chevron icon Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo YouTube logo download icon link icon audio icon quote icon posted icon clock icon author icon arrow icon arrow icon plus icon Search icon location icon location icon document icon menu icon plus-alt

General overview

Stage of development: Implementation

Policy sector: Health

Date outcomes contract signed: Jun 2020

Start date of service provision: Sep 2020

Anticipated completion date: Oct 2024

Capital raised (minimum): GBP 1.25m (USD 1.54m)

Max potential outcome payment: GBP 4.10m

Service users: 6k+ individuals


The aim of the Chances Programme is to make the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods in the UK healthier, more connected and safer, by providing new opportunities and alternative life pathways for children and young people.

Target population

Children and young people aged between 8-17 with specific issues - low school attendance, recent offenders, looked after children, NEETS, pre-NEETs, and young people with mental health problems.



  • United Kingdom

Service delivery locations

  • Islington London Borough Council
  • London Borough of Bexley
  • Birmingham City Council
  • Doncaster Council
  • Coventry City Council
  • Ealing London Borough Council
  • Wigan Council
  • Waltham Forest Council
  • Hounslow London Borough Council
  • Shropshire Council
  • Bristol City Council
  • Lambeth London Borough Council
  • Sunderland City Council
  • Southwark Council
  • Devon County Council

Outcome metrics

  • Metric 1: Engagement/ ‘Involved’ measure. A staff assessment of the ‘engagement’ level of a young person in the programme between 12 and 24 weeks after enrolment. A bespoke Engagement Matrix will be used.
  • Metric 2: Physical literacy measure at mid-point. A young person will complete a midpoint questionnaire, 12 to 24 weeks after enrolment and providing they have been assessed as being ‘involved’, which will measure perceptions of physical literacy.
  • Metric 3: Physical literacy measure at end-point. A young person will complete an endpoint questionnaire, 36 to 52 weeks after enrolment, which will measure perceptions of physical literacy.
  • Metric 4: Achievement of a recognised sports qualification / coaching award started during any quarter. The delivery organisation will provide a copy of the certificate of achievement.
  • Metric 5: Reduction in re-offending of young people who have offended once or are subject to a Pre-Court Disposal Order in the 12 months prior to referral into the programme. For young people who have offended once, the participating LA will provide a letter confirming the offending / non offending behaviour of the young person at the end of each quarter of their involvement in the programme.
  • Metric 6: Reduction of young people who have offended three times or more in previous 12-month period by one third over the year following referral No further offending over each three-month period following engagement. For young people who have offended a minimum of three times, the participating LA will provide a letter confirming the behaviour of the young person at the end of each quarter of their involvement in the programme.
  • Metric 7: Improvement in school or Pupil Referral Unit attendance of each 10% over three full terms compared to the full term immediately prior to referral to the programme. The participating LA school or PRU will provide a letter confirming the attendance rate of the young person at the end of each of the following three full school terms after they have enrolled on the programme.
  • Metric 8: Completion of a three-month volunteering or work experience placement totalling a minimum of 30 hours. The organisation hosting the volunteering or work placement will provide a letter documenting the length and type of placement.


Chances started delivering services in September 2020 and will finish in October 2024. Data was last updated in December 2023. 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.

Generating plot, please wait...

The intermediary organisation's comment of this graph:

'The physical literacy outcomes were introduced by Sport England, aligning with their central metrics for measuring and capturing physical activity levels across the national population. The social outcome metrics were developed using the extensive research and evidence base from sports programmes and consulting with a focus group of local authorities. Physical literacy outcomes develop over time and so require a consistent engagement with the participant, ideally over 10-12 months. Reducing youth offending behaviour is a challenging outcome to achieve and made more so by the relative nature of the participant’s previous offending. Improving school attendance is measured over three school terms and an average improvement of 10% is necessary for the outcome to be claimed. This is the most challenging outcome because of the multiplicity of the metric and the necessity of working with schools to provide data and evidence.

Taking the learning from Chances there are things we would adjust going forward but there is also an intention to set ambitious outcome measures in order to continually test and build the evidence base for sports based social impact interventions. We are also exploring proxy indicators and have introduced a soft outcome/well-being measure to better understand the impact of the project on young people.'

Outcome payments

Generating plot, please wait...

The intermediary organisation's comment of this graph:

'Sport England pay for the physical literacy outcomes, Life Chances Fund and 21 local authorities pay for EET (education, employment and training) and youth justice outcomes on a payment by results principle. The pandemic delayed the start of the programme, thereby pushing all the timeframes back. The achievement of outcomes in the first year was no doubt impacted by the pandemic, including delays with referring young people, referral of ineligible participants and stretched capacity of local government staff to support the project operationally.

We recognised quite early on that the cashflow modelling needed to be better aligned with the timeframe of when outcomes would be achieved and verified. Following this early stage amendment the model has broadly stayed the same. There is a need to be more realistic about the time gap between when outcomes land and when they are paid for by commissioners, particularly local government partners.'

SyROCCo reports

The following articles are taken from the Systematic Review of Outcomes Contracts Collaboration (SyROCCo) Machine Learning tool.

The tool is a collaboration between the Government Outcomes Lab and machine learning experts from the University of Warwick, that allows you to navigate and explore data extracted from nearly 2000 academic and grey literature publications related to outcomes-based contracting.

Is this information correct?
Do you have more you can add?

Please tell us about it

Get in touch

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 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.