Two encouraging missives urging greater adoption of SIB practice to end the week…
Another week, more progress, have a good weekend.
Different Is Better
Brian O’Shaughnessy – CT News Junkie
Tipping points often come upon us unnoticed.
If you are paying attention, there is a great deal of discussion about income, poverty and the quality of life. Whatever the focus – the minimum wage, early childhood education, wealth disparity, academic achievement gap, unemployment, crime – at the core are economic issues. The root causes of these issues are complex and addressing them could also cost money. What if we could address these issues and save money?
Several weeks ago, I was part of a conference at the Legislative Office Building to promote the concept of social innovation financing. This was the second conference on the topic. The legislative expression of this idea is set forth in SB 105, “An Act Concerning Social Innovation Investment.”
The legislation still seeks to find “packaging” that legislators, government and the public can embrace. This is unfortunate, because the idea is very simple. Unfortunately, the deviation from business as usual can be disorienting. Thinking different is hard.
The popular label is a social impact bond or pay-for-success contract. Government would agree to pay the provider of a social service program only if the services it delivers are proven successful. Hence, a pay-for-success contract. If the provider cannot establish success and significant financial savings, no payment is made. In a state where over $1 billion is spent each year for social services never measured for success, what exactly is the problem?
Pay-For-Success; Oklahoma Should Give It A Try
The Senate has approved a bill that would create a pilot project in which the state pairs nonprofits with programs aimed at diverting women from prison.
If passed by the House, the measure would authorize Oklahoma’s first major pay-for-success contract with nonprofits, which would be rewarded only if they deliver what they promise. New York and several other states successfully have used pay-for-success contracts, claiming that they promote results and accountability.
Senate Bill 1278, by Sen. Kim David, R-Porter, was written with the Tulsa’s successful Women In Recovery program in mind, but other nonprofit programs could apply as long as they have sufficient capital to get the programs rolling.
In five years, Women In Recovery, underwritten by the George Kaiser Family Foundation and operated by Family & Children’s Services, has diverted more than 130 women from prison, providing them with counseling, substance abuse treatment, job training and other rehabilitative services. The program has accomplished what it promised, and set the standard for pay-for-success programs.