Task Force says negative language holds back early-action projects 1

Finance | Vibeka Mair | 23 Nov 2011

The Early Action Task Force has said the conventional language of 'prevention' used around early action projects presupposes problems, victims and perpetrators, and called for the use of a new language of 'readiness' associated with assets and strengths.

The Early Action Task Force, which is chaired by David Robinson, senior adviser at Community Links, is a group of charity stakeholders including Sir Stuart Etherington, CEO of NCVO and Martin Brookes, former CEO of New Philanthropy Capital, who believe early-action projects are key in tackling social problems.

Its first report, entitled The Triple Dividend, makes a number of recommendations to government, including ring-fencing spending on early-action projects; setting up an early-action fund centrally held by the Treasury; and creating a ‘minister for early action’ or an ‘early action czar’. The report also calls on government to explore guarantees or insurances on social impact bonds to stimulate the public to invest.

Meanwhile, charity funders are encouraged to consider the optimum point for intervention each time they fund, by developing a “one step sooner” mindset. The report also calls on funders to collaborate on developing a shared evidence base with consistent measurement of early-action projects.

The report, launched today at the House of Lords, also recommends that new language around early action needs to be developed, saying the language of ‘prevention’ is pessimistic, reductive and discouraging, while the language of ‘readiness’ is motivating, optimistic and aspirational.

The Task Force is due to publish a second report early next year. The term 'triple dividend' stands for thriving lives; costing less; contributing more.

Directory: Community Links | National Council of Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) | New Philanthropy Capital
Who's Who: Sir Stuart Etherington | Martin Brookes

Place a comment

Paul Edwards
Community Development Worker
N/A
23 Nov 2011

As someone who worked in alcohol and drug prevention in the 1970s, this rticle makes very depressing reading. While the report is absolutely right about the positive value of the language of 'readiness; this is not possible while funders, and that means Government, insist on the language of 'blame' to appease the bloody-minded right wing gutter press.

[Reply]

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.