everyone, rather than people being precious about the pieces of work that they're doing."[Strategic PSP Partner - Third Sector Representative]

"The advantages of the model are the fact that you are working in genuine partnership with a number of technically competitors because often a number of the organisations are competing for different business. So the fact that you are getting to sit round the table and co-produce ideas and concepts is a fantastic way of working."[Strategic PSP Partner - Third Sector Representative]

Also public sector representatives recognised the way of working was changing among Third Sector organisations, establishing a more collaborative setting where the strengths and weaknesses of different providers are accepted and shared:

"The PSP does not just affect our relationship with providers, but the relationships that various providers have with each other. So they'll now work together to do a piece of work in some cases, whereas before it was always like competing. If a piece of work came out before, you would have everybody putting a bid in for it. Now what you tend to get is providers will say "that's not for us."[Strategic PSP Partner - Public Sector Representative]

The collaboration between partners (both public sector and Third Sector) ultimately contributed to improving the service delivered by understanding provision and matching supply with demand:

"What is easier for us is to know which services are out there. Because we have much closer relationships now with our colleagues in the Third Sector. We know what services are available. We know what they do. We have had meetings with them. We have got agreements with them about who does what. So I think we are better now at matching people to the support that they want." [Strategic PSP Partner - Public Sector Representative]

The Strategic PSP model has created opportunitiesfor new partnership projects between the Third Sector and statutory bodies. One of the Third Sector partners suggested that the possibility of working at a strategic level with the public sector helped to increase their credibility at the local level:

"When I'm in discussion with the local council or the NHS I can take the good practice and say, "Well yes, this is what we would be able to do," and I can say, "This is what we have been involved in through the PSP," and that gives the council and the NHS the confidence to deal with us, because they see that we've worked at a higher level with the public sector."[Strategic PSP Partner - Third Sector Representative]

Increased recognition of the model

There was a general agreement among Strategic PSP partners and stakeholders alike that the establishment of the various partnerships in different sectors had contributed to raising awareness about the model and increasing knowledge around collaborative and inclusive ways of working:

"You have to look on it on a case by case basis to make sure that it would actually work, but it would be one of the first things you would think about is can we do this as a PSP model? Does it fit or can we make it fit into that? So it's definitely there, it's there now, you know, you can use it if you need to and it's something that we … something came up the other day and I thought I'll contact [the public sector partner] and see what they want to do about this." [Strategic PSP Partner - Third Sector Representative]

"People are now much more confident about it, confident about the model. You know the challenges… but I don't think anything would have happened otherwise. We went out with that blank canvas, and we had to keep thinking: what do we see when we are talking about PSP?" [Third Sector Stakeholder]

The role of the RfB Consortium should also be recognised as a principle means by which awareness of the model was raised. This consideration however has to be placed within the context of longstanding conversations that Third Sector representatives within the RfB Consortium had been having with the Scottish Government for over a decade. Indeed, it can be argued that the interests of CEiS, Social Firms Scotland and SENSCOT in tackling the barriers social enterprises faced in accessing procurement opportunities and increasing the collaboration for wider benefits among public and Third Sectors, provided the backdrop against which the Developing Markets Programme for Third Sector Providers was developed. They organised workshops and events to engage Third Sector organisations and public sector representatives on the various stages involved in the development of the model, and some of the potential resultant benefits:

"I suppose the approach developed over the course of the following years, but it was essentially having a set workshop presentation that would set out what the Public Social Partnership Model was, go through each stage of it in detail, describe some of the benefits and then use some case studies and benefits from some of the previous PSPs to kind of show the benefit of it. And then it was to use group work and workshop sessions to encourage the public and Third Sector attendees to come up with their own PSP ideas."[Third Sector Stakeholder]

Ultimately, it became apparent among some Strategic PSP partners that the model was an opportunity to move towards preventative, evidence-based services, recognising the value of user-led service design and delivery:

"The public sector took a policy decision actually to invest more of their own resources in [preventive measures]. And to some extent took the space of a lot of some Third Sector work. And you have to think was that actually a success? For the public sector to say, 'actually we now need to rethink what it means, and what our mission is? And our mission now needs to help people back into the community.' And that is changing the mainstream and it is more sustainable. And it is embedding the change to an extent. So there I think it is worth acknowledging that is a success actually."[Third Sector Stakeholder]

"The PSP is a major vehicle to enable movement in the direction of the Christie Commission, which is the Scottish Government's requirement that services are local, that they are integrated, that we de-clutter the landscape, and that we involve people who use services in their planning and delivery…that things that are delivered are proven to be effective."[Strategic PSP Partner - Public Sector Representative]

What has been achieved - Summary of key points:

Each Strategic PSP has achieved their initial objectives/outcomes. The achievement of some unintended outcomes was also noted, such as increased professionalisation, confidence building and improved understanding of service users' needs – all part of the learning process each underwent as a result of working in partnership.

The areas of positive impact include:

- Designing and testing pilots has enabled the Strategic PSPs to collectively develop a pathway to more collaborative practices between sectors.

- Host organisations and the wider partnerships learning - in the appreciation of the efforts required to drive the partnership forward - have contributed to improvements in the standard of services.

- Relationships among partners (public sector and Third Sector organisations and among Third Sector organisations) has been noted as improved.

- Awareness was raised about the PSP model and increased knowledge around collaborative and inclusive ways of working.

3.3 The enabling mechanisms

Our analysis highlighted that three mechanisms have supported the achievement of the outcomes, namely: establishing a leadership role; developing a space to test and pilot ideas for services; and enabling partnership development, primarily through the support of RfB.

Figure 2 – Enabling mechanisms

Establishing a leadership role

A dedicated and resourced (paid for by the Government) lead person to drive the partnership was identified as a fundamental enabling factor across all different Strategic PSPs:

"I think you cannot overestimate how important some individual people are in the success of these kinds of partnership approaches. When you have the right people both at a management and leadership level, and also at delivery level, that just makes things work. It is actually people that make things work, not models or policies. It is people and their practice that make things work." [Third Sector Stakeholder]

This is exemplified by the experience of Elevate Strategic PSP, in which a manager has been recently appointed to enable the partnership progression at operational level. The manager has the role of overviewing the different work streams of activities, including coordinating information sharing, aligning different projects and reporting to their strategic committee. Strong and motivated leadership has been identified as a key mechanism for ensuring that the model is working:

"All of this had to have a very strong lead. Leadership, not even coordination but leadership […].I love the activity of business models and various strategies and approaches, but it all boils down to the human element. The human factor is the most important. If there is a will, there's a way. If you are passionate and invested in something, you'll make sure the model is working."[Strategic PSP Partner - Third Sector Representative]

Previous experience of working with, or for, the Third Sector appeared to be a useful advantage in helping to manage the partnership development through times of adversity. For example, in the case of the SPT – Community Transport and East Renfrewshire Strategic PSPs, the lead coordinators had experience of working with Third Sector organisations before moving to a public sector appointment. This was recognised as a key factor in helping to understand and appreciate the challenges involved, and thus engage more effectively with different partners:

"I think it needed to be a person who understood Third Sector organisations. The PSP leader does understand about Third Sector organisations. I think if it had been someone that didn't really know the background of community organisations it wouldn't have worked out, even though they were a dedicated person."[Strategic PSP Partner - Third Sector Representative]

"I was the main person, I've worked with the Third Sector, but I've worked for the council too, so I'm well aware of the challenges we face. So you know it's fine to say just go ahead, but actually lots of people who work for the Council don't completely understand the challenges that the Third Sector face." [Strategic PSP Partner - Public Sector Representative]

However, sometimes strong leadership can prove to be detrimental, as it can generate imbalances within the partnership:

"But until we got our project team on board we were obviously relying on being led by the public sector who potentially were the commissioners and they did a fantastic job, but they may not have had a full and ready understanding of the Scottish Government aspirations for the PSP." [Strategic PSP Partner - Public Sector Representative]

Therefore, a balance between strong leadership and an operational and strategic vision that incorporated inclusive governance mechanisms enabled the views of different partners to be considered and implemented.

Developing a space to test and pilot ideas for (new) services

Having the space to try things out, even if the result ultimately proved to be ineffective, alongside the possibility of flexibly organising the collaboration arrangements among partners have been identified as key enablers of the process:

"In terms of the PSP and other forms of commissioning, how does it work? I think the massive thing is flexibility. So, you don't have a contract to work to. The lead agency and other partners are not expected to do anything, quite frankly. But that means we can change things, we can try things out. We've run a couple of pilots, pilots that sometimes haven't worked very well. Okay, so they haven't worked. But we can try something else." [Strategic PSP Partner - Public Sector Representative]

Testing out ideas was considered to be crucial to the process of re-developing services more effectively. The Strategic PSP model allowed the space for this development work, encouraging flexibility and enabling partners to have a voice in proposing new ideas to pilot:

"We agreed what the overall structure was going to be and what the outcomes were maybe. But all the partners who were providing the training were allowed a bit of leeway to kind of organise a way that suited the participants the best. We tried two or three different ways before we settled on a definitive programme of training. And being that given that chance to kind of say, "Okay, we'll try it this way, we'll try it another way," eventually worked out the best way to do it for us. It proved to be a really successful model of training." [Strategic PSP Partner - Third Sector Representative]

However, although the Strategic PSP model provided this space for trying and piloting, it is also highly resource intensive. Indeed, all partners recognised that the initial process was "very time consuming" with recurrent meetings, often very long and confusing:

"The one thing that struck me through the whole development process was the amount of work it was to actually get things up and running. It's not as if we were getting a dedicated post to do all the PSP work, that had to go on top of the work you were doing every day running a Third Sector organisation. So initially it was quite a lot of extra work to get it up and running, but once you had the process in place it seemed to be okay."[Strategic PSP Partner - Third Sector Representative]

"It's very resource-intensive. A lot of those people have given up their own time for free […] a lot of those people are from Third Sector services who say that if we're spending 14 half-days [developing] a PSP, that's 14 half-days we are not delivering services that people need".[Strategic PSP Partner - Public Sector Representative]

In many cases the experimentation was not taken forward, owing to the tensions that existed in developing these spaces of experimentation as indicated by those stakeholders who lamented a lack of clear goals and outcomes. This is explained in more details in section 3.4.

Formalisation of the partnership - the role of Ready for Business

The RfB Consortiumwas instrumental in supporting each Strategic PSP at every stage of their development. Many partners recognised them as an independent 'external player' who could suggest how to proceed with a project plan:

"Well it was Ready for Business that we got the external support from. I mean, they pulled us back from the brink multiple times, and also certainly the first eight or nine or 10 months it was their support that got us through and their stuff that got us through. Because sometimes it would be a bit like "I'm going to this meeting, I'm dreading it, I've no idea what I'm going to be saying" because people are a bit unsure what they should be doing or what to expect, and we would just go back to the project plan and go back to the support that we get, and that would take us on. And then we just looked back one day and it was like "oh, we've passed all that now."" [Strategic PSP Partner - Public Sector Representative]

Establishing a unique mission, vision, business plan, logic model and communication plan were all recognised as key steps in developing collaborative working. RfB support was also important in the development of governance structures based upon rules and processes reflecting the input of all partners. These were some of the key documents that all of the Strategic PSPs developed to organise the activities of the partnership. For example, each Memorandum of Understanding had a very important role in all of the Strategic PSPs. It was used for regulating the entire life of the partnership, from how to involve new partners, through to how to decide upon pilots:

"One of the very early exercises that gets done in any PSP involves a mutually agreed governance structure which is then codified into a Memorandum of Understanding. But rather than imposing that on all the people in the room, we get them to actually contribute to the design of that governance structure and it's construction. And get them to actually design the particular activities that will be within a PSP as well. So by doing that collaboratively and having everyone believe that they've got a voice and they have input into that, then it overcomes some difficulties."[Third Sector Stakeholder]

In some cases, the Strategic PSP almost becomes an organisation in its own right, with its own brand identity, and its own operational and strategic plan:

"We have a set agenda at every workstream, and people are invited to bring their ideas and we'll debate them and discuss them and we'll talk about is it going to be a sole delivery? It is going to be a joint delivery? So, a couple of the ideas that we've put forward in the past have involved more than one partner. And what the role would be, so on that proposal that goes up to the steering group, you would have a partner that would take lead for writing it up. They would meet with the others, put all the ideas down, discuss it as a workstream and then submit to the steering group for approval, and then whoever, either myself or the vice chair would then bring that proposal to life."[Strategic PSP Partner – Public Sector Representative]

Co-location in the same office, or having the opportunity to visit other partner organisations also helped to increase trust between public sector and Third Sector organisational staff, increasing the learning opportunities between different cultures that is important for partnership working. Emblematic of this has been Low Moss Strategic PSP where all staff are based within the prison building, and share the same office:

"The openness of the public sector in terms of what would work and what would not was really high. Those real gains were made in terms of locating Third Sector organisations within the public sector that should be treasured. They were really meaningful. The involvement of public sector officers in the delivery was really meaningful and changed how these officers thought about their roles as well. So people spoke to me about that really positively."[Third Sector Stakeholder]

Their experience and knowledge of the Strategic PSP model, of partnership working and of procurement were recognised as being very useful in addressing questions and doubts. KPMG and Social Firms Scotland (as part of the RfB Consortium) – who were involved in the day-to-day work with each of the six Strategic PSPs – were mentioned by all interviewees as providing crucial support to the partners. They provided information and reassurance and this contributed to increasing the confidence of both Third Sector and public sector providers:

"I think having that kind of people with experience, people who could come in and speak with the Third Sector when they were asking difficult questions about procurement, that I have no idea about, because I've never procured services in my life! That was really helpful. But also in the early days they helped me with some of the initial meetings with stakeholders, to try and keep things moving."[Strategic PSP Partner - Third Sector Representative]

RfB was also identified as being instrumental in enabling the partnerships to access further public or private funding opportunities. They were also perceived as being the main communication channel with the Scottish Government:

"Ready for Business has been great in terms of, say from original set up, from pulling together the framing of it, from keeping us on task sometimes. To be honest with you, in terms of the last three years trying to get the funding to keep the thing going, if it hadn't been for Ready for Business, I wouldn't have been able to do it because I'm not as connected, particularly with the Third Sector."[Strategic PSP Partner - Third Sector Representative]

Finally RfB was identified as a broker to reduce partnership tensions, enabling a dialogue between Third Sector organisations and public sector representatives to solve possible issues regarding the partnership working, as indicated in one of the interviews:

Respondent 1: Ready for Business guided us through each step, didn't they?

Respondent 2: It's a minefield, so yes, absolutely. You couldn't have done it without them. Even with the guidelines on the website I don't think you could have done it. It would have fallen apart. There were some tensions within the steering group in the early stages.

Interviewer: So, they were negotiating the possible tensions?

Respondent 2: Oh yes."[Strategic PSP Partner – Public Sector Representatives]

The enabling mechanisms - Summary of key points:

Our analysis has identified three mechanisms that have supported the achievement of the outcomes:

- The presence of a dedicated and resourced (paid for by Government) lead person to drive the partnership was identified as a fundamental enabling factor across all different Strategic PSPs.

- Having the space to try things out and test new ideas was also considered to be crucial to the process of re-developing services more effectively.

- The development of governance structures based upon rules and a process reflecting the input of all partners were recognised as key in developing the partnership. This formalisation of partnership working - establishing a unique mission, vision, business plan, logic model and communication plan - as well as day-today support, brokerage of difficult internal and external (to the Strategic PSPs) relationships was effectively delivered by the RfB Consortium.

-The RfB Consortium supported each Strategic PSP at every stage of their development (from the take up of the model to its implementation) providing initial hands-on and later ad hoc support. The RfB Consortium was instrumental in the adoption of the PSP model and their support was essential to the development of each Strategic PSP.

3.4 What has been less effective

There are some areas where the Strategic PSP model has underachieved. The model assumes that Third Sector organisations are best placed to engage with, or know, service users – as the quote below indicates:

"[…] a chance for Third Sector organisations to help design a service which is going to best meet the needs of the service users, using the sector's skills and knowledge, and understanding of their client base." [Public Sector stakeholder]

However, we found varying degrees of service user engagement by Third Sector partners. While Strategic PSPs were described as enabling mechanisms to develop partnership working, little evidence emerged in terms of 'breaking down silos' and ultimately achieving the ideal 'stage 3', that of service commissioning.

Figure 3– What has not worked: outcomes

Involvement of service users

Service users' involvement differed significantly among the different Strategic PSPs. Some organised consultations (surveys or events) to lead on service re-design, while others implemented or facilitated ongoing communication between beneficiaries and front-line staff. Only rarely did partnerships develop a reference group involving service users. When they did, it was not always recognised as the best way of involving and empowering service users:

"My own personal view is that the reference group has not worked so well. And we are still looking for a way to make sure that service user involvement is right at the heart of what we do. What I am keen to do is just have an open door and invite service users to our operational meetings. So they are part of the day to day decision making. But I have been advised that that is not a good way to involve users and that we should stick to the Reference Group. I just find that a really clumsy way to involve people." [Strategic PSP Partner - Public Sector Representative]

While the meaningful participation of service users is recognised as a central philosophy of service re-design, and the Strategic PSP model has been recognised as a potential vehicle for doing that, participation was often reactive rather than true 'co-design'. Moreover, service users' needs and voices were not always fully incorporated:

"I really do think there's been genuinely good intentions on all of it. And I think in terms of co-production in general, and the idea that everyone is an expert, is really important and strong. But I don't feel that everyone, therefore, needs to be treated exactly the same, and answer exactly the same questions."[Strategic PSP Partner - Third Sector Representative]

One PSP, The Life I Want involve service users genuinely at the centre of all of the service co-design and delivery, and service users were involved at all stages of decision making at both strategic and operational levels:

"It's about people having the choice and control in their own lives, so they want to go to this group, this event, and not like be told." [Strategic PSP Partner - Service User]

"For me with employment, in particular because I've… I'm still young but I'm one of the oldest member at the group, but because I've gone off my experience from employment and supported employment, because we've got the manager of Glasgow City supporting employment as well as two or three or four members of staff at the meeting, and because I've got experience from her service, that's where I'm a part of that, that whole, my experience of that, and the support from that." [Strategic PSP Partner - Service User]

This level of engagement helped to involve user voices at every level of policy and service design and delivery, changing the way that policy and services had been planned up to now:

"If you're going to be writing policies and those policies are actually going to have impact on people's lives, then none of those policies should be written without the direct input of the people whose lives it's actually going to affect. Because otherwise how are you ever going to implement anything that actually meets people's needs?"[Strategic PSP Partner - Third Sector Representative]

Breaking down of silos

Although there was a general improvement in relationships between partners, in some Strategic PSPs, collaboration was seen as something that, in reality, had relatively little substance. Difficulties in establishing equality of relationships were mentioned, reflecting upon the unequal power differential between the public sector as the commissioning body and Third Sector organisations:

"At the moment, the public sector is paying all of the money and they commission the service. I think their role will be less important when the PSP gets together and we get some funding which is not wholly controlled by them. At the moment they are always 100% in control."[Strategic PSP Partner - Third Sector Representative]

At times, the Strategic PSP was rather seen as being little more than a vehicle to include the larger and 'better institutionalised' parts of the Third Sector in collaborative working:

"Because of the geography of the PSPs, you'll find that it's prominent national voluntary organisations that tend to be better placed to deliver these types of services. A criticism that could be made – I'm not making it, but it's a criticism that could be made – is that the small community oriented organisations that operate at very, very local and community level are not part of it."[Public Sector Stakeholder]

The issue of resources, time and effort required to drive the partnership forward were noted extensively by participants. This issue was particularly relevant among Third Sector providers who felt they were investing their time with the hope of gaining resources down the line through the eventual commissioning of the service. Conversely, those providers actively delivering a service that needed to be re-designed, and were asked to join the Strategic PSP, tended to voice their concerns for the length of time taken to 'get things going' and in 'making a decision' during lengthy meetings.

Changes in policy directives and the introduction of legislation – such as the personalisation agenda, or the integration of health and social care provision – combined with the perception of scarcity of resources, have also arguably contributed to stimulating new ways of working among providers. According to some of the interviewees, the Strategic PSP model has accelerated some of these processes:

"There's much more recognition now around the role that Third Sector needs to play. So I think there would have been an increasing role of the Third Sector in commissioning regardless of the PSP, but I think it would be a lot further behind. If you look at how health and social care integration itself, for example, has proceeded, there's a lot of evidence out there in terms of reports that the alliance have done that the Third Sector still feel like they're not really engaged in the process. Or that the work that the public sector undertakes does not facilitate their involvement, on a meaningful basis, in service design, in service commissioning. So I think we would be further behind where we are now without the PSP."[Third Sector Stakeholder]

'Stage 3' – commissioning of the piloted services

Although there was evidence that the Strategic PSP model, and collaborative working across sectors, has become increasingly recognised, there was next to no evidence of structural changes apparent in the way that services are designed and commissioned. For some of the Strategic PSP partners the value of the process stopped 'outside of the meetings' - that is only within the PSP experiment but - overall, the way services are procured has not changed significantly: budget holders still hold power over providers:

" PSP promised something that it hasn't really been able to deliver on. I think it was a good promise, in the sense it was a good vision for the future, but it wasn't thought through in terms of future sustainability. That's been the key problem because now you're ending up where we would have been anyway if we'd just been commissioned. But it was a new model to make people think, and I think it's maybe challenged people to think differently." [Third Sector Stakeholder]

Indeed, very few of the Strategic PSP partners we encountered claimed to have fully re-designed, tendered and commissioned any newly-created service; there was no long-term commitment to a truly collaborative approach to such activities in any kind of meaningful or systemic way:

"The third bit when everyone stops and says now we are going to commission this fantastic thing that we have developed together and co-created together and then piloted. We will now commission it. It doesn't really happen. And when it does happen, it happens in an entirely competitive way, just in the same way as any other commissioning would happen. So there is no real gain, I don't think. I am being quite critical here. Sorry I do appreciate I am being quite critical. But I don't see it at that point. If I was to put myself in a Third Sector organisation's shoes, I don't really feel it feels different to them to from just another invitation to tender coming out from the local authority, or the SPS, or the NHS. It is just as competitive as it was before."[Third Sector Stakeholder]

The expectation that the Strategic PSP model could reach a sufficient level of embeddedness or sustainability to change behaviours or structures has therefore not been fully met. More clarity about the intended ultimate goal (that is, the last stage of development) of the model could have been communicated and shared between public sector and Third Sector organisations from the outset:

"You're being paid for doing all that work and for designing the service, and what the PSP model is all about is actually finding out the expertise that you've got in the Third Sector. What is actually the best service that could meet the needs of the service users? There is then no guarantee then that any organisation involved is going to win the contract if we put it out to the tender. But the reassurance that we wanted to give Third Sector organisations who designed the service was that because you built it, built in the community benefit or maximum benefit to the service user – which is an area where the Third Sector specialises – you're in a good position to win the contract when it's actually tendered." [Public Sector Stakeholder]

If, however, the final objective of the model was, rather, to reshape services towards a more integrated, preventative and personalised approach – reflecting the Scottish approach based on principles of collaboration, co-production and partnership - then the Strategic PSP model has facilitated progress towards this objective, albeit there is still a significant distance to travel:

"Our public sector is still siloed, but we're making progress and the PSP programme was part of a culture change where many people in our public authorities have much more sense of the potential to work with social enterprises to solve problems. But we're probably just at the start of that journey, you know. We're certainly nowhere near where it needs to be to make the public sector more effective and to complete the social enterprise role in that."[Third Sector Stakeholder]

"We still work very much in siloes, within the NHS but also with social care. I know that everyone talks about integration and PSPs and all of that. But the barriers are so strong that it is going to take a long time and a lot of really difficult work by people at my level and people on the ground, not just the policy makers."[Public Sector Stakeholder].

What has been less effective - Summary of key points:

- While the PSP model assumes that Third Sector organisations are best placed to engage with, or know, service users, we found varying degrees of service user engagement by Third Sector partners.

- Difficulties in establishing equal relationships were mentioned, reflecting the unequal power differential between the public sector as the commissioning body and Third Sector organisations.

- Challenges in involving small organisations were also identified.

- Few of the partners claimed to have fully re-designed, tendered and commissioned the newly-created service, raising concerns around the sustainability of each of the Strategic PSPs.

- Although a short-term collaborative environment has been reached, a long-term collaborative way of working has not yet been developed, at least in any kind of meaningful or structural way.

- While the Strategic PSP model has been effective in developing partnerships, it has been less effective in creating the type of changes that allow services to become mainstreamed.

3.5 Mechanisms that have prevented success

The different ways in which the Strategic PSP model has been understood and used by various partners has arguably prevented the process of embedding this collaborative way of working in organisational practice. The changing economic environment with increased competition driven by budgetary constraints has also affected the Strategic PSP process of embedding more collaborative ways of working within various organisations.

Figure 4 – What has not worked: preventing mechanisms

Varying understandings of the model

The evidence gathered through this study indicates there was a significant variation in understandings of the principles of the Strategic PSP model and its scope across the six partnerships. We found that different people in different organisations have understood the model in different ways, attributing different goals and objectives to it. In some cases the focus was on the entity rather than the opportunity to experiment with different ways of working. This variation in understanding has not been helped by the different nature of the six Strategic PSPs and how they have been perceived both at strategic and operational levels. For example, the model has sometimes been used as a way to fill gaps in service provision, or as a vehicle to provide (higher) quality services at lower cost as opposed to promoting a more collaborative way of working:

"The PSP started with this prison being built, so this prison was due to open in 2012 and had a forward thinking governor, who wanted something different for the short term prisoners, so SPS [Scottish Prison Service] is an organisation, along with many, many Third Sector organisations, were looking at the model for the PSP or a model for the PSPs, Public Social Partnerships." [Strategic PSP Partner – Third Sector Representative]

"We see that community organisations can be a key player in delivering these services going forward. Both from an affordability point of view, but also from the types of service that we'll look to design, which is really around access to health services. Elderly people, disadvantaged communities, rural areas, are all areas where community organisations focus on."[Strategic PSP Partner - Public Sector Representative]

"We have just got to, you know there is an expression 'grasp the nettle,' take hold of something that is painful. We have got to do it, we have just got to do it and not wait forever to be told by our managers to make this change or that change. I think we have just got to try to ask our service users what they want and design the services based on that. And a PSP model it seems to me is a good a model as any to deliver what people want. We are doing it the wrong way around. We are trying to make people fit our services. And we need to make our services fit what people want."[Strategic PSP Partner – Public Sector Representative]

In other cases, mainstream service providers (and public sector officials) had perceived the Strategic PSP as an interesting 'additional' part of their services. Looking to the longer-term, it was not clear what the aims and goals of the Strategic PSP model were to be:

"They see what is happening and being piloted or developed in the PSP as additional to what they are doing: to the side of what their mainstream service is. And quite often they will set high value by it. They think of it as incredibly high-quality work, but what they are not seeing is that it is piloting an alternative to their delivery. They don't see it as an alternative to what they are doing. They see it as an addition to what they are doing."[Third Sector Stakeholder]

A minority of the Strategic PSPs had a commissioning target from the outset and/or had ring-fenced money to deliver the newly designed service:

"We didn't know really the direction it was going in. Nobody knew what it was about and we took probably the first year at least of the official time of the PSP to actually ground ourselves and, I think, really get to grips with what it is that we were wanting to achieve." (Strategic PSP Partner – Third Sector Representative)

"I am quite clear that it was about re-designing of the service, it was about a different way of doing that through the providers that were involved in the PSP. But still we had to go through that year, year and a half of not really necessarily knowing how we were going to do that."(Strategic PSP Partner –Public Sector Representative)

Changing economic environment and related budgetary constraints

In the context of austerity, it is challenging for public sector authorities to explore how to pool and redirect budgets; it is often difficult to establish a collaborative and transparent setting due to the politically-charged nature of budget priority-setting. The economic environment, with increasing budgetary constraints, has therefore affected the work of the Strategic PSP model:

"We need to save money here and reapply it there. That is the reality for the Scottish Prison Service when they are in the context of cuts. All public bodies have to cut their expenditure. That creates a very difficult context in which to do this kind of partnership work in. It is quite difficult for people to be honest partners with one another and be transparent with one another. I think all of those things are quite hard."[Public Sector Stakeholder]

Budget reductions and uncertainties have had the effect of increasing staff turn-over, both within the public and Third Sectors. This has an effect on the Strategic PSPs, since they are built upon people, their motivation, practice and knowledge:

"It is people and their practice that make things work. And again in the context of the public sector one of the effects of public sector expenditure cuts is that there is a lot of change in personnel. Quite often you might phone up and hear they have moved on or they are no longer there. And people are moving round all the time. There is insecurity because of that. And that is quite true in the Third Sector as well. So I think that context is really important."[Third Sector Stakeholder]

Budget constraints have also influenced the possibility of planning long-term commissioning processes, forcing public authorities to employ shorter-term decisions on budgets than they otherwise may have been able to enact. This short termism is a barrier for the inclusion of Strategic PSPs, which are time and resource intensive, into mainstream services. This is further complicated when a number of partners are involved:

"We have a geography that's wide as well, so we're not talking about one local authority, we've got five local authorities that have substantial numbers at Low Moss. We've got two health boards who, again, have substantial numbers. So suddenly we're talking about a multiplicity of partners; so that's the first problem. The beneficiaries are quite broad, and while we can identify them and what the impact is, the second bit of it is not just how many there are, but the cashable savings are, in some instances, quite far down the road."[Public Sector Stakeholder]

Mechanisms that have prevented success - Summary of key points:

- There was significant variation in understanding relating to the principles and scope of the Strategic PSP model across the six partnerships. This has meant that the model has developed alternatives to, or additional parts of, mainstream provision, but rarely involved services moving from piloting to mainstreaming.

- Budgetary pressures and constraints have affected the work of the Strategic PSP model, creating difficulties in establishing collaborative and transparent settings.

- In the context of austerity, it is challenging for public sector authorities to explore how to pool and redirect budgets, particularly if the emphasis is on saving money. Budget priority-setting can often be a politically charged process.