It feels like just yesterday that local councils were the sole custodians of pretty much everything that mattered in our communities – from libraries and social care to the nitty-gritty of HR and payroll. But times, as they say, have a habit of changing, and so has the way public services are delivered. These days, relying solely on the 'in-house' model is becoming increasingly rare. Councils are getting creative, using their legal muscle to build a more diverse portfolio of service provision.
What does this mean in practice? Well, if a service isn't being run directly by the council anymore, it's likely operating under what's called an Alternative Delivery Model, or ADM for short. Think of it as a spectrum of options that allow services to be delivered in new and sometimes surprising ways.
So, what are these ADMs? The landscape includes a few key players:
- Local Authority Trading Companies (LATCs): These are essentially arms of the council, set up to operate commercially. They can deliver services both within the council and to external clients, often bringing a more business-like approach.
- Public Service Mutuals (PSMs): Imagine a service, perhaps a library or a youth club, spinning off from the council to become its own independent entity, often run by its staff and users. They retain a public service ethos but gain more freedom to innovate and adapt.
- Outsourcing: This is perhaps the most familiar. It involves contracting out a service to an external provider. This could be a charity, a social enterprise, or even a for-profit company, depending on what best suits the service's needs.
- Joint Ventures (JVs): Here, two or more organisations come together to deliver a service. This could involve the council, staff, or external providers pooling resources and sharing ownership and control. It’s a collaborative approach, designed to leverage the strengths of each partner.
It's worth noting that these categories aren't always mutually exclusive. A PSM, for instance, might also operate as a LATC, or a JV could involve elements of outsourcing.
But what if the goal isn't necessarily to externalise a service, but to fundamentally improve how it works from within? That's where the idea of 'remaining in-house with re-engineering' comes in. This isn't about changing who runs the service, but about transforming how it's run. It’s about streamlining processes, finding efficiencies, and developing new ways to meet community needs, perhaps even in partnership with community groups.
Let's take the library service as an example. If it stays 'in-house with re-engineering,' the council is still in charge, but they're actively looking at ways to make it better. This could mean updating systems, finding cost savings, or even developing new programs. The upside? It might be quicker and cheaper to implement than setting up a whole new model, and it avoids the often-complex procurement processes. However, there's a risk that efficiency drives could inadvertently lead to underfunding, making it hard to meet future needs. Plus, staying entirely council-dependent means the service is still vulnerable to council budget cuts and might miss out on the flexibility and 'freedom to trade' that other ADMs can offer, potentially impacting its long-term viability.
Another interesting avenue is partnership across two or more councils. This is where neighbouring authorities decide to join forces. They might share staff, resources, and even jointly procure back-office systems. It’s not necessarily about creating a new organisation, but about forging agreements to work together. Libraries West and the London Libraries Consortium are great examples of this in action. The benefits are clear: tapping into a wider pool of expertise, reducing duplication, and gaining greater purchasing power. And because these are often in-house services across councils, they can avoid certain taxes like VAT and corporation tax. The challenges, though, can be significant – getting different councils to agree on the scope, navigating differing operating systems, and ironing out cultural differences can be a real test of collaboration.
Ultimately, the choice of ADM is a strategic one, aiming to balance efficiency, innovation, and the core mission of public service delivery. It’s a fascinating evolution, reflecting a growing understanding that the best way to serve communities might not always be the most traditional way.
