Social bridging finance: a new Scottish model for financing public service design and delivery?
Abstract In the UK, some devolved governments such as in Scotland have taken a distinctive approach to implementing public service reforms. In this article, we explore the key enablers and constraints of outcome-based initiatives at the sub-national level. Drawing on a formative evaluation of the delivery of the Social Bridging Finance model, this study contributes to understanding results-oriented funding models and pluralist governance in welfare services beyond Scotland in three key ways. First, it emphasises the critical role of independent, multi-year grant funding in enabling more equitable and collaborative relationships between public bodies and the third sector. By reducing financial risk, such mechanisms challenge traditional state-led financing models. Second, it highlights the dual role of contractual agreements – supporting early sustainability discussions but revealing limitations when legal enforceability is weak. This points to the relevance of informal and relational accountability in outcome-based commissioning. Third, the study identifies the importance of collaboratively developed success criteria. The diverse experiences revealed in this study emphasise the need for flexibility, shared ownership and continuous learning – particularly given public sector responsibility for service continuity.
Authors
- Enrico Bellazzecca (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3936-6945)
- Tom Montgomery (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5996-6043)
- Francesca Calò (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4755-3959)
- Micaela Mazzei (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8442-4959)
Institutions
- University of Stirling (GB)
- Glasgow Caledonian University (GB)
- The Open University (GB)
- Open Society (CZ)
- Politecnico di Milano (IT)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of Social Policy
- Published
- 2025-08-18
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047279425100937
- Citations
- 2
- Primary Topic
- Community Development and Social Impact
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 4.42
Funders
- Glasgow Caledonian University