Big Picture Learning in Doncaster
This project is also known as Big Picture Learning
Aligned SDGs
- Big Picture Learning in Doncaster
- General overview
- Location
- Involved organisations
- Outcome metrics
- Results
- Other resources
- Spreadsheet of data
- Big Picture Learning in Doncaster
- General overview
- Location
- Involved organisations
- Outcome metrics
- Results
- Other resources
- Spreadsheet of data
General overview
Stage of development: Implementation
Policy sector: Education
Date outcomes contract signed: Oct 2018
Start date of service provision: Jan 2019
Anticipated completion date: Oct 2024
Capital raised (minimum): GBP 750k (USD 982.50k)
Max potential outcome payment: GBP 6.19m
Service users: 220 individuals
Intervention
Big Picture Learning (BPL) is an innovative learning design, working with young people in small advisory groups. It is an alternative provision to Learning Centres and Pupil Referral Units within Doncaster.
Target population
Doncaster children and young people aged 11-16 who are disengaged from education. They work with those showing early signs of crisis and provide them with a stable and supportive learning environment that works with them as individuals.
Location
Country
- United Kingdom
Service delivery locations
- Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council
Involved organisations
Configuration of contracting parties:
- Intermediated contract with payments made through SPV (representatives from investor and provider)
Commissioners/outcome payers
Service Providers
Investors
Outcome metrics
- Key Stage 3, Metric 1: High Quality Personal Learning Plan established within 4 weeks of student beginning attendance.
- Key Stage 3, Metric 2: Attendance – students will achieve an 80% attendance outcome against the Attendance target set out in their Personal Learning Plan.
- Key Stage 3, Metric 3: Progress – Verification of PLP will demonstrate a consistent standard of planning and impact and will support an overall evaluation of ‘good’ progress.
- Key Stage 3, Metric 4: Reintegration – Review of PLP on completion of programme which will include support to the school and how learning can be continued in a mainstream setting.
- Key Stage 4, Metric 1: Personal Learning Plan established.
- Key Stage 4, Metric 2: Attendance.
- Key Stage 4, Metric 3: Engagement with Workplace.
- Key Stage 4, Metric 4: Workplace Skills.
- Key Stage 4, Metric 5: Accredited Qualifications.
- Key Stage 4, Metric 6: Personal Learning Plan Refresh.
Results
Big Picture Learning started delivering services in January 2019 and will finish in October 2024. Data was last updated in March 2024. These are interim results.
Outcome achievements
Overall target is based on the high case scenario defined in the Life Chances Fund Final Award Offer or Variation Agreements.
The graph above shows interim results for the project’s outcome achievements. Each bar represents a key participant outcome or metrics. Each metric is detailed above the graph (under the ‘Outcome metrics’ section of this page). Users can hover over the bars to access data on the expectations and achievements for that particular metric. Labels at the top of the bar represent the overall expectations for specific metrics, for the entire life of the project. The coloured section of the bar represents the project’s achievements so far.
Each bar takes the unit of analysis of the metric (if the metric is measured in number of individuals, the bar graph is representing individuals achieving that metric. If the metric is measured in weeks, the bar graph is representing weeks).
A note on targets (or expectations): the graph above shows the latest targets for the project. These targets are based on the best-case scenario expectations for every project. These targets may be different from the targets set at the start, as projects adapt to unexpected challenges or changes in circumstances. In addition, these targets could also work as a ‘cap’ for payments. We offer these parameters as a reference on outcome achievement projections. If projects are under implementation, they are not expected to have achieved any of these targets yet.
The commissioner's interpretation of this figure:
'The possible changes that we could make would be more flexibility around the outcome payments as the payment by result model has been challenging to maintain due to the resource required to collate, verify and monitor the outcomes. There are many variables when working with this particular cohort and there have been challenges we didn’t envisage. For example, the metric of attendance is recorded against specific codes- these codes are nationally used for mainstream school and do not necessarily meet the requirements of this particular cohort. This has in some cases, made it difficult to record a young person’s individual circumstances. If the contract was more flexible this would enable more young people to achieve the full range of metrics that are available.
We would pick similar metrics but with more flexibility on how this can be achieved. We would also use a more comprehensive data system to record the metrics and outcomes. Ideally, we would not use the payment by results method as this has been resource intensive and has at times, been difficult to measure the outcomes for young people against these metrics due to the number of variables linked to individual circumstances. It would be ideal to use the same types of metrics we have used this time, but change this to be guidelines, so there is a more overall picture of the young person and a review of their time within the placement, rather than on specific points only.'
Note: 'Backdated claims can distort the overall data as the figures may appear less than they actually are until those claims have been verified at a later date. Delays also occur from the point of submission of data to the point of verification - occasionally data is received later than anticipated and is therefore verified later than planned which leads to a delay in reporting/verification.'
Outcome payments
The graph above shows interim outcome payment results. The x-axis displays the years since the start date of the project to the anticipated completion date. The y-axis represents the value of the payments for outcomes realised by participants in the programme. The aim of this graph is to enable users to compare the initial expectations of the project against the actual value of the outcomes that were achieved.
The dotted lines represent the different plans that projects had at different moments- labelled as ‘Plans’ in the key. The data for these dotted lines (or single dotted line) comes from the outcome payment profiles that projects shared with the commissioners and their values represent expectations according to 'best-case scenarios' (if projects achieved as many outcomes as possible). There are different dotted lines as projects can renegotiate their payment plans as they face changes that affect delivery (such as the COVID pandemic) or adjust their expectations during the life of the project. Each dotted line is made of a set of points. Each point represents a quarter. Users can hover over those points and access data on the expectations for that quarter.
The solid line shows the outcome payments that the project already claimed and received- labelled as ‘Actual’ in the key. Squared points on the 'Actual' line indicate that the payment for that quarter was a COVID-19 medium-scenario grant. This was one of the temporary funding options offered to projects during the COVID-19 pandemic (this included activity payments based on projected medium-case performance scenarios). On the top-right corner, the ‘Plans’ and ‘Actual’ lines can be selected and deselected to change which lines appear in the graph.
A note on the representation of different payment profiles (or plans): when Life Chances Fund projects reprofile their payment plans, they use a template provided by the National Lottery Fund. When they complete data for the past quarters, some projects preferred to leave those cells blank, other preferred to repeat the previous expectations and other decided to complete those cells with data from actual payments. To avoid confusions around these different criteria, we start representing a plan from the moment when the plan is valid.
The commissioner's interpretation of this figure:
'There have been a number of contract variations in order to reflect the changes to the delivery model as the programme evolved. The original Big Picture Doncaster provision changed from an Ofsted registered school to an alternative education provision resulting in subsequent amendments to the metrics in order to clearly redefine the outcomes for this type of education delivery.'
Furthermore, 'during the COVID 19 pandemic there were lower referral rates due to the closure of schools, isolation rules and a move to online learning in mainstream schooling. This impacted on the number of payment claims that could be made. To offset this and ensure that the provision could continue to deliver a blended learning model and be prepared for students to return to on-site learning, we agreed a temporary fixed payment model with the Investor and Life Chances Fund.
This Social Impact Bond contract has provided us with the opportunity to consider how we can work more innovatively and creatively in the future to develop similar programmes that will improve life chances for children and young people... The contract could have been more effectively managed had we chosen to operate a slightly different payment model, with part of the funding being paid through a service fee and the remainder paid through a payment by results incentive model.
As we enter the final stages of this contract, we are planning for the sustainability of the model as we recognise that it has been successful and has the potential to support a greater number of young people to achieve positive outcomes.'
Other resources
Spreadsheet of data
Important Notice and Disclaimer on INDIGO Data
INDIGO data are shared for research and policy analysis purposes. INDIGO data can be used to support a range of insights, for example, to understand the social outcomes that projects aim to improve, the network of organisations across projects, trends, scales, timelines and summary information. The collaborative system by which we collect, process, and share data is designed to advance data-sharing norms, harmonise data definitions and improve data use. These data are NOT shared for auditing, investment, or legal purposes. Please independently verify any data that you might use in decision making. We provide no guarantees or assurances as to the quality of these data. Data may be inaccurate, incomplete, inconsistent, and/or not current for various reasons: INDIGO is a collaborative and iterative initiative that mostly relies on projects all over the world volunteering to share their data. We have a system for processing information and try to attribute data to named sources, but we do not audit, cross-check, or verify all information provided to us. It takes time and resources to share data, which may not have been included in a project’s budget. Many of the projects are ongoing and timely updates may not be available. Different people may have different interpretations of data items and definitions. Even when data are high quality, interpretation or generalisation to different contexts may not be possible and/or requires additional information and/or expertise. Help us improve our data quality: email us at indigo@bsg.ox.ac.uk if you have data on new projects, changes or performance updates on current projects, clarifications or corrections on our data, and/or confidentiality or sensitivity notices. Please also give input via the INDIGO Data Definitions Improvement Tool and INDIGO Feedback Questionnaire.