Cookies on Knowhow Nonprofit

We use cookies in order for parts of Knowhow Nonprofit to work properly, and also to collect information about how you use the site. We use this information to improve the site and tailor our services to you. For more, see our page on privacy and data protection.

OK

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Community-made content which you can improve Case study from our community

The collaboration spectrum

This page is free to all
The different ways that voluntary organisations may collaborate in order to bid for and deliver a commissioned contract.

Informal network

A loose network of organisations agreeing to collaborate

Pros

  • Members retain total independence and control/manage their own contracts
  • Different organisations may lead on different projects and subcontract to others, thereby spreading the risk
  • Often a first step to a formally constituted consortium 

Cons

  • No legal entity for commissioners to contract with, so cannot hold contracts
  • Does not allow for coordinated service delivery  

Lead Agency

A partnership with a nominated organisation taking the lead for contracting  purposes 

Pros

  • Able to bid for contracts
  • Existing organisation with track record and known to commissioners
  • Infrastructure already exists 

Cons

  • Lead partner has sole legal accountability for contracts and bears all risk
  • Lead partner could bring provision in-house (a risk for the subcontractors)

Constituted consortium

A new legal entity is set up, with a membership structure ensuring that its members control it 

Pros

  • Owned and run by members
  • Protects members from risk
  • Single ‘front door’ to sector for commissioners
  • Collective bargaining power

Cons

  • Difficult to prove track record at early stages
  • Significant funding and time required at start-up and development stages
  • Vulnerable to fluctuations in commissioning patterns 

Merger

Organisations undertake a full legal merger and become a single entity or group structure 

Pros

  • Is in the best interests of your charitable purposes and beneficiaries
  • Enables a service to continue if an organisation becomes unsustainable
  • Prevents duplication of services and creates efficiencies
  • Creates an organisation with a larger turnover, therefore access to larger contracts
  • Potentially greater profile and reach

Cons

  • Volunteers, staff or financial supporters might not progress into the merged organisation.
  • Highly disruptive to day-to-day business.
  • Significant differences in culture or ways of working could prevent effective integration and may undermine the financial or other drivers
  • Depending on the proposed new structure the process can be very complex, time consuming and (costly) professional advice required

Further information

Page last edited Sep 29, 2016

Help us to improve this page – give us feedback.

1 star 2 stars 3 stars 4 stars 5 stars 3/5 from 778 ratings

Find out how-to…

How-tos are written by our users to share practical knowledge.

And if there isn't one already you can write it yourself, or request someone else write it.

See all how-tos