As a London-based, web 2.0-liking, policy-focused, event-attending type of person, I’m aware that at times this blog might appear a little divorced from the frontline: from why SSE does what it does, and why I think social entrepreneurship really matters. Which is not, primarily, about big organisations, delivering solutions to (at?) the developing world, putting heroes on a pedestal, infighting over definitions, buzzword jargon, or consultations about legal structures.

Over the past couple of months, along with colleagues, I’ve visited parts of the UK where SSE is potentially seeking to expand / work in partnership / understand the area more. Today was in Peterlee (in the North East, between Hartlepool + Durham), a couple of weeks back was the Black Country (in the West Midlands: Wolverhampton, Walsall, Sandwell, Dudley), and slightly before that was Rhyl (North Wales).

In bald terms, these are areas with significant challenges. Easington (nr. Peterlee) has the highest incapacity benefit %ages in the UK; Rhyl has 3 of the top 5 most deprived wards in Wales; and the Black Country has pockets of deprivation to match both (and, despite a collective population to rival the city of Birmingham, not the same level of investment / focus). And in each, pretty much as we visited, the rate of JSA (job seeker’s allowance) was increasing significantly…as factories and retail outlets reduced hours or made redundancies. They are amongst the areas (for which, read people) being hardest hit by the recession.

What was inspiring was the sheer amount of work being done by good, impressive people to change these situations. Take Chris Ruane, the Rhyl MP, who comes from the town and is passionate and energy-fuelled (to say the least) in his desire to change it for the better, and the organisations he’s helped draw together in the Rhyl City Strategy who are working together in a genuine operating partnership to make things better. Or centres like the All Saints Action Network in Wolverhampton (which runs a Green-Works franchise, and heats its community centre by biomass) and the Savoy Centre in Netherton, run by Black Country Housing Group. Or organisations like Breathing Space (in Walsall) and Acumen Development Trust, under Kate Welch, which are relentless in their drive to empower, raise aspirations, create (sustainable) employment, and build confidence and self-belief.

Social entrepreneurship can’t, of course, solve all the problems in these areas, particularly not in the midst of the current economic crisis, and is never a panacea. But the triple win of personal development (of skills, knowledge, networks, + confidence), of job + volunteering position creation, and of addressing social needs can provide real, tangible impact in these areas…over years to come. And it is, as SSE has seen in other areas, an impact that can ripple out, inspiring others in the community, providing a local multiplier effect, and also connecting that community and its work to other ventures across the UK and beyond.
It is about people-centred sustainability; people-powered change; and adding to and complementing the excellent work already going on.

I’ve come away with greater understanding and knowledge, with renewed passion and purpose for expanding what we do to people who cannot currently access the opportunities, and a fair bit humbler.

One day, maybe, an Ashoka Fellow will come from Rhyl, a Skoll Awardee from Dudley, or an Enterprising Solutions Award-winner from Easington. That will be a sign of change, but the real signs will be in the communities themselves: that’s why social entrepreneurship matters, and where it matters most.

So it's been a while since the last round-up, and much to catch up on….

– Matt Stevenson-Dodd asks if Blackpool might be the first Social Enterprise Town?

– There is a consultation about dividend and interest caps in relation to CICs; incidentally, Soc Ent Mag reports that the number of CICs are 'snowballing' at the moment…

– On the subject of legal structures (which we'll move swiftly on from), here's a piece on Triple Pundit about the L3C structure in the US

– Enjoyed this: "Why defining social entrepreneur is a waste of time", from which I could have pulled a load of quotes, but this was a highlight:

"Ultimately, I think we are focusing on the wrong part of this issue.
I don’t care if more people are becoming social entrepreneurs, or,
according to someone’s definition, falsely labeling themselves as such.
I want more participation because I want greater scrutiny. Greater
scrutiny (from credible institutions on the inside and the outside)
will lead to greater transparency and more effective evaluation of
companies in the sector overall.

I do not, however, think this filter should be applied on the
front-end by determining who can be called a social entrepreneur. We
should encourage broader adoption of the term-the broadest possible
adoption of the term, actually-and then focus on finding a way to
classify and evaluate social entrepreneurs according to outcomes."

– Check out the new version of SocialInvestments.com: ClearlySo, now packaged as an online marketplace for social business, enterprise and investment; nice new brand and layout too

– Lately on US blogs and sites, you can't move for mention of Jacqueline Novogratz's book, the Blue Sweater; the founder of Acumen Fund also features in an excerpt / video interview on McKinsey's website

– Nice start up social entrepreneur story: Polly Gowers at Everyclick

– We introduced PWC to SSE Fellow Roger Wilson-Hinds, and now they are making his Screenreader software available via their corporate website. Good news!

– Recession support from ACEVO; recession resources from NACVA; beating the recession from Craig Dearden-Phillips

– Enough from Skoll World Forum already, but here's a couple of final things: some general round-ups, a great interview from Nat Whittemore, and the undoubted highlight of the event: the landmine-seeking rats

– Finally, my highlight recently was the SSE London graduation (OK, slightly biased). David Wilcox did some great snapshot video interviews; check out this one with Amanda Trought who uses art to work with dementia sufferers, and posts it online as a feedback loop to their carers:

Amanda Trought from David Wilcox on Vimeo.

 So the big news is SEC have finally decided (succumbed?) to back the Social Enterprise Mark that originated in the South West: see news story here. Which comes on the back of a lot of pressure not only from the regional bodies and various practitioners, but also from government (who have commissioned COI to do a piece of work about the need for an ‘identifier’).

I think SSE are fairly relaxed about the whole mark debate….sitting outside the definition debates as we tend to do….although I do think this is potentially useful if it helps practitioners communicate better the impact, quality and community-focus of what they do. If it only serves to confuse / lead to infighting, then I guess it won’t be.

It was interesting to chat to COI about all of this; we particularly talked about the CIC. My point was that the CIC’s primary value has actually been as a “badge” or “identifier” as much as the nature of the legal structure itself (to which amendments are coming, we are told)…that, particularly if you are seeking to gain contracts from the public sector, then a CIC structure is a recognisable badge which identifies the organisation as a social enterprise.

I won’t get into the drawbacks of the CIC structure now particularly, but it was interesting to hear from Peter Holbrook the other evening that he’d found it particularly good for the staff/users he worked with, in that they were able to become directors and therefore in control of something. And that being a director of a CIC was more than just being director of a company, because of the social enterprise focus / identification. Worth thinking about in this whole identifier/brand/mark/legal structure debate.

Finally, looking further into the future on this stuff, it was interesting to hear a panel discuss Fair Trade on Peter Day’s World of Business podcast (March 9th episode if you can find it). Particularly good for the debate between those who held that its value was through the rigorous certification criteria (the “it’s a certification mark” group) and those who felt that it had now superseded those beginnings and that its value was now simply as a brand (the “it’s a brand group”). As the social enterprise sector ponders a similar move, learning from the experiences of others (Fairtrade, Soil Association + others in the sector who’ve developed their own quality systems, like Social Firms and ourselves) must surely be high on the agenda.