Search results

Joint financing across health and social care represents an opportunity for NHS bodies and councils to improve outcomes and value for money and to integrate services better. There has been much debate about the appropriateness and application of pooled fund arrangements. This article examines and challenges local partners' perceptions and misconceptions of their ease of use, and considers current challenges to implementation posed by central government policies. It assesses the contribution of joint financing to an improved service user experience as, ultimately, partners must shift their focus from process to improving outcomes.

Drawing on “Strategic Alliance” literature and qualitative research methods, the purpose of this study is to examine the initiation and operations phases of the relationship between Australian litigation funders and class law firms. The initiation phase examines factors such as complementarity between needs and assets compatibility between the funder and the class law firm goals of the alliance trust and alliance structure. The operations phase considers factors such as governance, communication and risk management and accountability. Because of its focus on the fairness of settlement, case law provides limited understanding of the drivers of the class law firm and funder relationship. An “inside look” of how the funder-law firm is initiated and made operational provides a more accurate picture and has important implications for the management of the ethical issues that arise during the course of that relationship.

This paper is a content analysis and contains qualitative interviews.

The strategic alliance between class law firms and litigation funders has evolved within an institutional climate that has acknowledged the benefits that the alliance can bring to the conduct of class actions. That same institutional environment has led to an alliance which is informal and transactionally oriented, where each of the parties maintains a demarcation in function. Although they share aspects of the strategic management of class actions, funders continue to be diligent monitors of class law firms, and class law firms continue to advance the legal rights of class members.

It is observed that the size of the sample is small driven by a number of market participants.

The paper confirms that the litigation funder–law firm strategic alliance works well as a result of institutional constraints.

Each of the alliance partners was keen to ensure that neither they nor their partner acted in a way which might attract judicial disapproval. Each also believed that they played a positive role in promoting class member interests, albeit that their primary motivation was to earn fees or a commission. The success of the alliance between class law firms and litigation funders has substantially improved access to justice in Australia for small claims holders.

The paper provides insight into a strategic alliance which is formed primarily for the benefit of third parties. This is one of the first papers to consider the litigation funder–law firm relationship through the lens of strategic alliance literature.

For individuals and organizations who seek grant money, this guide details major information resources useful to identifying sources of financial sponsorship. It covers grants made by government agencies, by private foundations, and by business and industrial concerns, and should be of interest to persons seeking financial support for organizational or community projects, or individual scholarly endeavors. Excluded from this guide are general materials that review the history of charitable giving, or the role of philanthropy in society, as well as information sources devoted exclusively to scholarships and loans for undergraduate education.

Increased economic activity in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has given rise to increased demand for port development. Given the often scarce availability of national public funding, port institutional reform programmes have been implemented to pave the way for the inclusion of external port investors. Notwithstanding this fact, some sub-Saharan African Governments remain institutionally locked into the notion that state-owned enterprises remain an appropriate vehicle for port terminal operations. This, despite the fact that terminal operational concessions globally and within the continent of Africa are increasingly being managed by global terminal operators. Given this context, this study aims to evaluate different port valuation and funding strategies. Two research questions form the core of this research: what is the financial value of a concession? What is the most cost advantageous funding strategy? The methodology is applied to the development of a two-berth container terminal in SSA.

After reviewing a range of financial valuation and funding techniques, the study presents valuation and funding model applicability-fit tests. Thereafter, a suitable valuation technique is selected and applied to the case study providing a concession valuation. Different funding strategies are applied to the valuation model to determine the cost implications of each funding instrument given the local context and institutional constraints applicable to SSA. Finally, the study discusses the significance of the results to potential SSA port investors by highlighting the impact of each funding approach on key financial metrics.

The study presents a range of financial investment appraisal results for the case study concession in consideration of four specific funding strategies. The highest concession valuation could be attributed to a higher debt ratio as a principal funding strategy. In addition, this funding approach (100% debt) realised the shortest payback period and the highest internal rate of return values. The authors, however, maintain that the optimal funding strategy for a concession depends ultimately on the financial goals of the investor.

This research makes a contribution to the existing literature on port finance and development by presenting a structured approach to the evaluation of the valuation and funding techniques, which can be used in terminal development subject to the specific local context and institutional constraints (in this case applicable to SSA). The study provides practical insight into the potential cost of the considered terminal concession for private or public sector participants and a view of the most cost advantageous funding strategy available for interested investors.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the nature of societal regulatory control systems developing an analytical framework drawing from Jurgen Habermas' notion of “steering” and an understanding of “performance management systems”. It seeks to provide a conceptual language of “relational” and “transactional” approaches to regulation both generally and in relation to higher education (HE). The paper aims to illustrate that different types of regulation are related to the different contexts in which they are developed.

The paper undertakes an in‐depth analysis of regulatory frameworks and financing at a general level and in the specific context of HE in England in order to analyse the nature of the processes of steering both empirically and conceptually. The paper ends with some evaluatory reflections on the conceptual framework and in relation to the regulatory processes of HE in the England following this change.

The paper argues that the societal regulatory requirements, of a “relational” or “transactional” form use financing as central tools of “steering”, both generally and in HE. In HE two dominant institutional steering media are identified: regional Funding Councils, (in England, the Higher Education Funding Council of England (HEFCE)) and the Research Councils (RC). Regulation of funding flows from the two bodies is described using the conceptual framework developed. HEFCE's regulations are more “relational” in nature relative to the RCs more “transactional” systems. Located in two different Government departments until June 2007, these two funding organisations were then brought together to form the Department of Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS); they are now (since June 2009) part of the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (DBIS).

The paper provides a conceptual framework by which to understand regulation more generally and demonstrates the significance of this framework by providing new insights into the changing societal regulatory context of HE in England.

This article explores to what extent the long debate in England over the funding of long-term care (LTC) has involved learning from abroad.

It draws on Mossberger and Wolman’s (2003) framework which proposes criteria for assessing policy transfer as a form of prospective policy evaluation: awareness; assessment and application. The documents examined are the sources cited by the reports that examined funding LTC in England since 1999. The study uses interpretive content analysis in a deductive approach (applying the framework) that focuses on both manifest and latent content.

It finds that both the reports and the cited studies tend to focus on a fairly narrow range of nations, with most attention on Germany, Japan and Scotland. Most studies broadly do not provide much in the way of a clear rationale, and the level of details provided varies. There is relatively little focus on problems. Aims, objectives and goals are little mentioned in some studies, but they tend to be fairly abstract or “high level.” Similarly, there is limited detail on settings. Finally, only a few studies provide a clear recommendation.

It focuses on the neglected topic of the evidence behind reports which are intended to provide recommendations for policy change. The Mossberger and Wolman’s (2003) framework has been used in a small-scale but appears to be well-suited for this purpose.

This paper aims to explore Canadian in/exclusion of Aboriginal groups to/from access to mainstream business resources and opportunities. The focus is one prominent non-governmental program, the Canadian Aboriginal Prosperity and Entrepreneurship (CAPE) Fund, designed to provide equity to Aboriginal businesses. Do programs such as CAPE Fund promote Aboriginal entrepreneurship that liberates “others” on their own terms? or are they “civilizing missions” that attempt to impose Euro-centric practices and values?

The authors critically analyze the “promises” of entrepreneurship through CAPE Fund using TribalCrit, a framework rooted in critical race theory (CRT) and postcolonialism. The authors used a CRT research method highlighting two organizational narratives, describing CAPE Fund financing in two separate ventures. The research allowed to test the theory’s use in practical situations.

This paper develops a postcolonial conception of entrepreneurship to address the realities and needs of Aboriginal communities. Analysis of Canada’s CAPE Fund within two organizational narratives identified aspects of promise (active Aboriginal business ownership) and shortcomings (practices that attempted to erase inequity in ways that led to neocolonial subjugation).

This paper attempts to build theory while engaging in CRT research that relies on organizational narratives. Narrative approaches offer depth of understanding but are not generalizable because of the limited scope of organizations studied.

The research methods used and framework developed offer researchers new approaches to better understand Indigenous and Aboriginal entrepreneurship outcomes. The findings point to specific Aboriginal funding issues that can be addressed by other funding agencies who wish to create more inclusive structures.

Financial programs that might improve the possibility of self-determination of Aboriginal peoples within the postcolonial ideal must “hold both economic and non-economic objectives in tension” (Overall et al., 2010 p. 157) in ways that typically disadvantage Aboriginal entrepreneurs.

This is the first, fully articulated framework for postcolonial entrepreneurship, grounded in CRT and applied to analyze Canada’s CAPE Fund.

We identify the key social and political forces that brought about the Self Managed Attendant Service Direct Funding Pilot (SMAS-DFP). Attendant Services are services for people with physical disabilities (PWD) to assist with daily activities. Direct Funding means that individuals obtain funds through direct funding mechanisms and/or through third parties. Self-direction refers to consumers who know their attendant service needs and can instruct workers to meet these needs. Self-management refers to (PWD) who are employers under the law and are legally responsible for hiring, training, scheduling and paying their attendants. Our analysis of the success of the SMAS-DFP is based on pre-conditions and facilitating elements. The pre-conditions were the: (1) existence of social movements; (2) precedents to direct funding programs; (3) prior experience with the governance of attendant services; and (4) government health reform. Five elements facilitated the SMASD-FP: (1) a clear vision by the community; (2) a core group of leaders; (3) supporters of the SMAS-DFP came from inside and outside of the community; and (4) supporters provided key resources to be used and to deal with barriers. PWD successfully led the pilot (1994–1997) and continue to administer the expanded government program (began 1998).

The poor performance of public agricultural extension systems in developing countries engendered interest in pluralistic concepts of extension involving a variety of service providers. Within the reform agenda, modalities relying on private‐sector providers were perceived as a path to improvement. This paper aims to assess the potential and limitations of such modalities.

The paper discusses the conceptual underpinnings of these extension approaches, highlights theoretical and practical challenges inherent in their design, and provides an assessment of several performance‐based case studies described in the formal and informal literature.

Many of the modalities reviewed entail partnerships between the public sector, farmers' organizations or communities, and private‐sector providers. The paper concludes that while private‐sector participation can overcome some of the deficiencies of public extension systems, there are also challenges that have been faced, including misuse of public funds, insufficient accountability to farmers, inequitable provision of service, inadequate quality, and limited coverage of the wide range of farmers' needs.

The review suggests that private‐sector involvement in extension is no panacea. Extension systems need not be uniform, and will require different providers for different clienteles, with public providers and funding focusing more on smaller‐scale and less commercial farmers. The public sector may need to provide some regulatory oversight of private‐sector extension activities, particularly when public funding is involved.

The paper draws conclusions from a diverse range of experiences, some of which are recent, and provides comparative insights. It may be of interest to development scholars and practitioners.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how performance management systems in nonprofit organizations are influenced by their funding sources. It explains how resources motivate organizations to diversify their strategies with attended performance management systems.

It adopts a qualitative case study approach involving semi-structured interviews with key informants in a nonprofit organization to understand the evolving nature of performance management systems associated with different funding sources.

The findings suggest that the case study organization changed its revenue base along with its performance management systems to satisfy the reporting and accountability requirements of different funding sources. Despite external funding sources detailing different restrictions and requirements, the overall performance management system was able to manage these different expectations.

This study is based on a single case study, and its findings need to be interpreted with care, as there are differences between nonprofit organizations because they differ in their environments, services and funding.

This paper contributes to extant knowledge on how organizational performance management is influenced by funding sources, providing insights at the operational and governance levels.