March 2014Andy Curtis, Angela Ellis Paine, Kathleen DoyleNick Ockenden

Evaluation of vInspired cashpoint

Institute for Volunteering ResearchThird Sector Research Centre (University of Birmingham)Volunteer Scotland

2

Contents

Foreword from Terry Ryall 3

Executive summary 4

Acknowledgements 10

1. Introduction 11

2. The application journey 19

3. Delivering cashpoint projects 31

4. Impact of cashpoint 37

4.1 Award Holders 38

4.2 Wider beneficiaries 42

5. Conclusions and recommendations 49

References 55

Appendix: data tables 56

3

Executive summary

Terry Ryall, CEO of vInspired

vInspired develops young people to become social agents who lead change on issues they

care about and galvanise other young people to join them. This evaluation of our vInspired

cashpoint programme tells a compelling story about the change young people are creating in

their communities, and also of the change created in the lives of the young people

themselves.

vInspired cashpoint offers grants of up to £500, together with support and advice, for young

people to create the change they want to see in their communities. These young people are

using their creativity and passion to provide valuable, sustainable community-based services

– 74% of projects continue beyond the initial grant funding period. Meanwhile they’re also

developing confidence and practical experience in leadership, project management, team

work and budgeting – vital skills for enterprise and work. What’s more, the projects create a

significant “halo effect”, with each grant recipient recruiting on average 10 additional young

volunteers to their project, each of whom are also developing new skills and confidence.

For every £1 invested in the vInspired cashpoint programme, the social return is worth

£4.50. And with a truly diverse group of young people receiving cashpoint grants, we can be

confident the programme is benefitting a wide range of communities across the country.

However, while the evaluation offers us a valuable opportunity to reflect on the programme’s

successes, we are committed to using its insights to improve it further – particularly in the

ways we support grant recipients to maintain and grow their own projects. We will fully

integrate the cashpoint plus scheme, an offer to high-performing cashpoint Award Holders

the opportunity to build, scale, and develop on the success of their original projects by

accessing a sizable grant, across the programme. In its pilot phase this has successfully

encouraged young people to stretch their aspirations for their projects.

We know that many young people with entrepreneurial flair are attracted to cashpoint. The

development of cashpoint plus, alongside the development of our Igniter crowdfunding

platform, will provide new stepping stones between social action and enterprise.

We will also integrate cashpoint into our vInspired Schools Network, which will increase the

reach of the programme across the country, but also allow us to plant the seed of social

action and entrepreneurship amongst a much younger age group.

Finally, we will make important changes to our monitoring process in order to better support

failed first-time applicants. We know that the young people on the programme value our

support with budgeting and time management. By providing extra pre-application support we

will generate high quality and realistic re-applications for projects that young people feel

confident to deliver.

Against a backdrop of high youth unemployment and cuts to community services, young

people are demonstrating a desire to use their creativity, energy and passion to find new

solutions to the problems they see around them. We believe that cashpoint can harness and

channel that energy. It puts young people in the driving seat to tackle the issues affecting

their communities, and in doing so, find ways to shape their own futures.

4  

Executive summary

Introduction vInspired cashpoint offers young people aged 14–25 the chance to apply for small grants of up to £500 to design and run their own social action projects in their local community. vInspired cashpoint originated from a match fund project in 2007, support by the Cabinet office and HSBC, it ran until 2011. It re-launched in April 2012 with the support from with funding from the Social Action Fund, Barrow Cadbury Trust, the Jack Petchey Foundation and BAA Communities Trust. The current programme runs until the end of June 2014.1 In May 2012 an independent consortium led by the Institute for Volunteering Research (part of NCVO), in partnership with the Third Sector Research Centre and Volunteer Scotland, were commissioned by vInspired to undertake an evaluation of the cashpoint programme from the re-launch in 2012 up to the end of December 2013. The evaluation aimed to review the implementation of the cashpoint programme and to assess its impact, with the following five objectives:

1. To analyse and describe the demographics and characteristics of vInspired

cashpoint award holders; 2. To explore the short-term and longer term impact of the programme on:

Award Holders; volunteers recruited; the wider community; and the provision of opportunities for youth volunteering and social engagement;

3. To explore the social value and return on investment of the programme; 4. To assess the effectiveness of the vInspired cashpoint model of intervention

on supporting youth-led social action; 5. To disseminate the results and learning of the evaluation effectively

throughout the third sector and academic / research communities, and also to the general public.

A multi-staged methodology was employed and consisted of: six case studies of projects; online surveys to Award Holders and volunteers; secondary analysis of monitoring data collected by vInspired; and a Social Return on Investment analysis (SROI).

The application journey Applying to cashpoint

• The youth-led approach was facilitated by a grant-making process that was consciously designed by vInspired to be light-touch, with the application

                                                                                                                         1 The application deadline ends in March 2014 but the projects can run until the end of June 2014.

5  

process being praised by Award Holders as being straightforward and quick to complete.

• Award Holders reported that there was effective support from vInspired during the application process when it was needed.

Motivations for applying

• Motivations for applying were primarily altruistic, and more so than the wider population of young volunteers nationally.

Project design

• cashpoint enables and funds projects that are genuinely youth-led: Award Holders typically designed and applied for the Award on their own, frequently reflecting their personal interests and understandings of community need.

Making awards

• At the time of analysis 355 grants had been made after 671 applications (including 19 cashpoint PLUS awards).

• Based on the number of volunteers engaged so far, the programme is on course to exceed targets around engaging volunteers.

The characteristics of the Award Holders and volunteers

• Award Holders and volunteers were from diverse backgrounds. More Award Holders were female and most were from diverse ethnic backgrounds: over half of Award Holders and volunteers were from non-White British backgrounds.

• Fifteen per cent of Award Holders attended private schools, around twice the national average. However, a large proportion of Award Holders came from the most deprived neighbourhoods.

• There was a larger proportion of Award holders aged 22-25 compared to the youngest category of 14-17.

• Award Holders were most likely to be in full-time education, although there was a significant minority who were self-employed (12%) compared to the national average for the age group (5%). This suggests that cashpoint was particularly attractive to entrepreneurial (or at least self-employed) young people, perhaps due to its autonomous, self-led nature.

• Award Holders and volunteers were much more likely to have volunteered previously compared to the national average for the age group. Importantly, however, cashpoint represented raising the bar for Award Holders, offering a leadership role and more responsibility.

Developing and managing a grant

6  

• The projects' were varied, but the main activity of just under half involved art or sport. This was often a mechanism to achieve other outcomes, such as personal development of beneficiaries or improving community relations.

• The Award Holders felt well supported by vInspired in the projects and also tended to have had support from the volunteers and in some cases a ‘host’ organisation.

• The challenges Award Holders faced included time management, attendance of projects, budget management and recruiting volunteers.

• In terms of sustainability, just under three-quarters of the projects reported that they would continue.

Impact on Award Holders

• cashpoint provides impact on Award Holders in four core areas: o Networking and social capital: the vast majority of Award Holders made

new friends and social contacts as a result of their project, sometimes contributing to other benefits, such as paid work.

o Enjoyment and satisfaction: Award Holders reported that their involvement in projects was an enjoyable experience (94% reporting that they gained enjoyment and satisfaction from taking part). This may reflect the origin of many of the projects in the leisure interests of Award Holders.

o Personal development: the development of self-confidence and self-esteem was a major area of benefit for Award Holders, as well as a sense of pride in themselves and their achievements.

o Skill development and progression into education and employment: Award Holders reported developing a variety of different skills as a result of their involvement, particularly around project planning (94%) and budget management (90%), but also in leadership, learning about funding applications, experience of evaluation, and team-work. Award Holders also felt that it had enhanced their employment prospects, and to a greater degree than they had expected at the start of the project.

• The SROI identified a ratio of £1 to £4.80 with regard to the wider social value of the enhanced education and employment destinations of cashpoint Award Holders.

Impact on volunteers, wider beneficiaries and community Volunteers Volunteers benefited as a result of their participation, although reflecting the fact that their involvement was less intense than that of Award Holders, not necessarily to the same depth as them. The key impacts discussed by volunteers were similar to those for Award Holders:

7  

• Skills development, typically in leadership, interpersonal and communication, teaching, and teamwork;

• Personal development, primarily focused on increases in confidence as the result of being in leadership roles or working with people from different backgrounds;

• Progression to employment and enhanced employment prospects; • Making new friends and social contacts, as well as experiencing enjoyment

and satisfaction as a result of being involved. Project beneficiaries

• Award Holders estimated the total number of beneficiates for their projects to be 8,381; the median average per project was 28;

• Beneficiaries varied widely according to the type of projects; • Those who attended performances or lessons as part of projects were felt to

have benefited from enhanced knowledge, self-esteem and confidence; • Some projects provided beneficiaries with a new service.

Wider community

• These were mainly seen as a result of providing a service in a community and bringing people together with the aim of improving community cohesion;

• Using the average number of hours contributed by Award Holders (14 per week) and by volunteers (12) over a median project period of five weeks (the average across completed projects), 850 hours were contributed over the programme as a whole. Using the under 18 minimum hourly wage, this equates to £3,200 from a £500 investment, and an SROI ratio of £1 to £6.40.

Conclusions and recommendations Building momentum: vInspired cashpoint has given a boost to youth-led social action. If current momentum is maintained, the programme looks to be on track to deliver on its engagement targets. Indeed, it has already exceeded its target for the number of first-time volunteers engaged. Diverse and engaged: cashpoint has successfully engaged a wide range of young people in social action projects. Its success at attracting people from non-White backgrounds, and from more deprived neighbourhoods is particularly noteworthy. Igniting passion: Young people come to apply to cashpoint through a number of different routes and for a range of altruistic and self-interested reasons. A significant driving force, however, is the passion that they have for the activities which form the basis of their projects. A straight-forward application process and facilitative in-application support, eases the process of getting projects off the ground, and enables Award Holders to access the money needed to bring their ideas to fruition.

8  

Involving others: The energy, passion and enthusiasm of Award Holders can be palpable and catching. In many cases Award Holders have recruited their friends and existing contacts to volunteer within their projects, in others they have used more formal recruitment mechanisms to engage people previously unknown to them. Drawing in support: The support from vInspired is light-touch and seemingly well-pitched. vInspired gave Award Holders the flexibility and freedom to deliver their projects in the way they felt best, while maintaining a persistent presence at the end of the phone. Evidence suggests that more significant, however, is the support provided by individuals and organisations who nurture the project and/or the Award Holder at the local level. Making a difference: The greatest outcomes of cashpoint are experienced by the Award Holders and the other Volunteers who support them. Many Award Holders, and to a lesser extent Volunteers, started out with high levels of skills and confidence. Keeping it going: As their grant-funding came to an end, a majority of Award Holders planned to keep their projects going. Some are searching for alternative funding; some have already found some. At the programme level, grant distribution needs to maintain momentum if the target for the total number of awards made is to be met. The greater challenge, however, is arguably the successful completion of all the existing and remaining projects within the funding period. Evaluating the model: The support model has worked for those who have successfully completed projects – it has represented an appropriate balance of guidance and flexibility. Its overall effectiveness, however, is hard to assess until the outcomes of those projects which are yet to complete are known. Based on the findings from this evaluation, we recommend the following:

1. Maintain the £500 size of grant due to the effectiveness of small investments of funding;

2. Provide certificates to Award Holders which acknowledge their work and the success of the project;

3. Maintain cashpoint PLUS and make integral to future programmes, although review the size of the award;

4. Review and potentially enhance promotional and outreach work and pre-application support;

5. Review the monitoring process in order that there is a systematic way of tracking the progress of projects, including when projects have completed

9  

even if all the paperwork has not been processed. If this indicates projects take longer than two months then review this timeframe.

6. Investigate the challenges faced by projects which struggle to complete in a timely fashion (an important aspect not explored by the current evaluation) and, if necessary, review the provision of support – from within and outside of the programme.

10  

Acknowledgements The evaluation consortium was made up of:

The Institute for Volunteering Research Andrew Curtis Nick Ockenden Emma Broomhead Sarah Jenkins Third Sector Research Centre Angela Ellis Paine Nathan Hughes Steven McKay Madeleine Brown Rebecca Hill Volunteer Scotland Kathleen Doyle Becky Parry The evaluation team would like to acknowledge the help and support of various people, without whom this evaluation would not have been possible. The cashpoint team at vInspired provided invaluable help throughout. We are also grateful to the research participants in the six case study projects for engaging in the evaluation, particularly the Award Holders who facilitated our visits and for enabling us to observe activities and interview those involved in their projects. Thanks also to all the Award Holders and volunteers who responded to the surveys. It was an inspiring experience. Our biggest debt of gratitude, however, goes to our team of five peer researchers – all young volunteers themselves - who engaged so whole heartedly with the evaluation process. They made the evaluation workshops not just useful but also enjoyable; they enhanced the evaluation tools and methods; they enriched the whole process. Thank you.

11  

1. Introduction This is the final evaluation report of the vInspired cashpoint programme. An independent consortium of research organisations, hereafter referred to as the evaluation team, led by the Institute for Volunteering Research (part of the National Council for Voluntary Organisations), partnered with the Third Sector Research Centre (based at the University of Birmingham) and Volunteer Scotland, were commissioned by vInspired to undertake an evaluation of the cashpoint programme between May 2012 and December 2013. This report seeks to capture the process, outputs and outcomes of the programme. This introductory chapter provides a background to the programme before outlining the evaluation’s methodology. 1.1 Background to the vInspired cashpoint programme Interest in youth volunteering in the UK has been high for several decades. Under the New Labour government we saw the development of programmes such as Millennium Volunteers, Active Citizens in Schools, and the launch of V (vInspired) in 2006. This interest continued under the Coalition government which has funded major initiatives including National Citizen Service and International Citizen Service. More recently, the development of the Decade of Social Action and the launch of the Step up to Serve campaign – which vInspired has been involved with as part of Generation Change – has demonstrated high-level and cross party support for young people’s involvement in social action. Crucial to this approach has been the prioritisation of the activity being led, designed and undertaken by the young person themselves. The policy environment continues to be a supportive one for the development of programmes designed to engage young people in social action projects. vInspired cashpoint originated from a match fund project in 2007, support by the Cabinet office and HSBC, it ran until 2011. It re-launched in April 2012, with an initial end-date of September 2013, later extended until June 2014.2 It offers young people aged 14–25 years old the chance to apply for small grants of up to £500 to design and run their own social action projects in their local community. The re-launched programme varied from that run previously both in terms of the size of grant available - with the maximum available significantly lower than in the previous round - and the age-range of applicants - opening up access to 14-16 year olds for the first time. The programme is jointly funded and supported by vInspired, the Social Action Fund3, Barrow Cadbury Trust4, the Jack Petchey Foundation5 and BAA Communities

                                                                                                                         2 All grants need to be awarded by this point, opposed to projects being completed. 3 The Social Action Fund supports projects across England. 4 Barrow Cadbury Trust supports projects in Birmingham and the Black Country. 5 The Jack Petchey Foundation supports projects in London and Essex.

12  

Trust6. As cashpoint runs until March 2014, the evaluation is partial, examining the output and outcomes of the first 131 completed projects (up to the end of 2013). Ultimately the programme looks to fund 410 projects. 1.1.1 Programme aims vInspired’s cashpoint programme aims to increase the number of youth-led social action projects, including those developed within schools, which respond to local needs and issues – creating positive change that is not only of benefit to the wider community (for example, by improving local community spaces, environment and services) but to young people themselves. In benefiting young people, the programme hopes to support the development of key skills, including project and budget planning, managing others, communication and teamwork. The aspiration is that this may ultimately enhance employability and provide a progression route into employment, education and/or further volunteering. It is hoped that this will encourage young people to develop a sense of ownership and belonging to their communities and, in turn, help improve perceptions of young people through highlighting the positive contributions of young volunteers.

Overall, the cashpoint model can be characterised by the following:

• Relatively small grant amount (£500), with a light-touch application and monitoring process;

• Facilitating opportunities for relatively short-term (two month) youth-led social action projects, that are required to have a clear community benefit;

• Led by young people (aged 14-25) who devise and deliver the projects;

• Involving Award Holders and at least two other young volunteers in each project;

• Support provided by vInspired to Award Holders through regular phone and email contact.

In this report those leading the projects (i.e. the individual in receipt of the grant) are referred to as ‘Award Holders’ throughout. The additional volunteers are referred to as ‘Volunteers’. However, it should be remembered that Award Holders are also conducting the project in a voluntary capacity. cashpoint has a number of targets, set at the beginning of the programme with the funding bodies, relating to the number of projects to be delivered and the number of volunteers to be engaged (see table 1).                                                                                                                          6 BAA Communities Trust supports projects in Southampton, Heathrow, Stansted, Aberdeen, Glasgow and Edinburgh.

13  

Table 1. Programme-level targets Target

Programme target

Projects 410

Volunteering opportunities (this is also the total number of opportunities, as all opportunities are new)

1,230

First time volunteers 369

Additional local volunteers (includes all other volunteers) 820

1.2 Methodology This section outlines the evaluation methodology, starting with its aim and objectives. 1.2.1 Overview of the methodology 1.2.1.1 Aim and objectives of the evaluation The evaluation aimed to review the implementation of the cashpoint programme from the re-launch in 2012 and to assess its impact. The evaluation’s objectives were to:

1. Analyse and describe the demographics and characteristics of vInspired

cashpoint Award Holders;

2. Explore the short-term and longer term impact of the programme on:

a) Award Holders

b) Volunteers recruited;

c) The wider community;

d) The provision of opportunities for youth volunteering and social engagement;

3. Explore the social value and return on investment of the programme;

4. Assess the effectiveness of the vInspired cashpoint model of intervention on supporting youth-led social action;

5. Disseminate the results and learning of the evaluation effectively throughout the third sector and academic / research communities, and also to the general public7.

                                                                                                                         7 This objective is not addressed in this report.

14  

1.2.1.2 Peer researchers The evaluation team includes five volunteer peer researchers: two in London, two in the West Midlands; and one in Scotland. They were all in their early 20s and either final year under-graduate or post-graduate students. They took part in four workshops held at critical stages of the evaluation which provided training on evaluation techniques while also engaging them in the design and conduct of the evaluation. The peer researchers were involved in various research activities throughout the evaluation, such as designing questionnaires and topic guides, as well as being involved in the case studies, conducting research interviews and undertaking observations. In the latter stages of the evaluation they contributed to the analysis and write-up. The peer researchers’ contribution to the evaluation was hugely valuable, not least due to their ‘insider’ status and their ability to empathise with Award Holders and other volunteers. 1.2.2 Research components of the evaluation The evaluation involved four inter-linked components, including: six case studies; online surveys of Award Holders and Volunteers; secondary analysis of monitoring data; and a Social Return on Investment analysis. As has been discussed, the evaluation team was a consortium of three organisations. The Institute for Volunteering Research (based at the National Council for Voluntary Organisations in London) led the consortium, and were responsible for surveys, analysing monitoring data, and leading on report writing. The Third Sector Research Centre (based at the University of Birmingham) was responsible for two case studies and the Social Return on Investment analysis. Volunteer Scotland was responsible for one case study in Glasgow. All three supported peer researchers in their area and collaborated on analysis and report writing. 1.2.2.1 Case studies Six case studies of cashpoint projects were conducted. Reflecting regional funding targets, three were conducted in London, two in the West Midlands and one in Glasgow.8 Beyond the geographical criteria, the case study projects were selected to encompass a range of different project themes9 and the different backgrounds of Award Holders. Each of the case studies involved two site visits, one towards the start of the project and one towards the end, and included:                                                                                                                          8 Identifying and recruiting case study projects was a particular challenge in Scotland; two case studies had been planned but due to the limited numbers of funded projects in the country, it was only possible to recruit one and an additional case study was completed in London. 9 The project descriptions of the first 57 awards were analysed to look for recurrent themes. This helped to identify the first three case-studies and inform the design of the surveys. The themes are listed in chapter three.

15  

• Interviews with the Award Holders at the beginning and end of the project;

• Interviews with volunteers;

• Interviews with beneficiaries and other key stakeholders;

• Observations of activities. The interviews with Award Holders and volunteers were semi-structured. Many of the interviews with beneficiaries and stakeholders were more informal and often shorter in duration. Observations reflected the nature of the activity taking place in the case study, but included watching lessons, attending (and in some cases taking part in) rehearsals and performances, and being present throughout a community day. Table 2. Case studies overview Case study

Themes and activities

After-school club

• The project sought to address the underrepresentation of women in a particular academic discipline.

• It provided six weeks of education based activities and engaged girls aged 5-10. The lessons were designed to be fun and engaging.

• The project received additional funding to continue.

Sports club

• The project provided six sessions of sports training and matches, with coaching from national league players. It engaged secondary school aged boys from Years 9 to 13.

• It encouraged participants to engage in training schedules, nutritional information sessions and matches.

Community arts event

• A one day community-arts event designed for people to take the time out to appreciate someone important to them.

• It sought to increase community engagement in the arts in one of the most deprived areas of the city.

Poetry workshops and performance

• A series of poetry workshops for young people were delivered over a number of weeks. The sessions were led by the Award Holder helped by volunteers. These looked to develop the young people’s creative work but also looked to increase confidence ahead of the performance at the end.

• The performance was attended by friends and family of the beneficiaries.

Dance summer school

• This included a week-long dance summer school (aimed at school-aged children); workshops (open to all, including some in schools and some in local community venues); and a flashmob

16  

(aimed at the local community). The workshops led up to that for a number of weeks.

• The aim was to widen participation, increase cultural awareness, challenge stereotypes, and improve community relations

Drama performance and discussion

• Seven young people formed a theatre company and developed a performance looking at issues affecting young people.

• They performed the piece at a community venue and afterwards there was a debate with the audience about the issues raised in the performance.

1.2.2.2 Online surveys Online surveys were conducted with Award Holders and wider project Volunteers (referred to throughout the report as ‘Volunteers’). Award Holders were surveyed at three points: at the beginning of their project; at the end of their project; and three months after their projects completed. The three Award Holder surveys were:

• Start of project survey – project themes; anticipated project outcomes; demographics of Award Holders; and skills and attitudes.

• End of project survey – views and experiences of project delivery; and skills and attitudes (enabling an assessment of change between pre-and post- project).

• Follow-up survey – occurrences of longer-term outcomes from cashpoint, such as whether it helped Award Holders in applying for employment or education courses.

The surveys were distributed by vInspired as part of the grant-management process. Volunteers were surveyed at the end of projects. The surveys were distributed to Volunteers for whom Award Holders had provided contact details. The response rate for each survey is presented in table 3 below:

17  

Table 3. Survey response rates10 Response

number Total sample (base)

Response rate (%)

Award Holders’ start of project survey 201 336 60

Award Holders’ end of project survey 108 131 82

‘Linked’ Award Holders surveys 51 131 39

Award Holders’ follow-up survey 33 78 42

Volunteer survey 73 1,083 7

Due to delays in launching the start of project survey, a number of early Award Holders were missed, thereby reducing the possible number of linked surveys (i.e. where respondents answered both the start of project survey and the end of project survey) the evaluation could capture. Therefore, the number of responses to individual questions is low in some instances and these results should be treated with a degree of caution. Additionally, the follow-up survey was originally designed to be completed six months after the end of the project, but this timeframe was reduced to three months due primarily to some delays in grant distribution and project completion which reduced the time available within the evaluation to capture longer-term change. Finally, the Volunteer survey experienced a comparatively low response rate, possibly as a result of the fact that these individuals were less actively involved in projects than the Award Holders. While these findings are nonetheless informative, they should also be treated with some caution. 1.2.3 Analysis of monitoring report Project monitoring reports, collected by vInspired, were analysed by the evaluation team. These were completed by Award Holders at the end of projects and captured key outputs such as the number of Volunteers and beneficiaries engaged in each project. There were also open questions about the support received and challenges faced which were analysed. At the time of reporting, 131 projects had completed and all associated monitoring reports were included in the evaluation analysis. 1.2.4 Social Return on Investment analysis (SROI) The Social Return on Investment analysis (SROI) sought to turn the benefits of volunteering into a monetary sum, to be compared against the cost of the projects that led to the volunteering. The sources of information for the SROI were primarily

                                                                                                                         10 Note: percentages presented in this report are rounded so will not always add up to 100%.

18  

drawn from the online surveys conducted with the Award Holders and (in some cases) with the Volunteers. The SROI also uses monitoring data collected by vInspired as well as volunteers engaged (and due to be engaged in current projects) for the first 313 projects (with actual Volunteers for 131 completed projects, at the time of extract). Reflecting the emphasis on the SROI for individual projects, the costs included are those associated with individual project delivery (i.e. the size of the grants awarded), rather than the programme as a whole. The analysis is presented in chapter four and there are two aspects to this:

a) SROI focused on the education and employment destinations of Award Holders and Volunteers (e.g. if they have got a new job or new course);

b) SROI focused on the value of the volunteering hours in the programme. 1.3 Report Structure Chapter two examines the application journey in cashpoint and the background of Award Holders and Volunteers. The experience of delivering cashpoint projects is explored in chapter three while chapter four looks at impact, firstly on Award Holders and then more widely. The final chapter draws together conclusions and makes a series of recommendations for the on-going development of the programme. Names reported in the case studies and other key details have been changed to protect the anonymity of Award Holders.

19  

2. The application journey: from project idea to Award Holder  

Chapter summary

• The evaluation found that cashpoint enables and funds projects that are genuinely youth-led.

• Award Holders typically designed and applied for the Award on their own, reflecting their personal interests and understanding of need in the community.

• Receiving the cashpoint Award enabled the Award Holder to realise their social action idea.

• This was facilitated by a process that was consciously designed by vInspired to be light-touch, with the application process being praised by Award Holders as being straightforward and quick to complete.

• Award Holders received effective support from vInspired when it was needed.

• Their motivations for applying were primarily altruistic, and more so than the wider population of young volunteers.

• Based on the number of Volunteers engaged so far, the programme is on course to exceed targets around engaging Volunteers.

• cashpoint Award Holders and Volunteers were from diverse backgrounds. Award Holders were likely to be female and there was great diversity in terms of ethnicity, with over half of Award Holders and Volunteers being from non-White British backgrounds.

• There is also evidence of contrasting backgrounds in terms of affluence, with 15% attending private schools, around twice the national average, yet Award Holders are twice as likely to come from the most deprived neighbourhoods.

• Award Holders were most likely to be in full-time education, although there was a significant minority who were self-employed (12%) compared to the national average for the age group (5%).

• Award Holders and Volunteers were much more likely to have volunteered previously compared to the national average for the age group. Yet, importantly, for Award Holders, cashpoint represented raising the bar, having a leadership role and more responsibility.

 This chapter explores the application journey for cashpoint. First of all the application criteria and process is outlined. Then the motivations of Award Holders for applying

20  

and how they developed their project idea are examined, before exploring of the number of applications and grant distribution so far. It finishes looking at the characteristics of the Award Holders and Volunteers. 2.1 cashpoint funding criteria In order to secure a cashpoint grant, applicants were required to demonstrate that their project met the following key cashpoint criteria:

• Community benefit / social impact: creating positive change that is of benefit to the wider community as well as to the young person themselves;

• Create additional volunteering opportunities: project leaders are asked to recruit a minimum of two additional young volunteers;

• Youth-led: applicants must play an integral role in owning and shaping the social action – addressing their cares and concerns as a young person through creative and innovative responses to local issues (as opposed to an organisation’s youth provision);

• New: projects must be based on an original idea – cashpoint is unable to fund projects that are already in existence and seeking funding to continue.

Prospective applicants are required to complete a light-touch online application process, which operates on a rolling basis with no fixed deadlines. Each submission is then progressed to the ‘assessment’ stage where applicants are given the opportunity to further explain and, when necessary, develop their project with the support of an assigned vInspired Youth Projects Coordinator (YPC). A final decision, based on whether or not the project meets the criteria listed above, is made by the vInspired cashpoint team. If approved, applicants are sent a grant offer subject to the fulfilment of any specific terms. When this offer is accepted a bank account is then set-up in order to transfer the grant monies.11 By May 2013, the programme was enhanced with an additional component. The development of cashpoint PLUS sought to offer high-performing cashpoint Award Holders the opportunity to build and develop on the success of their original projects by accessing grants of up to £3,000. This allows young people to build upon their learning and experiences from the initial project to scale-up their community project. Within the cashpoint PLUS offer, £500 of the grant is set aside to support the personal development of Award Holders, enabling them to access relevant training courses to support the sustainability of the project. Successful applicants are required to demonstrate how their project could meet at least one of the following criteria:

                                                                                                                         11 See Figure A1 in the appendix.

21  

• Potential to generate income / develop into a social enterprise;

• Potential to scale-up;

• Address an unmet need. 2.2 The experience of Award Holders applying to cashpoint 2.2.1 Finding out about cashpoint Applicants found out about cashpoint through a variety of different approaches.  The most frequently cited sources amongst Award Holders were: vInspired.com (52%), a friend/parent (20%), and a youth club/organisation (16%).12 The evaluation case studies also highlighted the importance of social media as a source of information about cashpoint – case study Award Holders had, for example, come across the programme through sites such as twitter and facebook. 2.2.2 Award Holder experience of the application process Award Holders were unanimously positive about the application process. Positives described included the short nature of the form, with straightforward questions which were quick to complete. In addition, the ease of application may be related to the previous experience of Award Holders. Some of the case study Award Holders had existing experience of completing funding applications; either from previous attempts to gain funding for this particular project, or through other volunteering or paid roles. Furthermore, vInspired were also seen to be supportive during the application stage:

‘I’ve never seen such an easy form. I'm used to application processes, [which are] terrifying, writing down every minor detail that might possibly happen. [With cashpoint] it was just a case of, “tell us about your idea, tell us why you want the money and tell us how much you want”.’ (Award Holder)

‘[vInspired staff member] was really helpful and she suggested some other things that I didn’t take into account when I was doing my [budget] like volunteer expenses and if I needed to add them in and these sort of things. So, yeah, it was really helpful.’ (Award Holder)

Perhaps reflective of these positive views, suggestions for improvement were limited. There were, however, some specific requests for additional help with budgeting (e.g. examples of likely costs associated with certain types of activities), and for the provision of a printed copy of the application after submission (it is filled in online, so they do not necessarily have a record of the application and/or associated budget).

                                                                                                                         12 See Table A1 in the appendix.

22  

2.3 Motivations of Award Holders and Volunteers The evaluation explored what motivated Award Holders and Volunteers to get involved in cashpoint. Altruistic and community-minded motivations dominated, although an interest in personal development also featured heavily. In the online survey, the motivations most cited by Award Holders for applying for the award were: wanting to improve things/help people (87%) and feeling that there was a need in the community (74%). Then the next most cited reasons were the cause being important to them (59%), giving them a chance to use their existing skills (57%), and to give something back (54%).13 Award Holders in the case studies outlined similar motivations, for example:

‘Friends and family, connected with my social interests and hobbies, and I felt there is a need in my community.’ (Award Holder)

The Volunteers had similarly altruistic motivations with wanting to improve things/help people (67%) being the most cited reason for involvement. Volunteers, however, appeared to attach greater relative importance to skill development (59%) and learning new skills (55%) than Award Holders, which were the second and third most cited motivations for Volunteers respectively.14 These questions were deliberately developed to reflect categories in the Helping Out survey (2007) in order to allow a comparison to other studies of volunteering.15 There are some similarities between cashpoint Award Holders’ motivations and the findings in Helping Out for 16-24 year olds. One key difference, however, was the extent to which cashpoint Award Holders prioritised altruistic motivations: 87% of cashpoint Award Holders cited wanting to improve things/help people as a motive compared to 56% of young respondents to Helping Out. In both cases this was the most frequently cited motive. This suggests that motivations for becoming a cashpoint Award Holder differ from other young volunteers in the respect that there is even greater emphasis on altruistic reasons than personal gain. Other cashpoint Volunteers are, however, closer to Helping Out respondents in this respect. The Award Holders were also asked what had attracted them to the cashpoint programme; rather than asking about motivating factors, this sought to explore what principles and values they were attracted by. The most frequently cited attractions were leading and designing a project (with 83% citing it as important) and choosing the type of project and work (82%). This indicates that two key aspects of cashpoint – that young people both lead the project and decide what the activity of the projects

                                                                                                                         13 See Table A2 in the appendix. 14 See Table A3 in the appendix. 15 Low, N., Butt, S., Ellis Paine, A. and Davis Smith, J. (2007) Helping Out: A national survey of volunteering and charitable giving. London: National Centre for Social Research and the Institute for Volunteering Research. p. 35.

23  

will be – are very important to the Award Holders16, again highlighting an interest in self-autonomous and youth-led opportunities. This is perhaps indicative of a particular type of volunteering: youth-led social action. The young people are themselves responsible for developing a project rather than, for example, taking up an existing volunteering opportunity within an organisational setting. Case study: maths club for girls With funding from cashpoint, Emma set up a maths club for girls. A keen mathematician herself, Emma was motivated by a desire to engage more girls in maths in order to move beyond stereotypes of what maths is about and the types of people who become mathematicians. This was not the first time Emma had been involved in an after-school club. She had previously volunteered to help support a science club, which was based in the same venue she used to locate her new project. This was the first time, however, that Emma had led a project. She heard about vInspired on twitter and that led her to the cashpoint programme. Emma found the application process easy, and after receiving the award she set about recruiting other volunteers by advertising on maths-based discussion forums and building links with other organisations working in the same field. The project was a success. The girls who attended the club seemed to enjoy it and became more confident, enthusiastic and interested. Emma has successfully secured funding to continue the club, and hopes to expand it to older girls. 2.4 Developing the project design The process of designing and developing a project application varied but, reflecting the above, often arose as a result of the Award Holders responding to a need in their local community, or within a certain group of the population (e.g. young people). Often the projects developed through connections to the Award Holders’ own areas of interest or passions. For example, one project originated as a result of a desire to increase female participation in maths, challenging stereotypes about the subject and those who take it. For another, the project grew out of the involvement of a group of young people within a drama workshop and a desire to continue that activity – a perceived lack of suitable opportunities for young people in this type of activity also drove the project:

‘…as a young person – I’m an actor, comedian, poet and writer – there’s no opportunities for me, so instead of running around and trying to look for opportunities, I thought “let me create them for myself” and it worked. It helped other young people as well.’ (Award Holder)

                                                                                                                         16 See Table A4 in the appendix.

24  

For some Award Holders, their groups were already in existence and the project was an extension of the activities of an existing group or activity. In some cases evidence suggests that the projects would have gone ahead in some form without the Award, although it would likely have been a slower start or on a smaller scale project. In other instances, the project replaced an activity that had previously been in existence but had stopped, due, for example, to a removal of funding. Crucially, receiving an award provided the young person and their project with a significant kick-start and ability to progress it as an activity. Case study: school netball team Jonathan is a keen netball player. In the past he has played for a national team and been captain of a local team. He is also a committed youth activist, having previously volunteered for his local Youth Cabinet and Student Council. Jonathan’s passions for netball and for volunteering combined and his engagement reached a new level with the development of the cashpoint project which involved setting up a netball team in his old school with the aim of educating young people in what it takes to ‘make it’ in sports. Alongside a reflection of Jonathan’s passions and interests, the project was motivated by the collapse of a previous school team and of local inter-school tournaments due to loss of funding. The project involved a combination of training, nutritional information and tournaments. Although Jonathan has now left the school, one of the teachers hopes to encourage other students to develop similar projects in the future. A recurring theme running through the application process is that the majority of Award Holders initiated and drove the design and application process themselves, reflecting the nature of the projects as being youth-led social action. Most either designed the project on their own (69%), with a smaller number having had some assistance or collaboration17 (25% as a group, and six per cent with someone else’s help18). 2.5 Programme awards and performance The final part of the journey of an applicant is the awarding of the grant itself. This can be explored by looking at records from vInspired on the number of awards made, as well as information on who the Award Holders are. 2.5.1 Applications, grants and success rates cashpoint originally had a target of making 410 grants by September 2013. It was agreed subsequently with funders that the programme would stay open until June

                                                                                                                         17 Source: Start of Grant surveys (valid n = 198) 18 The application form allows for Support worker details – if a young person has additional support needs or would require help to deliver the project.

25  

2014. At the time of analysis (December 2013) 355 grants (including 19 cashpoint PLUS awards) had been made after 671 applications.19 With four months of the (extended) funded period of the programme remaining, 87% of the target number of projects had been funded. Figure one presents applications and grants awarded quarter by quarter.20 There were fluctuations in the number of applications, peaking in the spring of 2013. While it took some time for grant distribution to rise, both applications and awards have grown over time. The average number of awards per quarter is just over 50, having peaked in the summer of 2013. Figure 1. Number of cashpoint applications and grants made by quarter

Monitoring data from vInspired shows that just under 50 Award Holders (around 14%) had either withdrawn from the process part way through or were unresponsive to any communication, so vInspired had to assume they had withdrawn. cashpoint distributed awards throughout the UK, although a vast majority of awards were made in England and Scotland, and there was some regional and country-wide variation. The region with the highest number of awards was London (39%).21 Six per cent of awards (18 in total) were in Scotland.22

                                                                                                                         19 This evaluation did not seek to explore why applications had been unsuccessful or were turned down. 20 Note: due to the time it takes to process applications, the number of awards made in a quarter will not necessarily be for projects applied for in that period. 21 See Table A5 in the appendix. 22 13 out of the 18 Scottish awards were in Glasgow.

0  

20  

40  

60  

80  

100  

120  

140  

Apr  -­‐  Jun  2012  

Jul  -­‐  Sep  2012  

Oct  -­‐  Dec  2012  

Jan  -­‐  Mar  2013  

Apr  -­‐  Jun  2013  

July  -­‐  Sep  2013  

Oct  -­‐  Dec  2013    

Applica;ons  

Awards  made  

26  

2.5.2 Programme progress towards targets cashpoint is working towards targets set by the programme funders, which predominately relate to the number and type of volunteers engaged. As the programme is still in progress and at the time of analysis there was a further four months of the programme to run, it would not be expected that these targets had been met by this stage. However, based on performance to date, we expect the cashpoint programme to have reached and exceeded its targets by the end of the funded period. Table four presents the overall targets for engaging Volunteers and data from the first 131 completed cashpoint projects on the Volunteers engaged so far. With the programme being in progress it is useful to develop a metric of what the projects have achieved so far, compared to the original targets; this is done by calculating targets per project. Table four contains three targets for engaging Volunteers in cashpoint: the number of new volunteering opportunities; the number of first time volunteers; and the number of additional local Volunteers. The third column divides the targets by 410 to establish the target per project. The fourth column contains the number of different types of Volunteers engaged to date and the far right column divides these by 131, to show the average figure per project to date. Table 4. Performance against Volunteer targets

Target

Programme target (410

projects)

Target per

project23

Outputs after 131

projects24

Average outputs per

project25

New volunteering opportunities (all volunteering roles in the cashpoint project)

1,230 3

1,219

9.3

First time volunteers 369 0.9 722 5.5

Additional local volunteers (all non 14-25s volunteers)

820 2

445

3.4

Source: vInspired’s End of Grant reports (n = 131) By comparing the target by project (column 3) and average outputs per project to date (column 5) we can see that the projects so far have engaged considerably more Volunteers – both new, first-time, and additional – per project than the original per                                                                                                                          23 Programme target number is divided by 410 (awards) to find target per project. 24 Number of volunteers engaged in 131 projects funded to December 2013 25 Number of volunteers engaged to December 2013 divided by 131 to find the average per project

27  

project target. If the average is maintained until the end of the programme, the main targets are due to be exceeded. 2.6 Characteristics of Award Holders 2.6.1 Background of Award Holders and Volunteers cashpoint Award Holders and Volunteers have diverse backgrounds in terms of age, sex, ethnicity and education. Overall there was a larger proportion of Award Holders aged 22-25 (42%) compared to the youngest category of 14-17 year olds (21%). Volunteers were even more polarised than Award Holders in this regard, with the majority aged over 22 (52%) and the fewest being in the 14-17 category (17%).26 The sex of Award Holders and Volunteers was fairly even, but with slightly more females (57% of Award Holders and 61% of Volunteers were female).27 This is slightly more balanced than other vInspired programmes, for example TeamV, where 64.4% of participants were female.28 These figures also broadly reflect the gender balance in wider forms of volunteering, in which women demonstrate consistently higher rates of volunteering than men. Ethnicity is highly diverse with only 44% of Award Holders and 45% of Volunteers describing themselves as White British 29.This is much more diverse than the wider population of young people in England,30 in which 76% of 15-24 year olds were classified as White British in the most recent Census31. It is possible that this high level of diversity might be affected by the large number of projects being drawn from London, the most diverse region of England. A large proportion of Award Holders live in more deprived neighbourhoods,32 with just over half being located within the bottom quartile in the Income  Deprivation  Affecting  Children  Index  (IDACI) rank distribution (figure 2).

                                                                                                                         26 See Table A6 in the appendix. 27 See Table A7 in the appendix. 28 See Adamson (2014), p. 9. 29 See Table A8 in the appendix. 30 The ethnicity by age in Scotland has not been released yet. Scotland’s overall figure for all age groups is 4% from minority ethnic group. This will be larger for younger age groups. 31 Based on data from: http://www.nomisweb.co.uk/census/2011/DC2101EW/view/2092957699?rows=c_age&cols=c_ethpuk11 32 Based on the postcode of where Award Holder lives.

28  

Figure 2. Postcode ranking of Award Holders’ addresses

Indeed, providing a service in a deprived area is a theme in many projects. For example, the following Award Holder was conscious of the lack of local opportunities for young people, hence her doing an educational project:

‘[It] is a deprived area. So there aren’t many educational [opportunities]…lots of children get left behind in education, and stuff like that, and need extra help. The schools around there sometimes struggle with having big classes and some [children] get left behind.’ (Award Holder)

2.6.2 Employment and educational background of Award Holders Forty-two per cent of Award Holders and 44% of Volunteers responding to the online survey were in full-time education or training.33 Of those in education, the single largest group of Award Holders were attending university (22%), whilst 17% were in secondary education or sixth-form college and 22% were at university.34 Furthermore, 15% had attended a fee-paying school,35 which is just over twice the national average.36 A greater proportion of Volunteers (25%) are in full-time work than Award Holders (13%). A high proportion of both groups are self-employed, with 12% of Award

                                                                                                                         33 See Table A9 in the appendix. 34 See Table A10 in the appendix. 35 See Table A11 in the appendix. 36 Although the complex education landscape could lead to multiple interpretations of the question, e.g. academies and free schools are not ‘state run’ but are not private in the sense of charging pupils fees.

0  

10  

20  

30  

40  

50  

60  

BoCom  quar;le   Lower-­‐middle  quar;le  

Upper-­‐middle  quar;le  

Top  quar;le  

%  of  A

ward  Ho

lders  

More  deprived                                                                                                                      Less  deprived  

29  

Holders in this category and eight per cent of Volunteers.37 This is higher than the figure for the UK as a whole for the 16-24 age group, which is five per cent in self-employment.38 The autonomous nature of cashpoint may have proved particularly attractive to those young people who are entrepreneurial/self-employed. 2.6.3 Volunteering background of Award Holders and Volunteers Outside of their involvement in cashpoint, Award Holders appear to be active volunteers and participants in community life. They were commonly involved in activities through their schools, colleges or local communities, and frequently took part in leisure-based or artistic activities related to their project (for example, case study respondents were often keen sports players, dancers, poets, or actors). As regards volunteering specifically, both Award Holders (55%) and Volunteers (36%) demonstrated considerably higher rates of volunteering than the national population of young people. Figures from the Community Life Survey (which provides the most recent national figures on rates of volunteering) show that 29% of 16-25 year olds volunteered through a group, club or organisation at least once a month.39 In terms of having volunteered at least once in the last year, both Award Holders (82%) and Volunteers (64%) have higher rates of participation than the English average for 16-25 year olds (44%).40 The mean average hours spent volunteering per week, outside of cashpoint, is around 13 hours for both Award Holders and Volunteers.41 Despite this active background, cashpoint frequently represented the first time the Award Holders had been responsible for leading a project themselves; the projects were a significant step-up in their volunteering journeys and in their personal development more generally:

‘I’ve been in a lot of events in the past three years through volunteering myself and working, but this is my first time organising something and it’s terrifying.’

(Award Holder) Receiving an award was a significant turning point for some young people in the development of their projects and in their volunteering careers, especially when they had been turned down by other funders. As one Award Holder put it: ‘The reason that I would say they had a big impact was because after I’d been knocked down, it was like them saying ‘yes’ that gave me the motivation to do it, because I was just getting frustrated with the rejection letters’.                                                                                                                          37 See Table A9 in the appendix. 38 Office for National Statistics. (2013) Self-employed up 367,000 in Four Years. London: ONS. p. 4. 39 Data relates to England only: http://communitylife.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/explore-the-data.html 40 See Table A12 in the appendix. 41 See Table A13 in the appendix.

30  

For Volunteers, some were extending their existing participatory activities into a volunteering role; for example, they were often already artists and performers, and then stepped up their involvement to become active volunteers. In some cases the boundary between being a participant and a volunteer was blurred.                                                                    

31  

3. Delivering cashpoint projects

Chapter summary

• The projects' were varied, but the main activity of just under half involved art or sport. This was often a mechanism to achieve other outcomes, such as personal development of beneficiaries or improving community relations.

• The Award Holders felt well supported by vInspired in the projects and had also tended to have had support from the volunteers and in some cases a host organisation.

• The challenges Award Holders faced included time management, attendance of projects, budget management and recruiting volunteers.

• In terms of sustainability, nearly three quarters of projects reported that they would continue.

In this chapter various aspects of project delivery are examined. To begin with, the common types of activities in cashpoint awards are explored before moving on to Award Holders’ experience of delivering the project and the support they received. 3.1 Type of projects and activities A central tenet of cashpoint is the autonomy of young people to decide on the activity of the project. This potentially leads to a wide range of activities. 3.1.1 Project activities The projects are often very creative and cover a range of activities. Moreover, individual projects themselves often entail more than one activity. The projects were notable for their ambition, for example, cashpoint includes projects as diverse as: campaigns to get blood from people with rare blood types; youth forums; opportunities for young people with disabilities to take part in social activities with other young people; and teaching Muslim boys how to cook healthy meals. While it can be limiting to attempt to broadly categorise the projects, it is important to gain an insight into the type of activities funded. Survey data captured the different activities of the projects as classified by Award Holders, with personal development for beneficiaries (54%) and networking and support (30%) being the most citied.42 The respondents were then asked to identify the main activity in the project. Table five describes the five most cited activities:43 While personal development is the most

                                                                                                                         42 See Table A14 in the appendix. 43 For full results see Table A15 in the appendix.

32  

frequently cited activity, leisure pursuits dominate: nearly half (47%) cite some form of arts or sports activity as the main activity of their project. Table 5. Main activity of projects

Main activity of cashpoint projects (as designated by Award Holders in the survey)

% of projects

Personal development (including mentoring and skills building) 17

Performing arts (theatre/dance) 12

Sport 12

Visual art/photography/Film 11

Health and well-being promotion 8

Source: Start of grant survey (n = 201) The Award Holders were asked to identify their intended beneficiaries: 90% cited young people, focusing their work on their peers. More Award Holders cited females (58%) as potential beneficiaries than males (48%). Just over one-in-five projects targeted older people and/or people with disabilities.44

                                                                                                                         44 See Table A16 in the appendix.

33  

Case study: fostering personal development through the creative arts

Stuart established a performing arts project for young people (the beneficiaries) to explore issues around their identity and the pressures on them in contemporary society. The project culminated in a public performance. Over the course of the project, through attending workshops and taking part in the performance, young people gained considerably, they spoke about how it had given them the chance to meet new people and to grow in confidence. They enjoyed working in a group, seeing others come out of their shell. They said how their friends outside the workshops had noticed a difference in them. Stuart and the other project Volunteers recognised these outcomes:

‘…a lot of them in our first session, they were really shy and getting them to participate in fun activities is hard. They don’t want to speak up, they don’t want to do things by themselves. And after the first session we were like “are we going to get all of these kids to perform, they might not want to do it at all?”.’ ‘So, I think them going through the process and being able to come out and say “I feel more confident on stage, I feel like I’ve progressed and I can do different things now”. And I think they’ve got a lot out of it, more than we could have thought we were going to give to them, and that was really good.’

3.2 Projects’ progress and support The case study projects had largely been delivered as designed by Award Holders in the application process, although some had been extended and/or adapted. The general sense across all the case studies was that the Award Holders and volunteers were learning as they were going, for example: about how to respond to the needs of their beneficiaries and adapt their activities accordingly; about how to manage budgets and deliver projects. The projects were therefore delivered responsively to the changing needs of the beneficiaries. 3.2.1 Recruiting volunteers Award Holders tended to know the Volunteers already and recruit them through informal mechanisms, using: word-of-mouth (74%); through friends and family (60%); and through a youth/community group (52%). When asked what the most successful method was, the same three sources were cited: through word-of-mouth (25%); through friends and family (19%); and through a youth/community group (16%).45 In addition, in the survey of Volunteers just under two-thirds (63%) said they had known the Award Holder before starting the project.46 Some Award Holders,

                                                                                                                         45 See Tables A17 and A18 in the appendix. 46 Source: Volunteers survey (n = 70).

34  

however, used more formal recruitment mechanisms – advertising volunteer positions on websites, discussions lists, and through Volunteer Centres, for example. 3.2.2 Support 3.2.2.1 Mutual support There was often a sense of mutual support throughout the team of Volunteers working on the project, although projects varied as to how ‘hierarchical’ the teams were and in how involved the Volunteers were beyond helping out with direct delivery.  As outlined in chapter two, 25% of Award Holders applied as a group. It was also evident that some projects were more integrated: one case study, for example, was particularly a team-based project and the boundaries between the Award Holder and volunteers were not clearly demarcated. The group had come together prior to the cashpoint project and have remained a group since. Other case studies involved Volunteers being led by the Award Holder, who took the initiative. Given that the Award Holder had the autonomy to design the project as they wished, such variation is to be expected and is also likely to reflect the personality and preferred way of working of the Award Holder. 3.2.2.2 Support from host organisations Award Holders gained support from various sources, and to varying degrees. Some were embedded within wider organisations/networks, and drew support from them, although the nature of this support varied. The role of ‘host organisations’ was seen to be particularly significant in a number of the case studies and the help and support included: the use of a venue; administrative support; help in recruiting volunteers; taking photos; providing advice; use of facilities and equipment; access to networks; and mentoring.

35  

Case study: dance summer school Anya is passionate about flamenco dancing. For a number of years she has volunteered to run a flamenco dance group for young people in her local area. The group sits under the umbrella of a larger arts-based organisation, within which Anya has extensive connections. Inspired by a desire to increase engagement in flamenco dancing, recognising its potential to raise cultural awareness, build bridges between and within communities, and challenge stereotypes, and also triggered by the centenary of Spanish cinema, Anya applied for cashpoint funding to develop a project for her youth flamenco dance group to run summer schools for local school-aged children and to organise a flash mob event in a local shopping centre. The project was a great success. Alongside a week-long summer school and the flashmob event, Anya organised a number of awareness raising events in schools and free-workshops in community centres. Anya is very capable. She has a strong education background, extensive volunteering experience and plenty of confidence. The role of two local organisations in supporting her, and the project, were significant, however. The aforementioned arts-based organisation provided informal mentoring support for Anya; they helped with access to their networks, promotion, and with thinking through some of the trickier project delivery issues such as safeguarding. The project was also supported by a local theatre who provided a venue for the dance group, and also helped with promoting the summer school, workshops and flashmob event. 3.2.2.3 Support from vInspired Support was provided to Award Holders through telephone calls at various points. Award Holder expectations for support were limited, and generally exceeded. In the case studies they particularly valued the freedom to progress their projects as they wished and to get on with it, but also appreciated that help was at the end of phone if needed as well as finding it useful to have someone checking on their progress:

‘...it’s been support after support and it’s been great.’ ‘I quite liked just having the freedom to get on with it and I knew they were there if I needed them.’ ‘...and they’re really supportive, like that in every step of the way they’ve been there.’ ‘...they made you feel like they understand my project, which I think for a lot of funders sometimes you don’t get that.’47

The only issues associated with the support from vInspired that were reported, related to short delays in funding and the initial process of receiving/accessing payment/bank cards. These, however, were minor administrative issues and had been overcome successfully.                                                                                                                          47 Quotes from Award Holders in case study interviews.

36  

3.2.3 Challenges in the projects In the open questions in the end of grant monitoring reports, Award Holders were given the opportunity to highlight the challenges they faced. Recurring themes included issues with time-management, including their own project timeline and people at events/sessions failing to turn up on time. There were other challenges for some around budget management and recruiting volunteers. Despite this reported challenge, monitoring data indicates that large numbers of Volunteers were recruited by completed projects, at least in relation to the original targets (see section 2.5.2). 3.3 Future and sustainability of projects In the End of grant forms just less than three quarters (74%) of Award Holders stated the project will continue in some way. In the case studies there was a sense of sustained commitment to the projects (from both the Award Holders / Volunteers and beneficiaries), with successful attempts by some to draw in additional funds or to identify other ways to keep going. Two of the six evaluation case studies had attracted funding already: one from the ‘host–organisation’ to run further sessions which they hope will be repeated in the future; and another had some financial backing from a charitable organisation they had made contact with during the project to run the project for another term.    

37  

4. Impact: benefiting from cashpoint projects Chapter summary

Impact on Award Holders

• Networking and social capital: the vast majority of Award Holders made new friends and social contacts as a result of their project.

• Enjoyment and satisfaction: involvement in projects was an enjoyable experience. This may reflect the origin of many of the projects in the leisure interests of Award Holders.

• Personal development: the development of self-confidence and self-esteem was a major area of benefit for Award Holders, as well as a sense of pride in themselves and their achievements.

• Skill development and progression into education and employment: developing different skills, particularly around project planning and budget management, but also in leadership, learning about funding applications, experience of evaluation, and team-work. Award Holders also felt that it enhanced their employment prospects, and to a greater degree than they had expected at the start of the project.

• The SROI identified a ratio of £1 to £4.80 with regard to the wider social value of the enhanced education and employment destinations of Award Holders.

Impact on wider beneficiaries

• Volunteers benefitted in the following ways:

o Skills development, typically in leadership, interpersonal and communication, teaching, and teamwork;

o Personal development, primarily focused on increases in confidence as the result of being in leadership roles or working with people from different backgrounds;

o Progression to employment and enhanced employment prospects;

o Making new friends and social contacts, as well as experiencing enjoyment and satisfaction as a result of being involved.

• Award Holders estimated the total number of beneficiaries for their projects to be 8,381; the median average per project was 28;

• In terms of wider community benefit, these projects provided a service in their local area. Moreover, the SROI ratio in terms of volunteering hours devoted to cashpoint projects was £1 to £6.40.

38  

This chapter explores the impact of cashpoint, drawing on data from the case studies, end of project surveys, and the follow-up surveys. The first part looks at the impact on Award Holders while the second examines the impact on volunteers, beneficiaries and the wider community. 4.1 Impact on Award Holders cashpoint provides an opportunity for young people that is a distinct offer, a combination of leadership experience (to devise and deliver the project), plus project management experience (to execute the project to time scale/budget), plus team work (experience of managing and motivating a team). As described in Chapter two, Award Holders applied to cashpoint for a variety of reasons, predominantly altruistic but also to develop their own skills. Award Holders gained a great deal through their involvement in cashpoint. The Award Holders identified a range of benefits from their participation which can be broadly categorised in four themes, each of which will be explored in turn. 48 4.1.1 Networking and social capital At the start of their projects, 47% of Award Holders said they hoped to make new friends and social contacts. By the time they had completed their projects, 82% of Award Holders said they had developed their networks in this way. This included making links with organisations and agencies connected to the project as well as with volunteers and beneficiaries. Building such relationships had frequently been fruitful, for example in one of the evaluation case studies the Award Holder had gone on to have paid work with the organisation that provided the venue for the project.

4.1.2 Enjoyment and satisfaction Award Holders reported that their involvement in projects was an enjoyable experience, with 94% reporting that they gained enjoyment and satisfaction from taking part. This may relate to the origins of the projects, which in a number of cases were the leisure interests of Award Holders, building on an activity or issue that they already enjoyed spending time on (see section 2.4). In general, however, the overall process of designing and delivering a social action project was enjoyable and satisfying:

‘…the joy of watching a concept come to life, which is always a good one.’ (Award Holder)

4.1.3 Personal development cashpoint helped to develop the Award Holders’ confidence in themselves, their abilities to provide leadership, to deliver projects, to work in teams, to speak in

                                                                                                                         48 This section draws on data presented in Table A19 in the appendix.

39  

public, to make connections. Award Holders also expressed a sense of pride, in themselves, but also a belief that others - particularly their families - were proud of their achievements. While involvement in projects benefitted the personal development of Award Holders in different ways, it is important to note that their starting position was often as an already confident and ambitious young person. Furthermore, they were also often already involved in this kind of activity (see section 2.4 for connections to leisure activities). In this sense, undertaking a project was not always life-changing (as one Award Holder put it), but evidence suggests that it has made them feel more confident in doing this – in some cases impact had exceeded expectations.      The surveys also examined whether there was any major change in the attitudes of Award Holders about their social networks and local community at the end of project compared to when they started. In the linked dataset there were no major changes, although caution is needed due to the small sample size.49

                                                                                                                         49 See Tables 17 and 18 in the appendix.

40  

Case study: an Award Holder’s journey

Shenelle previously applied for various grants to fund her performing arts project, without success. cashpoint was her first successful funding application:

‘I’d applied for a lot of funding before I found vInspired [cashpoint] and everyone had knocked me back and said “you have no experience, you’ve never done it before, we’re not giving you money”. So it was quite shattering at the beginning because I didn’t know how else to start.’ ‘And then, I can’t remember how I found the vInspired website, it might have been just a Google search, but I found it. The grant application was really short, which was great, because I filled in 45 pages for [one grant programme] and 100 pages for [another grant programme], so it was like the simplest application I’d ever done.’ ‘…the process was really simple. I spoke to a coordinator a few weeks after that, got a response quite quickly, and they were like “okay, we’ll send you a card, you can have £500, do your project”.’

To have someone show belief in the Award Holder, after so many rejections, was important to her. Although she had the idea for some time, cashpoint funding made it possible to realise and had given her a track record, evidence of success:

‘…it’s just given me the opportunity to do what I’ve always wanted to do and have the support and the money to do it; and then to be able to present it to other people, like this is proof of what we’ve done before and we can do this in your school or your youth club. So it’s literally been my portfolio evidence.’

She has since had additional funding and also conducted paid work due to the activities she did through the cashpoint project. 4.1.4 Skill development and progression into education and employment Award Holders developed a variety of different skills as a result of their involvement, particularly around leadership, project management learning about funding applications, experience of evaluation and team-working. At the end of the project Award Holders were asked whether various personal skills had developed.50 The majority of respondents felt they had developed most in the area of project planning (94% agreed they had developed project planning skills) and budget management

                                                                                                                         50 This section draws on data presented in Table A22 in the appendix.

41  

(90%), likely reflecting their prominent role in project design and the youth-led nature of projects (see section 2.4).     Before starting their projects, 51% of Award Holders said they hoped to enhance their employment prospects and 37% that they hoped to gain access to training and resources. Expectations were exceeded. At the end of the projects, 61% said their employment prospects had been enhanced, 41% that their access to training and resources had increased. Evidence from the case studies illustrated how the experience of delivering a cashpoint project was assisting transitions into work and further education. One Award Holder, for example, had gained experience in an area they wanted to develop career-wise (in this case the creative arts) and had referred to their project in an interview for a postgraduate course as an example of team work:

‘I actually spoke about the project in my interview, because they asked me something about working as a team, so I said I’d done this and they were interested.’ (Award Holder)

The SROI analysis provides an insight into the value of the programme in terms of the impact on education and employment destinations of Award Holders and volunteers.51 This can include finding a job, or starting a training or educational course.52 Award Holders were asked if they had put cashpoint on their CV53 or mentioned it in interviews for jobs or internships.54 This provides some supporting evidence of the extent to which cashpoint was being used to assist with transitions into work or other positive destinations.55 Based on this the average money given in grants was £450 and the average social value per project was £2,154. This means that £1 given in grants achieved £4.80 in broader social value (see appendix for full calculations).56 4.2 Impact on Volunteers, beneficiaries and wider community This section looks at the wider impact of cashpoint,  on: Volunteers; project beneficiaries; families; and communities (of both place and interest). Reflecting the diversity of projects, the number and type of beneficiaries, and interactions between

                                                                                                                         51 Source: Follow-up survey n=34. 52 See Table A23 in the appendix. There are some similar figures for the volunteers involved in the projects. See Table A24 in the appendix. 53 In the Follow-up survey 28 of the 34 did. 54 In the Follow-up survey 19 out of 34 did. 55 See Table A25 in the appendix. 56 Any SROI calculation has its limitations and two specific ones should be considered here: a) limited survey data, with an assumption that data collected is representative of all projects; and b) not all benefits can be monetised with existing proxies, so the measure of benefit may be regarded as something of a minimum. See Table A26 in the appendix.

42  

them, varied greatly. Before the impact on the different stakeholders is explored in turn, it is helpful to conceptualise the range of stakeholders diagrammatically. The Award Holder is placed in the centre – as the focus of the project – and as we move outwards, through a series of ‘halos’57, the additional beneficiaries can be observed. As you move through these outer halos, it becomes more challenging to directly attribute impact to the Award Holder’s project, although it is nonetheless worth examining outcomes for these stakeholders. Figure 3. Project beneficiaries and the halo effect

The deepest and most measurable impact is on the Award Holder, then Volunteers, then beneficiaries. These effects radiate out further into the community at large (e.g. participants in a cashpoint project, for example, individuals playing in a sports team or attending art-based classes). In addition, people connected to project participants who do not directly take part can also benefit (e.g. parents of participants). The outer parts of the halo are those in the wider community.

                                                                                                                         57 The halo diagram was developed in an opening evaluation co-design workshop held between the evaluators and vInspired.

Award Holder

Volunteers

Beneficiaries

Wider community

43  

4.2.2 Impact on Volunteers The number of Volunteers in projects varied, as did the intensity and duration of involvement. The key impacts discussed by Volunteers were similar to those for Award Holders, although tended to be less intensive. The development of new skills was cited by 68% of Volunteers in the online survey58. Typically, Volunteers described gaining skills in the area of leadership, interpersonal and communication, teaching, and teamwork:

‘I guess the skills we’ve learned from here are also good in everyday lives, patience, commitment and all that...’ (Volunteer)

Their personal development was also closely related to the skills gained. Increases in confidence were observed, primarily as the result of being in leadership roles or working with people from different backgrounds. Positive impacts were also seen around progression to employment, with just over one-third (36%)59 of respondents to the online survey reporting that it had enhanced their employment prospects. Like Award Holders, Volunteers made new friends and social contacts as a result of participating in the project (55% citing this in the survey).60 The most frequently cited impact for Volunteers, however, was enjoyment and satisfaction (77%):

‘It’s nice to have been involved with this fun and successful project.’ (Volunteer)

4.2.3 Beneficiaries 4.2.3.1 Engaging beneficiaries cashpoint projects frequently had a wide variety of beneficiaries, some with extended participation and others with more limited or one-off engagement. It is therefore challenging to categorise different types of engagement with beneficiaries, but it is possible to broadly distinguish between intensive and more light-touch engagement, and what these different forms tell us about the range of beneficiaries. (a) Intensive Often a project would work with a small number of beneficiaries regularly over a period of time, up to two months. The after-school club case study is a good example, which worked with between eight and ten school-aged girls, developing their knowledge of the subject and increasing their interest in it:

                                                                                                                         58 This section draws on data presented in table A27 in the appendix. 59 See Table A27 in the appendix. 60 See Table A27 in the appendix.

44  

‘…it surprised me how excited they got by it and how into it they were...I definitely think I achieved the aim of getting them enthusiastic about [the subject].’ (Award Holder)

(b) Light-touch There is also a more broad and light-touch type of project. These engage a greater number of beneficiaries but less intensively, for example, a community day. This form was recurring among cashpoint projects, albeit less frequently than ‘intensive’ ones. One case study project, for example, sought to improve community relations by holding an event to bring people together:

‘People walking in off the street, just seeing something was happening and have the confidence to walk into a space that they’d never gone into before and having the confidence to go, “what’s happening?”.’ (Award Holder)

(c) Mixed In reality many projects have aspects of both intensive and light-touch models, especially arts projects which work with a small group intensively over a number of weeks and then may have a performance with a larger group at the end of the project (for example, a dancing group had an intensive summer school followed by a flashmob in front of a large audience): ‘The flashmob after [the summer school] was even more successful than the

summer school. We had all together between 60 and 70 participants taking part, and we had an audience of over 300, and we got coverage from [a media outlet] and the local paper as well.’

(Award Holder) 4.2.3.2 Impact on beneficiaries For the purposes of this section, beneficiaries are considered to be those people who participated in the project but not as a volunteer, and who may be directly affected by the work of the projects, for example, children attending the after-school club, or an audience watching a performance. Reflecting the diversity of projects, the intensity of beneficiary involvement – and the resultant impact they experienced – could vary considerably. Award Holders reported these participants gaining new knowledge, or improved self-esteem and confidence61. This could also occur even on those projects which involved one-off events:

‘Our project benefited young women within our community (under age of 25). They left with a greater knowledge into the difference between self-esteem

                                                                                                                         61 End of grant monitoring report open questions (n = 131).

45  

and self-confidence and were now better able to apply the principles to raise their personal self-confidence.’    (Award Holder) ‘…it was very touching as some audience members seemed to open up and share how they had felt about being betrayed in the past and what they had done.’ (Award Holder)

The end of grant monitoring forms provide some indication of scale. Award Holders were asked to estimate the number of people who directly benefited from their project. The total number of beneficiaries was 8,381; the mean average per project was 67 while the median average per project was 28 (the lower median average reflects the presence of some extremely large outliers). Case study: project performance Michael formed a theatre company with seven other performers in 2013. They are aged between 16 and18 and are all from black and minority ethnic groups. Their cashpoint project explored issues of identity and esteem for young people in today’s society. The performance was attended by around 40 people and was very well received. The ages of the audience varied greatly. After the play had finished, the audience remained behind to discuss issues raised in the performance. This aspect was always a key part of the project – to encourage debate in the community. Audience members, including those from older generations, joined in the lively debate. For example, one woman discussed her experience of arriving in Britain aged 18 as an immigrant in the 1950s. There were areas where the older generations and younger people found common ground and others where their experience varied greatly. The project therefore provided both a powerful performance and subsequently an arena for debate.

We saw in chapter three that Award Holders benefited from engagement with ‘host’ organisations. This could often be reciprocal, with organisations benefitting from engagement in the programme. This includes providing them with new users and, in some cases, providing that group with an additional service:

‘The community hall that housed us benefited from new members attending their clubs after we promoted the venue.’ (Award Holder)

46  

‘Youth and community centres have also benefitted by an increase in attendances, and having something fresh to offer young people.’ (Award Holder)

4.2.3.3 Wider community The wider community was often impacted upon more indirectly than beneficiaries. Award Holders reported, for example, that the families of participants could experience benefits, despite not having been directly involved:

‘The project provided entertainment to children with special needs during the holidays which prevented social isolation and also provided valuable respite care for the parents and carers of the children.’ (Award Holder) ‘…I think as well for the parents that were there at the showcase, a lot of them afterwards came up to us and said “I don’t think my daughter would have told me that she felt that way or that I would ever have got that level of honesty out of her, but being able to watch it and see it, now I know what to do”.’ (Award Holder)

Broader community benefits were also observed, commonly as a result of providing a service in a community (many of which were deprived) and bringing people together with the aim of improving community cohesion:

 ‘The area where we delivered the project is also high in youth crime and antisocial behaviour so we feel that the project had an effect on helping to prevent this group of young people from engaging in such negative behaviours.’ (Award Holder) ‘Families in [the area] with disabled children have very few opportunities to access services, so therefore this service greatly benefited this community.’ (Award Holder)

One way to quantify the impact on the wider community is to place a value on the volunteering conducted in the projects, utilising an SROI. This part of the SROI analysis explores the potential value of volunteering hours in the project. Award holders had spent an average of close to 14 hours a week during the period of their projects.62 By comparison the Volunteers had spent an average of 12 hours per week63 with ten per cent volunteering for 37 or more hours. On average, projects that

                                                                                                                         62 Source: End of grant surveys, n=100. 63 Source: Volunteers survey, n=64.

47  

completed so far occurred over a median of five weeks.64 Assuming that the average hours were consistent over each period then the total hours generated by the average project was 70 hours for the Award Holders plus 60 hours for each of an average of 13 Volunteers. This is approximately 850 hours in total. Even using the under-18 minimum wage rate (£3.72 in 2013), then a commonly used measure of value would equate to around £3,200 generated from projects with an average cost of less than £500.65 That would mean a ratio of £1 to £6.40 between cost and benefit. Case study: community day Abbie’s project aimed to improve community engagement by bringing together local residents at a one-day community event. The event provided an opportunity for residents to take some time out from their busy lives, and reflect and take time to appreciate each other through sharing a cup of tea and home-made food, and enjoying an assortment of arts and crafts, live music and dancing. The event was hugely successful, with nearly 120 people from the local area attending. Many were so pleased that something good was happening on their door-step, in their community; Abbie reported that she could feel the warm atmosphere and sense a 'buzz' among local residents and Volunteers. The event was made possible through the support and commitment of the Award Holder and 25 Volunteers – six young Volunteers (three completely new to volunteering) and 19 Volunteers aged 25 and over. A small number of Volunteers spent a great deal of time and effort helping to organise and decorate the community space and market the event. Two of the Volunteers described making decorations during the week and working late into the evening to create a welcoming space. The project exceeded Abbie's expectations, in terms of numbers as well as the positive response from the residents, Volunteers and local community groups. This was evident in their commitment to run or participate in the programme of activities that were scheduled for one hour but continued to run for the rest of the day. Abbie said that the experience boosted her confidence to apply for further funding to put more of her ideas into practice, and also helped build and demonstrate the skills and capacities needed to obtain funding, and organise, coordinate and manage a community arts event.

                                                                                                                         64 Source: End of grants reports, n=119. 65 This reflects the project costs opposed to the costs for the programme as a whole.

48  

5. Conclusions and recommendations In this final chapter we draw together the findings from across the evaluation, pulling out the key themes and findings. We then finish with a set of recommendations for vInspired to consider when reviewing the future of the programme. Building momentum vInspired cashpoint has given a boost to youth-led social action. Over 355 grants have been distributed66 to young people across the country, resulting in the creation of over 1,200 new volunteering opportunities, and the subsequent reinforcement of a culture of participation amongst those who took part. If current momentum is maintained, the programme looks to be on track to deliver on its engagement targets. Indeed, it has already exceeded its target for the number of first-time volunteers engaged. Diverse and engaged cashpoint has successfully engaged a wide range of young people in social action projects. Its success at attracting people from non-White backgrounds, and from more deprived neighbourhoods is particularly noteworthy. It has funded people aged 14-25 years old, although a higher proportion of awards have been made to those towards the higher end of the age range than the lower end. cashpoint operated across the UK, with specific targets to involve young people in the West Midlands, Scotland and London and the south east. While Awards have been made across the two countries, engaging young people in Scotland has been a challenge for the programme, reflecting vInspired’s limited presence in the country to date. What perhaps unites Award Holders and most sets them apart from other young people is their existing volunteering experiences and their wider engagement in participatory activities. cashpoint can, however, represent a new level of engagement for Award Holders (and indeed many of the other volunteers involved) – a taste of leading their own activities, and of being responsible for the design and delivery of their own projects. Igniting passion Young people come to apply to cashpoint through a number of different routes and for a range of altruistic and self-interested reasons. A significant driving force, however, is the passion that they have for either the activities which frequently form the basis of their projects (e.g. dance, drama, sports, film, education, food) or the                                                                                                                          66 Including 19 cashpoint PLUS awards.

49  

changes that they hope to see as a result of them (e.g. enhanced personal development, stronger communities, challenged perceptions, changed attitudes, better health and well-being). Engaging, supporting and developing other young people is a clear passion for many Award Holders, and is at the heart of many of the projects being delivered. A straight-forward application process and facilitative in-application support, eases the process of getting projects off the ground, and enables Award Holders to access the money needed to bring their ideas to fruition. A slower than anticipated grant-distribution rate, however, suggest that the application process may represent a challenge for some young people. Involving others cashpoint awards are made to individuals. The projects, however, are generally delivered by groups. Indeed, some are designed by groups. On average, projects have involved between nine and ten volunteers, against an original target of three: an indication of the programme’s success at engaging young people in social action and of Awards Holders’ ability to enthuse others with their ideas. The energy, passion and enthusiasm of Award Holders can be palpable and catching. While in many cases Award Holders have recruited their friends and existing contacts to volunteer within their projects, in others they have used more formal recruitment mechanisms to engage people previously unknown to them. While the total numbers involved is impressive, some Award Holders found recruiting other volunteers a challenge. Some also found ‘managing’ fellow-volunteers and generally leading a team a challenge (albeit a challenge which represented a potentially rewarding experience). Drawing in support As well as being rewarding, delivering a youth-led social action project can be challenging. Award Holders found time-management, budget-management, and volunteer management particularly challenging. Addressing these challenges as the projects unfolded arguably led to some of the key outcomes for Award Holders (see below), with Award Holders drawing on a range of sources of support to help guide them through the process. The support from vInspired, which is integral to the programme, is light-touch and seemingly well-pitched. vInspired gave Award Holders the flexibility and freedom to deliver their projects in the way they felt best, while maintaining a persistent presence at the end of the phone to offer guidance and a nudge in the right direction when needed. Evidence from the case studies suggests that more significant, however, is the support provided by individuals and organisations who nurture the project and/or the

50  

Award Holder at the local level. A ‘host-organisation’ may, for example, start by providing a venue for the project but end up also providing back-office support, access to networks, mentoring and/or advice. In some cases the project is more formally connected to the ‘host organisation’ either by virtue of the Award Holder working/volunteering/studying within the organisation or by being locally active in the field that the project is working. To date, 131 projects have been completed, out of a total of 355 Awards made, and a target of 410. Although not possible to assess through the evaluation, it is possible that the presence or absence of ‘host-organisations’, wider support at local level, and the relative importance of vInspired in providing support may be a factor in the timely and/or successful completion of projects. Making a difference Based just on the wage-equivalent value of the hours contributed by volunteers, around £3,200 was generated from each £500 cashpoint grant. Looking at the wider social return on investment, specifically the educational and employment outcomes for young people taking part, for every £1 invested in the projects a value of £4.80 was generated. Taking both of these into account and subtracting management costs the overall ratio is 1:4.5 – in other words, for every £1 invested in the programme the social return was worth the equivalent of £4.50. The greatest outcomes of cashpoint are experienced by the Award Holders and the other Volunteers who support them. Many Award Holders, and to a lesser extent Volunteers, started out with high levels of skills and confidence. Many Award Holders, however, reported developing skills, such as project management, building networks, and having new doors opened to them through their volunteering. Perhaps most significantly, getting an award and delivering a project, led to young people growing in confidence – confidence in themselves, their abilities, and the value of their ideas. If the evaluation case studies are anything to go by, the experience of being an Award Holder – of being awarded funding, of leading and delivering a project, of seeing the outcomes – was enjoyable and rewarding. The extent to which a relatively small-scale, time-limited project can realistically be expected to result in positive change for the communities as a whole within which they are delivered is questionable. Outcomes were, however, reportedly achieved for ‘project beneficiaries’ – the people who received services or took part in project activities. The outcomes varied according to the nature of the project, but were reported to include skills and confidence development, and enjoyment. More broadly, the projects also touched the communities within which they were based (be that a geographical community or community of interest) – they provided opportunities for engagement and activity, and began to challenge attitudes and to build relations.

51  

Keeping it going As their grant-funding came to an end, a majority of Award Holders planned to keep their projects going. Some are searching for alternative funding; some have already found some. At the programme level, grant distribution needs to maintain momentum if the target for the total number of awards made is to be met. The greater challenge, however, is arguably the successful completion of all the existing and remaining projects within the funding period. The 131 projects that have been completed to date demonstrate that ‘from a small seed a mighty trunk may grow’ (Aeschylus) – engagement targets are well on track to be exceeded and the outcomes are considerable. With approximately another 200 projects started and yet to complete, plus 70 still to be awarded, the programme has some way to go, however, in order to meet its full potential. Evaluating the model The programme aimed to increase the number of youth-led social action projects, which responded to local need and embedded a culture of participation. It intended to create positive change for young people and communities. It set out to do so through providing small grants to young people, to enable them – with a minimal amount of support – to deliver new social action projects. With no baseline available, it is impossible to conclude whether the total number of youth-led social action projects has increased, although the available indicators suggest this is likely to be the case. Over 355 social action projects have received funding, the first 131 of which to be completed have alone resulted in more than 1,200 volunteering opportunities, and have led to a number of positive outcomes for volunteers, beneficiaries and communities. The support model has worked for those who have successfully completed projects – it has represented an appropriate balance of guidance and flexibility. Its overall effectiveness, however, is hard to assess until the outcomes of those projects which are yet to complete are known. Recommendations

• Providing small grants of £500 to young people to initiate and deliver their own projects is an effective way of facilitating social action and contributing to positive change within communities. Delivering a project of this scale is both challenging and achievable. Each award provides considerable return on investment. Bureaucracy can be kept to a minimum as risks are low. We recommend that the size of the grant is maintained.

• Award Holders gained a great deal through conducting a cashpoint project. One area they identified as potentially lacking is the absence of official

52  

recognition, such as certificates/awards for taking part. We recommend that the certificates which acknowledge the work of the project are given to Award Holders on successful completion of their project.

• cashpoint PLUS opened up the possibility of a progression route for Award Holders wanting to take their projects further. We recommend that this progression route is maintained and made integral to future programmes, but that the size of the PLUS award is reviewed to ensure that it offers progression for Award Holders, but also offers a similar rate of return on investment to the smaller awards.

• The programme was particularly successful at engaging an ethnically diverse group of young people and young people from deprived communities. Grant distribution was, however, slower than initially anticipated, geographical coverage was varied, and Award Holders tended to be towards the higher end of the age spectrum. We recommend that promotional and outreach work and pre-grant application support is reviewed and if necessary enhanced to boost uptake in areas and/or amongst groups that have to date been less well-represented.

• The funding criteria currently recommend that projects are completed within two months. Award Holders found time management a particular challenge. While those who have completed monitoring forms indicate their projects were completed within two months, a significant proportion are yet to complete their projects and/or their paperwork so it is not as yet possible to calculate the average project completion time for the programme as a whole. We recommend that the monitoring system is reviewed and all data stored in a single repository, easily accessible to run queries. In addition, that the monitoring system captures all contact between the programme team and Award Holders. For example, if it is confirmed that an Award Holder has finished their project in a phone call with programme staff, this is then recorded in a database. This would enable a clearer and more systematic tracking process, one that provides a more up to date picture of the progress of projects. This would overcome some of the challenges presented by the delay in Award Holders completing paper work. This would also ensure that project completion times are more effectively captured and, if necessary, that the two-month timeframe criterion is reviewed if there are challenges with the time it takes to complete projects. We also recommend that the support provided for Award Holders with regards to time management is reviewed and, if necessary, enhanced.

• The support provided through the programme by vInspired is well received by Award Holders who successfully complete projects. There may be the need for additional support with budgeting for some applicants and it would be useful to send a PDF copy of the completed application back to applicants. The apparent importance of ‘host-organisations’ in nurturing

53  

Award Holders and their projects has also been highlighted. Projects have on average, however, taken longer to complete than anticipated (131 have completed to date, out of 355 Awards made and a target of 410) and the evaluation has not been able to explore the reasons for this, or for the small number of projects which have not completed. We recommend that challenges faced by projects which struggle to complete and/or find the paperwork challenging are investigated and, if necessary, the provision of support – from within and outside of the programme – is reviewed in order to understand more about the significance of different forms of support in achieving programme outcomes.

     

54  

References Arvidson, M., Lyon, F., McKay, S. and Moro, D. (2013) ‘Valuing the social: the nature and controversies of SROI [social return on investment] in the UK’ Voluntary Sector Review, vol 4 (1). Institute for Volunteering Research. (2010) Volunteering Impact Assessment Toolkit. London: Volunteering England. Low, N., Butt, S., Ellis Paine, A. and Davis Smith, J. (2007) Helping Out: A national survey of volunteering and charitable giving. London: National Centre for Social Research and the Institute for Volunteering Research.      

55  

Appendix: data tables Table A1. How they found out about cashpoint How they heard about cashpoint (could select as many options as applicable)

%

vInspired.com 52 A friend/parent 20 Youth club/organisation 16 Google 10 Twitter 6 University 5 At school/college 5 vInspired email 4 Facebook 4 Youth Advisory board member 2 Newspaper/magazine 1 Other 10 Source: Start of Grant survey (n = 201) Table A2. Motivations for applying for a cashpoint Award Holders taking part

Motivation (award holders could cite as many as applicable)

%

I wanted to improve things/help people 87 I felt there was a need in my community 74 The cause was really important to me 59 I thought it would give me a chance to use my existing skills

57

To give something back 54 It was connected with my social interest or hobbies 41 It helps me get on in my career 33 I thought it would give me a chance to learn skills 36 It’s part of my philosophy of life to help people 28 I felt there was no-one else to do it 28 I was already involved/connected with the group the project is helping

25

I wanted to meet people/make friends 17 I had spare time to do it 14 It’s part of my religious belief to help people 8 My friends/family do similar things 5 It was connected with the needs of my family/friends

8

I had received voluntary help 6 It gave me a chance to get a recognised qualification

5

Other 2 Sources: Start of grant survey (n = 201)

56  

Table A3. Motivations for applying for Volunteers taking part

Motivation (Volunteers could cite as many as applicable)

%

I wanted to improve things/help people 67 I thought it would give me a chance to use my existing skills

59

I thought it would give me a chance to learn skills 55 The cause was really important to me 52 I felt there was a need in my community 51 To help my friend who was running the project (Volunteers only)

44

To give something back 44 It was connected with my social interest or hobbies 38 It helps me get on in my career 27 I was already involved/connected with the group the project is helping

27

I had spare time to do it 26 I wanted to meet people/make friends 25 It’s part of my philosophy of life to help people 21 It’s part of my religious belief to help people 14 I felt there was no-one else to do it 10 My friends/family do similar things 8 It was connected with the needs of my family/friends

7

I had received voluntary help 4 It gave me a chance to get a recognised qualification

1

Other 1 Source: Volunteers Survey (n=73) Table A4. Award Holders’ attraction to cashpoint (%)

Attraction to cashpoint

Not at all important

Slightly important

Moderately

important

Very important

Extremely Important

Either very or

extremely important

to them Leading and

designing a project myself

2

2

13

35

48

83

Choosing the type of project and work

1

1

15

36

46

82

Joining a programme that promotes youth

leadership

2

7

18

35

38

73

Managing a grant /

money by myself 3

4

24

33

36

69

Managing other volunteers and leading a team

6

10

21

35

28

63

Source: Start of Grant survey (n = 201)

57  

Table A5. cashpoint awards by region

Table A6. Age of Award Holders and Volunteers survey respondents

Age Award Holders %

Volunteers %

14-17 21 17 18-21 37 32 22-25 42 30 26+ 22 Sources: Start of grant survey (valid n = 181) and Volunteers survey (valid n = 60) Table A7. Sex of Award Holders and Volunteers

Sex Award Holders %

Volunteers %

Female 57 61 Male 43 38 Prefer not to say - 2 Sources: Start of grant survey (valid n = 195) and Volunteers survey (valid n = 66)                                                                                                                          67 13 out of the 18 Scottish awards were in Glasgow.

Region % London 39 South east 11 North east 8 West Midlands 8 Yorkshire and Humber 7 East of England 6 North west 6 Scotland67 6 East Midlands 5 South west 3 Other 1

58  

Table A8. Ethnicity of cashpoint award holders (based on current ONS categories)

Ethnic group

Award Holders %

Volunteers %

ASIAN / ASIAN BRITISH – Any other Asian background, please specify in "other ethnic group" box below

1 2

ASIAN / ASIAN BRITISH – Bangladeshi 1 2 ASIAN / ASIAN BRITISH – Chinese 2 ASIAN / ASIAN BRITISH – Indian 4 6 ASIAN / ASIAN BRITISH – Pakistani 2 3 BLACK / AFRICAN / CARIBBEAN / BLACK BRITISH – African

15 14

BLACK / AFRICAN / CARIBBEAN / BLACK BRITISH – Any other Black / African / Caribbean background, please specify in "other ethnic group" box below

2 2

BLACK / AFRICAN / CARIBBEAN / BLACK BRITISH – Caribbean

12 8

MIXED / MULTIPLE ETHNIC GROUPS – Any other Mixed / Multiple ethnic background, please specify in "other ethnic group" box below

3

MIXED / MULTIPLE ETHNIC GROUPS – White and Asian

3 5

MIXED / MULTIPLE ETHNIC GROUPS – White and Black African

1

MIXED / MULTIPLE ETHNIC GROUPS – White and Black Caribbean

3 2

WHITE – Any other White background, please specify in "other ethnic group" box below

1 3

WHITE – English / Welsh / Scottish / Northern Irish / British

44 45

WHITE – Irish 1 Other ethnic group (please specify) 6 8 Prefer not to say 2 3 Sources: Start of grant survey (n = 201) and Volunteers Survey (n=73) Table A9. Education/work status of Award Holders and Volunteers (survey data) Current activities (they could choose as many as applicable)

Award holders %

Volunteers %

Full-time education or training 42 44 Part-time volunteering 26 15 Part time work 23 7 Self-employed 12 8 Full time work 13 25 Part-time education or training 7 3 Unemployed 7 7 Full-time volunteering 7 5 Not in education, employment or training 2 1 Carer 1 Sources: Start of grant survey (n = 201) and Volunteers Survey (n=73)

59  

Table A10. Education institution of Award Holders and Volunteers (survey data)

If you are currently in education, are you in:

Award Holders %

Volunteers %

Secondary school or upper school

5

3

Sixth-form/Sixth-form college

12

4

College 4 5 University 22 29 Other (please specify) 5 3 Sources: Start of grant survey (n = 201) and Volunteers Survey (n=73) Table A11. Schools status of Award Holders and Volunteers (survey data)

How would you describe your secondary/upper school (if you changed secondary school please answer for the school you spent most time in)? (select one)

Award holders

Volunteers

% %

State run 82 84 Fee paying 15 14 Other (please specify) 3 2 Total 100 100 Sources: Start of grant survey (valid n = 150) and Volunteers Survey (valid n=50) Table A12. Volunteering outside cashpoint

Other than your work as part of vInspired cashpoint, have you volunteered elsewhere?

AH (Start) Volunteers (under 26)

% % No, I have not volunteered before 5 14 Yes, I am currently volunteering elsewhere 55 36 Yes, I have volunteered in the last 12 months but I am not currently volunteering

28

28

Yes, I have volunteered in the past but I have not in the last 12 months

13

21

Sources: Start of grant survey (valid n = 194) and Volunteers Survey excluding over 25s (valid n = 58) Table A13. Hours spent on other (non-cashpoint) volunteering

Average hours per week spent on other volunteering

Award Holders

Volunteers

Mean 12.8 13.1 Median 8 7

60  

Table A14. Activity of projects

Activity of cashpoint projects (as designated by award holders in the survey)

%

Personal development (including mentoring and skills building)

54

Networking/support 30 Visual art/photography/Film 28 Health and well-being promotion

25

Performing arts (theatre/dance) 21 Music 19 Community day 18 Sport 17 Crafts 17 Social club 15 Cultural/religious 7 Fashion 6 Reading club 1 Other (please specify) 18 Source: Start of Grant survey (n = 201) Table A15. Main activity of projects

Main activity of cashpoint projects (as designated by award holders in the survey)

% of projects

Personal development (including mentoring and skills building)

17

Performing arts (theatre/dance) 12 Sport 12 Visual art/photography/Film 11 Health and well-being promotion

8

Music 7 Community day 5 Crafts 5 Networking/support 5 Social club 2 Cultural/religious 2 Reading club 1 Other (please specify) 14 Source: Start of Grant survey (n = 201

61  

Table A16. Intended beneficiaries

Intended Beneficiaries (cite as many as applicable)

%

Young people 90 Females 58 Males 48 Older people 22 People with disabilities 22 Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people

13

Homeless people 7 Other 16 Source: Start of grant survey (n = 201)

Table A17. Methods Award Holders used to recruit Volunteers Methods to recruit Volunteers (cite as many as possible)

%

Word of mouth 74 Friends/family 60 Youth/ community group 52 Social Media (e.g. Facebook) 35 Your school/college/uni 34 Through previous volunteering 27 Flyers/posters 20 vinspired.com 2 Other 14 Source: End of project reports (n = 131) Table A18. Most successful methods Award Holders used to recruit Volunteers Most successful method to recruit Volunteers

%

Word of Mouth 25 Friends/Family 19 Youth/community group 16 Social Media 10 School/college/uni 9 Previous volunteering 6 Mailing lists 4 Source: End of project reports (n = 79)

62  

Table A19. Desired and actual benefits (linked respondents only)

Personal benefits that you hope to experience/you have gained as a result of your vInspired cashpoint project: (select all that apply)

Award holders (Start)

%

Award Holders (End)

%

Percentage point

change

Access to training and resources 37 41 4 Certificates / awards / some form of recognition

35

27

-8

To make new friends and social contacts

47

82

35

Improved employment prospects 51 61 10 Enjoyment and satisfaction 76 94 18 Source: Linked surveys (n = 51)

Table A20. “Scores” of attitudinal statements

Award Holders (start)

Award Holders (End)

Change

I am confident in my own abilities

1.5

1.6

0.1

I like trying new things 1.6 1.5 -0.1 I have a lot to look forward to in my life

1.6 1.6

0

I like working as part of a team 1.6 1.4

-0.2

I like leading others 1.3 1.4 0.1 I enjoy making decisions 1.3 1.2 -0.1 I am able to organise my time well

1.4 1.2

-0.2

(Strong disagree = -2; Disagree = -1; Neutral = 0; Agree = 1; Strongly Agree = 2). Source: Linked surveys (n = 51)

63  

Table A21. “Scores” of attitudinal statements

Award Holders (Start)

Award holders (End)

Change

I have a good social support network I can call upon

1.4

1.3

-0.1

Most of my friends tend to be drawn from the same background as me

0.5 0.5

0

Most people in my area cannot be trusted

-0.7 -0.7

0

I feel like I belong in the community where I live

0.9 0.6

-0.3

I feel able to influence local decisions in my area

0.7 0.6

-0.1

I tend not to get involved in local activities

-0.7 -0.8

-0.1

I don't often get involved in political activities

0.5 0.2

-0.3

I feel like the local community perceives young people positively

0 0.3

0.3

(Strong disagree = -2; Disagree = -1; Neutral = 0; Agree = 1; Strongly Agree = 2). Source: Linked surveys (n = 51) Table A22. Skills developed by Award Holders

Do you feel like you have developed any of the following skills whilst doing your vInspired cashpoint project? (select all that apply)

%

Project planning 94 Budget management 90 Managing others 86 Team work 84 Communication 83 Other skills (please specify) 13 Source: End of Grant survey (n = 108) Table A23. Longer term destinations, and whether cashpoint helped: Award holders (note they can choose more than one outcome) Yes Partially No Don’t

know Total

(from 34) A new university course 7 1 - 1 9 A new college course 2 - 1 1 4 More volunteering 11 - - - 11 Employment 8 2 1 - 10 Training 3 - - - 3 Internship 3 2 - - 3 Source: Follow-up survey of 34 award-holders

64  

Table A24. Destinations, and whether cashpoint helped: Volunteers Yes Partially No Don’t

know Total

(from 73) Full-time education 6 7 14 5 32 Full-time work 3 3 8 4 18 Full-time volunteering 1 2 1 - 4 Source: Volunteers survey of 73 Table A25. SROI calculations68 Proportion Value Attribution

factor Per

project Total

Award holders Moving into work 0.24 £4,300 0.2 1 £202 Going to University 0.06 £9,250 0.2 1 £109 Better time management 0.94 £853 0.5 1 £399 Better team working 0.84 £524 0.5 1 £221 Increased confidence 0.44 £150 0.5 1 £33

Volunteers Moving into work 0.04 £4,300 0.2 13.2 £467 Learned new skills 0.55 £500 0.2 13.2 £723

Total monetised benefits £2,154 Total grant costs per project

£450

SROI ratio 4.8 Source: SROI database of proxies, rates from surveys and master data Table A26. SROI Sensitivity analysis Sensitivity analysis Change to SROI Treating extra volunteering hours as benefit, and including all administrative and programme costs

> SROI ratio becomes 4.5.

Attribution factor decreased to 10% for all outcomes SROI -> 2.0 Attribution factor increased to 50% for all outcomes SROI -> 9.8 Attribution factor increased to 100% for all outcomes SROI -> 19.6                                                                                                                          68 A key requirement, and assumption, for calculating Social Return on Investment is that benefits may be converted into monetary terms (Arvidson et al. 2013). This is needed to be able to appropriately compare these benefits with the rather more tangible costs. This table sets out some of the key benefits that have accrued within the programmes, with appropriate monetary benefits and assumptions of ‘deadweight’ based on past research studies.

65  

Table A27. Benefits for Volunteers Personal benefits you experienced as a result of your vInspired cashpoint project: (select all that apply)

%

Access to training and resources 21 Certificates / awards / some form of recognition 19 To make new friends and social contacts 55 New skills, such as leadership skills, project management skills, team working skills etc.(Volunteers only)

68

Improved employment prospects 36 Enjoyment and satisfaction 77 Other 1 Source: Volunteers survey (n = 73)

66  

Figure A1. cashpoint Assessment and Monitoring Process

vInspired5th Floor Dean Bradley House52 Horseferry RoadLondonSW1P 2AF020 7960 7000

@vinspired

vinspired

vinspiredofficial