RoI

Social Return on Investment is not an excuse to leave out all the important numbers. If anything, it is a more rigourous way of making sure that everything that is important, is counted.

I’m writing a guide, and as I write, I’m discussing SROI with project managers, with charities, with businesses, and with public sector organisations. Some people seem to think that SROI is an excuse for including “softer” benefits into a business case. I’ll discuss why not, here.

 I like to research thoroughly before responding to a tender, and a requirement came up that really challenged me. The client wants to know if their response to domestic violence represents value for money.  It's still early days for the service, but how it develops from here depends on the findings of the cost-effectiveness study, so we owe a really important duty of care for such a critical service.
For example: Which interventions work in reducing or preventing domestic violence? Is it enough to give women a place of safety, or does this just

"Measuring the Benefits" looks at the evidence for urgent care practitioners caring for patients effectively. It compares paramedics and advanced paramedics (in research from USA, Canada, Australia and Europe) with advanced nurse practitioners and ECPs (in UK pilots).

This was one of the defining reports for the Emergency Care Practitioner. Launched by Prof Sir George Alberti in October 2004, it explains what ECPs are (or can be), where they were at the time, how much they cost to develop and what the Return on Investment is (these two were my bits).

"Health free at the point of use" means health funded out of the public purse - but it doesn't mean public-owned providers. Social enterprise is one very viable option