The payment by results Social Impact Bond pilot at HMP Peterborough: Final process evaluation report

Disley, Emma; Giacomantonio, Chris; Kruithof, Kristy; Sim, Megan

doi:10.7249/rr1212

Cited by 35 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Returns on investments are only paid to the extent that social entrepreneurs succeed in the goals set out up front-goals that result in savings for the governments. A prominent example deals with successfully reintegrating delinquents into the labor market and hence limiting the costs associated with reoffenses (Disley and Rubin 2014). While this type of finance appears to be promising, it is not without challenges and critiques (McHugh et al 2013).…”

Section: Public Policy For Social Entrepreneurshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing Public Policy for High‐Growth, Female, and Social Entrepreneurs

Terjesen

Bosma

Stam

2015

Public Administration Review

171

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Findings from a large and growing body of entrepreneurship research offer insights for public policy and public officials and managers. Entrepreneurship policy is defined as measures undertaken to stimulate entrepreneurship in a region or country. The authors discuss generalizations from empirical research on three types of entrepreneurship activity that are vital for inclusive, sustainable economic growth: high-growth (stressing economic impact), female (inclusive impact), and social (sustainable impact) entrepreneurship. High-growth firms make up a small share of all entrepreneurial activity but create the majority of economic growth. Compared to their male counterparts, female entrepreneurs are fewer in number (one-third of all entrepreneurs) and tend to start ventures with lower financial capital and growth expectations. Social entrepreneurs generally have high levels of education and pursue social objectives, often remedying market failures with innovative solutions. For each entrepreneurship type, the authors provide a definition, empirical generalizations, and implications for public policy. Practitioner Points• A small group of high-growth firms provide the majority of new economic activities, hence policy makers are encouraged to focus on high-growth entrepreneurship rather than the creation of new firms and self-employment in general. • To stimulate high-growth firms, governments use a wide range of policy instruments directed at finance, labor market regulations, investment in new knowledge, and opening up new markets. • Public policy to support female entrepreneurship includes efforts to provide entrepreneurial education and training, entrepreneurial mentors and networks, and child care. • There is no "one-size-fits-all" blueprint for social entrepreneurship policy because of the vast differences in social venturing prevalence as well as legal and regulatory frameworks, access to financial resources, markets, and training. • Social entrepreneurship activity is facilitated by dedicated finance programs, which include community investment, program-related investment, and dedicated legal status.

show abstract

Section: Public Policy For Social Entrepreneurshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing Public Policy for High‐Growth, Female, and Social Entrepreneurs

Terjesen

Bosma

Stam

2015

Public Administration Review

171

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The pilots (Ministry of Justice , ) are significant in as much as TR progressed without waiting for thorough evaluation and the interim results are definitely not indicative of a revolution, although some success was experienced (as is often the case with pilots; see Disley et al . ()). See http://www.russellwebster.com/did-peterborough-and-doncaster-reoffending-pilots-succeed/ (accessed 3 March 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Originally presented as a 'rehabilitation revolution' (see Clarke 2010; Ministry of Justice 2013a), the central logic of TR is a re-emphasis of the contestability recommendation in the Carter Report (Home Office 2003). One of the main areas of contention was the late coalition government's intention to have rehabilitative interventions audited and rewarded according to 'payment by results' (PbR) for reductions in offending through social impact bonds (SIBS) -see HMP pilots at Doncaster and Peterbrough 1 (Ministry of Justice 2014d, 2014e; Disley et al 2015). Inevitably, this move towards marketisation and privatisation has diminished the role of the public sector, increased the involvement of voluntary and not-for-profit organisations, and, most notably, extended the opportunities for commercial/business enterprises to become involved in 'offender management'.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Silo Mentalities’ and Their Impact on Service Delivery in Prison-Community Transitions: A Case Study of Resettlement Provision at a Male Open Prison

Moore

Hamilton

2016

The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Set against a backdrop of persistently high reoffending rates and the emergent ‘Transforming Rehabilitation’ (TR) agenda, the main argument in this article is derived from research of resettlement provision at a male open prison. Findings indicated that staff showed limited knowledge of the resettlement pathways of the Offender Management Model (OMM) and this had a direct impact on the purpose, range, and content of service delivery prior to release. Characteristics of a ‘silo mentality’ were identified within the prison's organisational framework which detracted from providing a sufficiently focused level of service according to the multi‐faceted requirements of the seamless sentence and the ‘through the gate’ ethos. The implications of this ‘myopic exclusivity’ for resettlement policy, design and practice of the prison and for the wider context of the penal system itself are not insignificant. They will present further major challenges and questions for TR.

show abstract

“…In the same way, some equally dangerous behaviors have become frowned on, particularly speeding. Car makers that used to brag about their "zero to sixty" acceleration and high performance now tout their safety features instead, given that they are far higher on 7 Social impact bonds are already being used to fund projects; see Disley et al (2015).…”

Section: The Car As Toolmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Road to Zero: A Vision for Achieving Zero Roadway Deaths by 2050

Ecola¹,

Popper²,

Silberglitt³

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

R® is a registered trademark. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution RightsThis document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.orgiii PrefaceWith this report, RAND continues a history of work in both traffic safety and scenario development and analysis. This report develops a scenario for the year 2050 in which not a single person in the United States dies in a traffic crash. This scenario is intended to inform and help coordinate future efforts in traffic safety across multiple stakeholders. We developed this scenario based on the results of three stakeholder workshops, held in 2017, that brought together participants in the recently instituted Road to Zero Coalition who represent a variety of stakeholders in traffic safety-professional engineering and planning organizations, public-sector organizations, safety advocates, vehicle manufacturers, technology developers, public health, emergency medical and trauma organizations, and law enforcement and judicial system representatives. This report does not necessarily represent the views of each coalition member or organization or individual that participated in the three stakeholder workshops. This work was sponsored by the National Safety Council, which also convened the Road to Zero Coalition. It will also be of particular interest to any of the types of stakeholders listed above, in addition to local, state, and federal elected officials with responsibility for traffic safety.The research reported here was conducted in the RAND Science, Technology, and Policy program, which focuses primarily on the role of scientific development and technological innovation in human behavior, global and regional decisionmaking as it relates to science and technology, and the concurrent effects that science and technology have on policy analysis and policy choices. The program covers such topics as space exploration, information and telecommunication technologies, and nano-and biotechnologies. Program research is supported by government agencies, foundations, and the private sector.RAND Justice, Infrastructure, and Environment...

show abstract

The payment by results Social Impact Bond pilot at HMP Peterborough: Final process evaluation report

Cited by 35 publications

References 8 publications

Advancing Public Policy for High‐Growth, Female, and Social Entrepreneurs

Advancing Public Policy for High‐Growth, Female, and Social Entrepreneurs

‘Silo Mentalities’ and Their Impact on Service Delivery in Prison-Community Transitions: A Case Study of Resettlement Provision at a Male Open Prison

The Road to Zero: A Vision for Achieving Zero Roadway Deaths by 2050

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About