How Providers Evidence Effective VCSE Partnerships in Social Care Contracts
Many adult social care providers state that they “work with VCSEs”, but commissioners increasingly ask a deeper question: how effective are those partnerships, and what difference do they actually make? Evidence of engagement must move beyond intent statements and into measurable delivery.
This article forms part of SME, VCSE & Social Enterprise Engagement and supports broader social value requirements around collaboration, transparency and community impact.
Why evidence matters more than intention
Commissioners are accountable for public spend and need to demonstrate that partnerships deliver tangible outcomes. Unsupported claims of “working with the voluntary sector” no longer meet scrutiny standards.
Effective evidence allows commissioners to assess:
- Value for money and preventative impact
- Risk management and safeguarding assurance
- Contribution to wider system outcomes
What commissioners expect to see
Evidence typically includes:
- Named partner organisations and scope of activity
- Defined referral pathways and volumes
- Outcome data and qualitative feedback
- Governance and review arrangements
Operational example 1: Measuring community inclusion outcomes
A provider partnered with a VCSE delivering community access support. The context included commissioner concern about limited social outcomes being evidenced.
The support approach introduced outcome tracking aligned to care plan goals, such as frequency of community participation and reported wellbeing changes.
Day-to-day delivery involved staff recording attendance and engagement levels, with VCSE partners providing monthly summaries.
Effectiveness was evidenced through measurable increases in community participation and positive qualitative feedback used in contract reviews.
Governance and assurance in partnerships
Strong partnerships are underpinned by governance mechanisms that protect people, staff and organisations.
This includes:
- Regular performance and safeguarding reviews
- Clear dispute resolution processes
- Defined exit or contingency arrangements
Operational example 2: Joint quality review meetings
A social enterprise delivering wellbeing sessions participated in quarterly joint quality reviews. The context included managing increasing demand safely.
The support approach used shared dashboards covering attendance, incidents and feedback.
Day-to-day delivery included action tracking and shared learning following any issues.
Effectiveness was evidenced through stable delivery despite growth and improved commissioner confidence.
Balancing flexibility and accountability
VCSEs often offer flexibility, but commissioners expect accountability to remain robust. Providers must show how flexibility is balanced with oversight.
Operational example 3: Managing safeguarding across organisations
A provider worked with multiple small VCSE partners. The context included differing levels of safeguarding experience.
The support approach included joint safeguarding training and clear reporting protocols.
Day-to-day delivery ensured incidents were escalated consistently and reviewed centrally.
Effectiveness was evidenced through timely reporting and consistent safeguarding practice.
Commissioner expectation
Commissioner expectation: commissioners expect clear, auditable evidence that VCSE partnerships are active, effective and contributing to agreed outcomes.
Regulator / Inspector expectation
Regulator / Inspector expectation (e.g. CQC): inspectors expect partnership working to support safe, person-centred care, with clear accountability retained by the regulated provider.