Informed by conversations with leaders of Black, Asian and minoritised  ethnic led charities working in the criminal justice system, the pilot will aim to support enable organisations to give them the tools to have their voices heard in the national policy debate, build personal and organisational resilience and network with other criminal justice leaders. 

Background  

In the UK, the voluntary sector plays a vital role in providing services, supporting those most at risk of engagement in the criminal justice system, campaigning for policy reform, informing the media and influencing public debate.  

 The sector is diverse but, due to historic underfunding, organisations run by and for people from Black, Asian and minoritised ethnic groups tend to be smaller and find it harder to achieve critical mass and sustainability.  

 Informal conversations between independent trusts and foundations and organisations run by and for people from Black, Asian and minoritised ethnic backgrounds concluded that investing in leadership development could be transformative and contribute to positive social change for people in the criminal justice system and wider society.  

Barrow Cadbury Trust and Lloyds Bank Foundation now wish to commission an organisation (or a partnership) to design and deliver the pilot programme over two years to support Black, Asian and minoritised ethnic leaders.  

About the Community Leadership Development Programme 

What is the primary objective of the programme? 

The overarching objective of the programme is to challenge and change the criminal justice system, from policy through to service design and delivery. To do this a stronger and more experienced specialist sector should be empowered and enfranchised to promote radical change and advocate for new approaches. The programme should be a unique leadership development programme tailored to Black, Asian and minoritised ethnic leaders working in criminal justice. 

The pilot programme will have four core elements:  

• wellbeing; 
• networking;  
• policy development and influencing; and  
• organisational development.  

The aim is to increase the resilience and capabilities of current leaders, supporting them to lead social change.  

What sort of knowledge and expertise is needed? 

We expect the provider to be, or work in partnership with, an organisation which is led by people from Black, Asian or minoritised ethnic communities, and have knowledge of the policy context for criminal justice charities and leadership development for charities. The provider/partnership should have clear demonstrable experience of delivering work in line with the programme design brief. 

Will the programme be monitored and evaluated?  

Over the course of the programme the provider will be expected to capture learning and feedback. The provider will be expected to design and implement a robust monitoring and outcome evaluation framework as part of the programme delivery model.  The Barrow Cadbury Trust and Lloyds Bank Foundation are considering an external evaluation this which will be funded separately. 

How much budget is available?  

The Barrow Cadbury Trust and Lloyds Bank Foundation have a budget of up to £200K for this programme.  

What is the Application Process?  

This is a two stage application process. The deadline for the first stage is 5pm 27 March, with the preferred supplier appointed at the end of June. 

Download a copy of the full programme design brief
Download a copy of the bidder profile form

“I want the words and language to argue for change!”

“I’d like the community I work in to know how the economy could change to benefit them.”

These are just some of the reasons participants gave for joining Shift Birmingham, which kicked off at Stirchley Baths in the south of the city in September. The free training programme brings together changemakers from across Birmingham to look at how power and resources in the city can be rebalanced.

The cohort includes 23 people making a difference across Birmingham in various ways- from a nursery manager to a housing campaigner and a community hub manager at a local college. With the first session postponed due to the unprecedented heatwave in July, there was an atmosphere of excitement and anticipation as the inspirational group met face to face for the first time.

The first session set the foundations for a ten month journey where the cohort will be looking at how to improve the local economy and the lives of communities they live and work with, who are being hit hard by the cost of living crisis. They’ll look at opportunities for change that build on the strengths and assets that exist in Birmingham.

Participants will explore pressing economic problems that affect the city – from the housing crisis to the climate crisis — and get confident understanding and talking about their root causes, how they are connected and how to address them. They will also be supported to get their voice heard in the media, and to influence people in positions of economic power to make the type of change this participant called for:

“Jobs for local communities. Skills for local people. Services where we need them.”

Shift Birmingham is delivered by Economy and funded by Birmingham City Council’s Neighbourhood Development Support Unit and the Barrow Cadbury Trust.

This blog is cross-posted from Economy’s recent newsletter.  Many thanks to Economy for allowing us to share it.

Whilst I’m critical of the Government’s response to racial inequalities and associated disproportionalities, I was encouraged by its commitment in the recently launched ‘Inclusive Britain’ report (the Government’s response to the controversial Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities report published a year ago).  The ‘Inclusive Britain’ report asserted that “young adult offenders (those aged 18 to 24) receive age-appropriate consequences for their actions and are discouraged from repeating criminal behaviour … we do not want to see them criminalised if there is a strong argument for a second chance, especially where individuals are motivated to acknowledge and learn from the experience. Where drugs offences come about through the exploitation of vulnerable young people, we want to avoid a cycle of victims becoming offenders”.

Why focus on young adults?

T2A has been advocating for age appropriate services for more than a decade.  In that time we’ve amassed substantial evidence from neuroscience which shows that the brain is not fully formed until at least the mid-20s. The upshot of this is that young adults typically have more ‘psychosocial’ similarities to older children than to adults in their reasoning and decision-making. Young adulthood is also a stage of life where behaviour change is more likely. There is a crucial window of opportunity where desistance from crime can be nurtured as the young adult brain is receptive to learning and personal growth.

 Working in the police service for many years, I witnessed first-hand the impact on young adults, their families and communities when they are in the justice system. As the newly appointed chair of the Transition to Adulthood Alliance (T2A), I’m pleased to see a shift in the Government’s approach to 18-24 year olds in the Inclusive Britain report but this does mark a different approach to some recent positions adopted by the Government. For example the legislative changes planned in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill which removes some existing recognition that young adults should be treated differently because of their developmental status. Nevertheless, key parts of the justice system, notably prisons and probation, acknowledge that young adulthood extends up to the age of 25 and require a distinct service.

Disproportionality

At T2A, we are very concerned by the significant and growing disproportionality of young adults of colour in the criminal justice system. These disparities have continued to increase as consecutive governments have failed to hear and deliver on the recommendations from several reviews of the criminal justice system — such as the 2017 Lammy Review,  and going back many years now the Macpherson Inquiry — where potential reasons for racial disparities were explored and the need for more systematic research to understand the causes has been identified.

Next steps

I would like to see the government go further and commit to providing age appropriate services, which tackle long-standing inequalities, right across the criminal justice system.

Recently the government showed its intent to invest in supporting families with complex needs and has asked the Children’s Commissioner to review the way public services understand the needs of children and families. We would like to see this extended to young adults up to 25.  Young people typically reach what might have been seen as traditional milestones of adulthood at a much older age than when I started my policing career. Young adults and their families generally have access to fewer supportive public services than children because there a cliff edge of provision dropping away when they turn 18.

Young adult vulnerability

Because of their age, young adults involved in serious crime are rarely viewed as possible victims but rather as highly culpable perpetrators. While I welcome recent significant shifts in understanding the nature of youth criminality and the role of exploitation in violent and drug-related offences, this has typically focused on those who are demonstrably young and vulnerable. The fact that the vulnerability of those young adults may well have brought them into crime is rarely recognised. For instance, recent statistics from MOPAC (Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime)  in London show that only 22% of referrals for support are aged 18-25. However, 69% of people known to be involved in County Lines are aged 18-25. [MOPAC, Rescue and Response Strategic Assessment]. And research shows that public services can disproportionately view black young people as adults before they are 18 and have higher expectations of them in a process known as ‘adultification’.

Talking to young adults

T2A places utmost importance on developing solutions with people who are experts because of their own experience of the criminal justice system. In implementing the actions set out in the ‘Inclusive Britain’ report, the Government could usefully engage with young adults of colour, for example, through organisations like Leaders Unlocked. In the Leaders Unlocked report Race and the Criminal Justice System, young adults provided powerful testimony of their experiences of engaging with public services which make for sobering reading.  They demonstrate a lack of trust in the system starting in childhood. Once involved in the criminal justice system, young adults find that they are perceived through a narrow lens as a perpetrator or a criminal.  They may find it challenging to move on from their offence and rebuild their lives, which ultimately is what we all want.

Leroy Logan MBE is chair of T2A
@T2AAlliance @LeroyLogan999

Debbie Pippard reflects on the Levelling Up White Paper and what it might mean for regional and in-region inequalities

Following the recent publication of the Government’s Levelling Up White Paper, those concerned about the differences in opportunity, resources and wellbeing that people experience merely because of where they live in the UK, have had an opportunity to digest its contents.  We’ve identified three things we like and three things we’re concerned about, and have done a round up of responses from those we work with.

First, it’s good to see a major strategy that seeks to tackle the deeply rooted disparities between different areas of the country (and for short history on just how deeply rooted those differences are, and a run through previous attempts to address them, check out https://www.politico.eu/westminster-insider-podcast/).  The White Paper is a serious attempt to address the problem and we welcome the recognition that reducing inequalities is a moral duty as well as an economic and social necessity.  Few of us would disagree with the 12 missions it sets out, or with the acknowledgement that it is a long-term project that will require sustained focus across several political cycles to be fully realised.

Systems change to tackle regional inequalities

Second, the authors recognise that making different areas of the country more equal requires systems change across a whole raft of different issues, not just short term fixes from one department or another.  The White Paper lists six types of capital (physical, human, intangible, financial, social and institutional) all of which must be present if communities are to thrive and we agree that any lasting change has to be about the interrelationship of all those things.  Making the reporting of progress a statutory duty increases the prospects of focussing ministerial and departmental minds on action, and makes it more difficult to dismantle.

 Third, increased devolution means that those who know their local places best can identify and work on priorities that matter most locally.  However, devolution is not enough – it must be accompanied by redistribution from wealthier to poorer areas or those with less will remain stuck in a vicious cycle.  Unsurprisingly the emphasis is on stimulating and supporting the private sector as a main route to levelling up, though we would have liked to see more about the importance of a thriving foundational economy and the role of social enterprise.  As an organisation with roots in Birmingham we were pleased to see that one of the three proposed ‘Innovation Accelerators’ will be in the West Midlands.

Structural inequalities within areas

However, on the flip side of the coin, there is not enough about differences within places, which can be as great or greater as those between different parts of the UK.  Some of the places that fit the vision in the White Paper of being ‘home to skilled people with high quality jobs… outstanding schools…competitive universities…fine housing’ (Oxford or Cambridge spring to mind) are still places where people struggle to make a living and sometimes die on the streets.  We need levelling up across the UK, but we also need attention to the support needed by individual people and much stronger recognition and eradication of the structural inequalities linked to the intersection between poverty and protected characteristics such as gender, race and disability.   That will need an injection of public funds as well as a recognition of and sustained focus on eliminating those structural inequalities which arise from who we are – and the value society places on different groups of people – not what we do.  

The need for ongoing evaluation 

The paper sets out a number of targets. Some of these are too vague to be meaningful, others are numeric but very ambitious.  They will need to be clarified and refined over time, perhaps with targets being set by local areas with the centre ensuring that the individual contributions add up to a step change in each reporting period.  We have a long history of attempts to address regional disparities, but as the National Audit Office so painfully pointed out, too little has been spent on learning about what works.  This ambitious plan and its long term nature lends itself well to ongoing evaluation so that central Government and local players can learning from different approaches that will be taken across the country.

Finally, of course, there is a question of whether the funding that will be needed will be made available, and whether the priority the current administration puts on this policy will stick when there is a change of leadership – whether that comes soon or in a few years’ time.  Putting a requirement to report on a statutory footing and establishing a high profile Advisory Council will help ensure longevity but the first few years, during which time the architecture of devolution and other structures will be put in place, will be crucial. 

Further reading

And if you want to read more about putting policy into practice our partners provide plenty of further reading:

• Alternative approaches from the New Economics Foundation and Centre for Local Economic Studies and a regional perspective  from ippr North. 
• Thoughts on levelling up and integration from British Future, on implications for the charity sector from NCVO and on the gap between ambition and action from npc.
• A strong critique about failure to address inequalities from The Equality Trust and a cautious welcome from Business in the Community.

Debbie Pippard is Director of Programmes at Barrow Cadbury Trust

On 10 February 2021, the first grantmakers signed up to IVAR’s eight commitments to funding charities in an open and trusting way. One year on, over 100 trusts and foundations are working actively with each other and with charities to make these commitments a reality.

Looking back, we are struck by six imperatives that shape this work and will help drive it forward in 2022 and beyond.

1. Change is urgent

COVID-19 has been a wake-up call on funding practice. Its key challenges to funders – relieving pressure on charities; freeing them to respond flexibly to the evolving needs of the communities and causes they serve; and facing up to biases and assumptions that perpetuate entrenched injustice and inequity – long predate the pandemic. But events of 2020 – the first COVID-19 lockdown and the murder of George Floyd – showed that communities’ needs are evolving; and funders’ responses demonstrated that change is possible. The time for a simpler, more respectful, and more inclusive philanthropy is now. We all need to play our part in building greater momentum.

2. Charities must be the judge of progress

A strong, diverse charity voice is critical to this effort – but hard to achieve. Power dynamics mean charities are wary of giving robust feedback to funders. And too often new rhetoric makes little or no difference to what funders do in practice. With extreme pressure on capacity and widespread cynicism about the influence they have, many charities see no point in engaging. We will all benefit from broader and deeper conversations between the charity sector and the funding sector. But only if these conversations lead to visible and meaningful change.

3. Confident practice comes from deep roots

Even small changes in practice by grantmakers – a more streamlined application form, the opportunity to pick up the phone and ask a question, quick replies to emails – make a real difference to charities. But open, trusting and respectful practice cannot flourish unless it mirrors and is supported by organisational culture, structure and leadership. In a busy foundation, it can be hard to step back and scrutinise – at all levels – how well-established assumptions and ways of working are supporting the commitment to be more open and trusting. But this is an essential step in achieving the best possible alignment between ‘how we do things’ and ‘what we are trying to achieve’.

4. ‘Making our thinking visible’ is a powerful mechanism for change

Thinking out loud with each other provides an opportunity for people to offer alternative perspectives or identify the powerful questions that enable action. By working together, sharing ideas, difficulties and experiences in a spirit of positive challenge, we are all encouraged to act, learn and do better next time.

5. Acting like a partner, not an auditor

Open and trusting grant-making calls for a new mindset – one that starts from the assumption that charities know their own business, and will make informed judgements about how to adapt and adjust as things change. They can be trusted to be thoughtful and reflective, to know what ‘success’ looks like, to collect useful data, and to share it as part of their own commitment to improve the quality of what they do. A trusting relationship is ultimately about shifting power, not shifting paperwork. And the single most powerful thing funders can do to be more trusting is to give charities greater control over their own spending and reporting through unrestricted or highly flexible grants.

6. Making good progress means ‘starting from where we are’

Independent grantmakers are far from uniform in their scope, size, interests, priorities and governance. They face different opportunities and constraints. Being more open and trusting does not look the same everywhere – one size does not fit all. But, together, we are uncovering the principles that frame an open and trusting approach, enabling funders of all kinds to start from where they are and take positive steps to improve.

Now is the moment for transformative change in UK grant-making. To achieve this, funders, charities and their learning partners will all need to be persistent, determined and in it for the long term.

IVAR Trustees and staff are committed to supporting this momentum for change. Please join our Open and Trusting grant-making community by signing up to through our webpage or getting in touch. Charities can  hold funders to account by signing up here.

With thanks to Shaady Salehi at Trust-based Philanthropy and to our community of open and trusting grantmakers for helping to inform and develop our thinking over the last year.

This blog is cross-posted from the IVAR website.

The Funders for Race Equality Alliance is a growing network of charitable funders determined to take action to tackle racial inequity and injustice. Now with 45 members and counting, the network provides space for challenge, knowledge exchange and peer support, helping us to review the extent to which we are funding racial justice. The Alliance also tests new ways of providing, in the words of the network’s mission, ‘more and better’ funding to organisations led by and for people affected by racial inequity. Read more about the Alliance (pdf)

To help funders understand where their grants are going, and to provide a baseline against which to measure change, the Alliance developed an audit tool which can be used by funders of any size, type or specialism to analyse the extent to which their grants are supporting the race equality sector and furthering racial justice. In May 2021 we published the pooled results from the pioneers who tested the audit tool, and we have now added those from the second cohort.

The first cohort included a variety of charitable funders, including social justice funders such as the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust and Barrow Cadbury Trust, a community and place-based funder, – Bedfordshire and Luton Community Foundations – as well as some bigger foundations including Esmée Fairbairn, Paul Hamlyn and Lloyds Bank Foundation.

The second cohort includes the National Lottery Community Fund, Henry Smith Charity and the People’s Health Trust, amongst others, illustrating the significant uptake of the audit tool amongst a wide spectrum of charitable funders.

Here are the results from both cohorts, which have been combined to reduce biases and give a better overall picture of where funding is going.

Racial justice funding over time

There are some notable differences in the results from the two cohorts. In the first, almost a quarter of the total grant funding provided was designed to benefit Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic groups, compared to only a tenth from the second. Interestingly though, the proportion of funding allocated to organisations led by Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic communities was almost identical – 6% in the first cohort versus 5% in the second.

These figures are both much lower than we’d expect if funding were to be equitably distributed across the whole voluntary and community sector.

The second big difference is the amount of funding going to the race equality sector for service provision compared to campaigning and influencing work. Almost 80% of the funding in the second cohort went to race equality organisations for provision of direct services, compared to less than half in the first cohort. However, a very different pattern was found when we looked at campaigning and influencing work – almost a fifth of grant funding in the first cohort was given to support campaigning with a full half devoted to work aimed at creating structural change, but the funders in the second cohort spent less than 1% on this work.

The pattern will partly be due to timing – the second cohort analysed their grants during or after the big push to provide crisis grants given to help people through the Covid-19 crisis – but the second cohort may also be more typical of the foundation sector as a whole, which tends to fund much more service provision than work that directly addresses the root causes of racial injustice.

Funders are changing their grant-making practice

It’s clear that funders are eager to understand their grant-making better. Twenty funders have shared their data with us, representing more than 3,000 grants totalling £270 million, and we know others have undertaken the audit for internal purposes only. It’s clear that their findings are helping them to think and fund differently.

For example, Lloyds Foundation identified barriers to organisations led by racially minoritised groups and introduced a 25% ringfenced fund in August 2020 for Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic-led charities. Its evaluation of that fund showed that it had exceeded that target, with 38% going to those organisations.

When Trust for London audited its grants, it found that while 70% of its funding would benefit racially minoritised people, only 14% went to organisations led by people from those communities. Subsequently, they are now working up plans to make a significant investment to Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic-led organisations to increase their skills, capacity and policy influencing activities in tackling racial injustice. And the Smallwood Trust has also changed its processes and has seen its funding for the sector increase from 7% to 21% across its portfolio.

The audit has led to wider changes too: Esmée Fairbairn Foundation and the National Lottery Community Fund supported 360Giving and the Social Investment Consultancy to develop a Diversity, Equity and Inclusion data standard for 360Giving. This will pave the way for consistent data collection that all grant makers can use and which covers all protected characteristics. We hope this will lead to more consistent reporting, greater accountability and lasting change.

Looking to the future

Now that the audit is well established, the Alliance will be publishing pooled data on a regular basis. Since these first two cohorts, we have revised our racial justice audit tool to integrate it with 360Giving’s new DEI Data Standard and to update our language and terminology around communities experiencing racial inequity. This revised tool will be published shortly.

We are confident that the changes funders have made in the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder, the resurgence of Black Lives Matter and the stark and long-standing inequalities brought to light by Covid-19 will show up the next time we publish audit figures. But funding behaviours and priorities have so far been reactive – we cannot continue to only fund the sector in times of recognised injustice and allow the momentum for change to seep away in the coming years. We are asking for all members of the Funders for Race Equality Alliance to commit to auditing their grant making at least every two years, to ensure a steady shift towards equity.

If you want to find out more about the Alliance or get support with undertaking the audit, please contact the Alliance Secretariat. We look forward to you joining us!

Some people may already know that Joyce Moseley’s tenure as Chair of the Transition to Adulthood Alliance (T2A) after nine years in post has now come to an end. The Alliance and The Barrow Cadbury Trust would like to thank Joyce for her work supporting T2A and dedication she has shown to its work over the years.

 We can share the news that Leroy Logan MBE will be taking over. The experience he brings from his time in policing and founding a leading youth charity will be valuable to advancing the work of T2A. Leroy will be talking more about taking up this appointment in early 2022.

 But first let us hear from Joyce Moseley OBE, outgoing Chair, and former chief executive of Catch 22. She talks to Laurie Hunte, Criminal Justice programme manager at Barrow Cadbury Trust about how she was drawn to working with young people and her time as T2A Chair.

When did you become chair of T2A?

I have been chair for nine years beginning in 2012.

 What attracted you to the role?  What motivated your interest in criminal justice and young adults?

Where to start! The interest in young adults grew out of many years’ involvement with youth justice. As a social worker from 1968 onwards I was drawn to working with young offenders and their families. Labelling theory was strong and it did seem to me nonsensical how young people were being stigmatised for years to come for the most minor offences when it was plain to see that their difficult life circumstances were the things needing attention.

Later as a Director of Social Services I helped promote the needs of care leavers as more and more research showed how they fared badly in later life. This led to the Leaving Care Act which for the first time meant help and support could be given to those over 18 to help with the transition into adulthood.

But I did reflect that when I was a young social worker care leavers were not seen ‘as a problem’. Why? What had changed? Although similar problems probably befell them in later life the act of leaving care did not present problems – there were plenty of jobs for 16 year olds, renting a room was not difficult, the army used to recruit many care leavers and there did seem to be more community based social support networks (or is that rose tinted glasses?).

So society, the economy, support infrastructure, family structures all changed in the 70, 80 and 90s making the transition to adulthood that much more difficult for the kinds of young people finding themselves in the criminal justice system. Not so of course for those going onto higher education where student accommodation, welfare support, financial and social support was still strong. No one expected students to ‘behave like adults’.

In the late 90’s I became one of the founding members of the newly established Youth Justice Board. Having been a Director of Social Services I knew what little focus there was on young offenders in local authorities generally  – elected members’ interest and therefore budgets did not naturally fall on young offenders. So whilst it was controversial to split them off from the social welfare system and put them more firmly into the CJS it did bring a research, practice and policy focus on them and their needs which had not been so strong before.

What was your work and other experience leading up to that and what was the relevance of it to chairing T2A?

As well as social work training and management of social services I also trained as a community worker and undertook an MSc in Social Research. During my stint at the YJB I made a move into the voluntary sector and I following my interest in youth justice and became the CEO of the Royal Philanthropic Society. RPS had been the organisation that set up the first residential treatment centre for young offenders in 1832! Reading their records is such an eye opener – attitudes towards and understanding of the young people was often more caring and thoughtful than one sees today. RPS merged with the Rainer Foundation which had started the Probation Service in the second decade of the 20^th century eventually  becoming Rainer. Then there was a merger with Crime Concern, the charity that had developed much of the thinking around community safety, and Catch 22 was born where young adults were the central focus of the work.

RPS had a strong relationship with various European organisations that had shared the same philosophy back in the mid 19 century. King’s School, Canterbury, led by Rainer, and funded by ESF. In the early 2000s a European conference was held at Kings School, Canterbury, led by Rainer and funded by ESF, focused on young adults. We were very conscious of lagging behind in our thinking on this age group. Many of our European partners had both welfare and criminal justice systems that did not have the rigid dividing line at 18 that the UK had, enabling them to support young adults in those crucial years when, as we know now, they are still developing many of their cognitive skills. There was an important supporter of this conference – no other than Barrow Cadbury Trust. This proved to be the early beginnings of what became T2A in 2008.

One other influence was my time as a board director of the Tavistock Clinic NHS Foundation Trust known for its therapeutic approach to mental health. An adolescent department had been established back in the 1920’s. Adolescence had always been defined by the Tavistock as up to 25 for treatment purposes. They were early adopters of a  psychotherapeutic lens that regarded becoming an adult as a developmental process, something we now have neurological research to back up.

 Did you always know you wanted to work in this field?  If so why?

I’ve always been amazed when people say, ‘I have always known I wanted to be X or Y’. How did they know that? I have tended to fall into things without much planning! Getting into university was more luck than judgment and doing sociology at London was more to do with not having a modern language O level than much else. And what did one do with a sociology degree in those days – became a social worker to change the world!

So, no I did not have a plan although some fairly turbulent teenage years might have led me to respect and empathise with the young people I have worked with over the years. The difference for me was having a strong loving family and a good education.

Going up the management ladder in social services there were some good role models who encouraged me. There were also those moments when I realised that I could do jobs as well if not better than my colleagues (mainly male!) who were going for the promotions.

 What was the situation like at T2A when you joined? I.e. what was going on politically and policy wise and in the VCS criminal justice sector?

It is a trip down memory lane to look back at my early Alliance meeting notes. Take December 2012 – Chris Grayling was promoting ‘swift and sure justice’, the government said all community orders had to include a ‘punitive element’ and austerity was starting to bite. On a more positive note, Sadiq Khan then shadow justice minister spoke at the YJB convention saying he wanted to look at the merits and cost of the youth offending services having an 18+ remit. The ‘what if’ approach to history!

At T2A we launched the T2A Pathway which has acted as the backbone of the work and I think is still worth using as a reference point.

For the VCS austerity hadn’t quite hit. The Big Society ideology saved them for a while but as cuts hit local authorities the knock on to voluntary organisations really started to bite. Social Impact Bonds were all the rage.

It was wonderful to be working with an organisation such at BCT that committed their investments for the long term and believed so strongly in the voluntary sector. That really gave meaning and succour to the Alliance, I think.

 What do you feel has been the greatest achievement of T2A in your time as chair?

Can chairs ever claim achievements? I like to think that in the early days the many discussions/debates with Max Rutherford, (the former CJ Programme Manager at BCT), helped with the thinking that went into the T2A programme. I like to think I fronted some of the public facing events well – party conference sessions, conference chairing, speaking to the Select Committee, meetings with ministers and officials. And of course chairing the Alliance meetings – making people feel welcome, asking reasonable questions when needed, thanking guests, trying to politely curtail some lengthy interventions, reading the moods of the meeting and finishing on time. I’m only sad that face to face meetings didn’t return on my watch. But who knows they might never!

 What do you think the future holds for the treatment of young adults in the CJS?

A Conservative MP told me recently not to be too pessimistic about the way things are going. A bit difficult given recent legislation, the massive cuts and yet more structural change as well as an underlying lack of care for the young adults we work with especially those from diverse backgrounds whose treatment by the CJS is shaming.

I think the MP said what he did knowing that ‘things change’ especially in politics, so one can only hope. And despite the politics there are many good things happening – the T2A message has never been stronger and heard by so many people. To make lasting and embedded change we need to make it conceivable that young adults in the CJS and all policy areas are seen as a distinct group with specific requirements. And that doing so makes economic as well as moral sense.

 Finally, what do you think you’ll miss most about being chair of T2A?

Being a part of something so right – T2A is a coherent set of policy thinking and policy ambition, backed by research and evidence backed practice.

Cross posted from the  T2A website 

I read Tariq Fancy’s recent broadside against sustainable investment with interest.  As the former Chief Investment Officer for Sustainable Investing at Blackrock he speaks with considerable authority, and has a better insight into ‘greenwashing’ than many, but I think he does responsible investors a disservice.

Why ESG investing can work

Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) investing may not be a panacea for all the ills of climate change and social injustice, but it is far more than a mere placebo.  At its simplest level investors use ESG to determine the risks associated with individual investments.  Poor governance or environmental or social performance can mean a higher risk for the company, so there is a higher cost of capital.  If investors in the company can engage with management to improve their ESG ‘score’ then the risk reduces and there is a potential financial benefit for investors, as well as the bonus of an environmental and social impact.  If management will not engage with investors then there is a case for selling our shares in the company.  There is growing research that this ESG approach will benefit investors in the long term and from our own experience we have seen the lower financial returns generated by companies which we have divested from for ESG reasons.

Beyond financial gains

For some investors the financial benefit is enough, but there is a growing understanding that we also need to address these issues for the sake of the planet and people.  Many charity investors will consider how they can improve ESG at companies and look for opportunities in companies which are paying attention to ESG issues, particularly those which can demonstrate a positive environmental impact. In addition to this it is essential that we work with policy makers with the aim of creating a structural and regulatory environment that supports the transition to a low carbon economy.

UN Sustainable Development Goals and sustainable growth

A responsible investment approach can have wider benefits.  An approach which takes into account the wider issues of the UN Sustainable Development Goals will drive sustainable growth and reduce the externalities such as pollution and greenhouse gas emissions  which negatively affect national and global economies.  For long term investors in suitably diversified portfolios the overall global economic performance will influence the future value of their portfolio rather than just the performance of individual companies or sectors.

At Barrow Cadbury Trust we have limited funds and resources, but we do believe that by working with other asset owners and our investment managers we can improve our financial return and achieve positive environmental and social change.

Mark O’Kelly
4 October 2021

In amongst the first few days working in a prison, I was told on multiple occasions, from multiple different prison officers, to ‘forget everything I learned at training’. I can see their point, there are some things you can’t learn in a classroom, and like so many skills, practice makes perfect when it comes to working in a prison – you have to get involved and pull your weight, or else you’ll never learn. However, there is a key skill that I learned during my Unlocked officer training that has stood me in good stead for the last two years –a willingness to learn, and the confidence to say that I don’t know everything. I can’t forget what I learned at training, because I learned so much! Even if I found practical experience to be more useful to me in the workplace, that’s still information that started when I started my training. I think it is crucial for prison officers, as well as pretty much everyone, to continue informing themselves, and be prepared to admit they still have more to learn.

This is what I have particularly enjoyed while on my placement with the Barrow Cadbury Trust – I have had a chance to access reports that have drawn on information from all around the criminal justice sector, all of which can inform my practice in prison. By reading about young peoples’ experiences with the police, and with the courts, I can better understand the attitudes and perceptions of prison that young people have when they come through the gates. This paper, by Nacro, breaks down the process of how best to help a young person struggling with their identity, so they can grow into a more pro-social one, which is key to my work, and helpful for me to refer back to should I feel out of my depth. These papers are important because it is through understanding someone that I can talk to them with respect, and prevent moments of miscommunication, or omissions in judgment, that can lead to violence.

I will take the lessons from these papers, amongst others, back into my work, both using it to shape my actions and practice on the wing, and my conversations with fellow prison officers and members of staff. Discussing the day’s events in a prison is crucial, as it helps us process what we saw, and how we felt. Beyond that, I think it’s equally important to discuss how we can improve and talk about what we can do next time, to keep people safe. Preventing mistakes comes with practice, but it also comes with being ready, and informed on what’s going through someone’s head. Sometimes you don’t need to see it happen once to stop it happening a second time, you can stop it from happening at all. All these lessons, and skills, we learn, and I don’t believe we should ever forget anything we learn, only build new lessons on top of previous ones.

I want to say thank you to everyone at the Barrow Cadbury Trust for supporting me in the last two weeks; it has been fascinating to find out more about what you do, and also cheering to see the range and passion of people invested in supporting young people in our society. I hope to stay in touch with the people I have met, and hear more about the work being done to help bring about socially just change.