Backing what works? Social Impact Bonds and evidence-informed policy and practice

References

• Anders, J., & Dorsett, R. (2017). HMP peterborough Social Impact Bond—cohort 2 and final cohort impact evaluation. London: Department of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• Bickerdike, L., Booth, A., Wilson, P. M., Farley, K., & Wright, K. (2017). Social prescribing: Less rhetoric and more reality. A systematic review of the evidence. BMJ Open, 7(4), e013384. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013384
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boaz, A., Davies, H. T. O., Fraser, A., & Nutley, S. (eds.). (2019). What works now? Evidence informed policy and practice. Bristol: Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Callanan, L., & Law, J. (2012). Will social impact bonds work in the United States? McKinsey on society. Washington DC.
   Google Scholar
• Cox, B. R. (2011). Financing homelessness prevention programs with Social Impact Bonds. Rev. Banking & Fin. L, 31, 959–985.
   Google Scholar
• Disley, E., Giacomantonio, C., Kruithof, K., & Sim, M. (2015). The payment by results Social Impact Bond pilot at HMP Peterborough: Final process evaluation report. Ministry of Justice (UK).
   Google Scholar
• DWP. (2014). Innovation fund pilots qualitative evaluation: Early implementation findings. London.
   Google Scholar
• Edmiston, D., & Nicholls, A. (2017). Social Impact Bonds: The role of private capital in outcome-based commissioning. Journal of Social Policy, 1–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenberg, E. M. (1984). Ambiguity as strategy in organizational communication. Communication Monographs, 51(3), 227–242. doi: 10.1080/03637758409390197
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, R., Brown, R., Rees, G., & Smith, P. (2017). Systematic review of educational interventions for looked-after children and young people: Recommendations for intervention development and evaluation. British Educational Research Journal, 43(1), 68–94. doi: 10.1002/berj.3252
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitzpatrick-Lewis, D., Ganann, R., Krishnaratne, S., Ciliska, D., Kouyoumdjian, F., & Hwang, S. W. (2011). Effectiveness of interventions to improve the health and housing status of homeless people: A rapid systematic review. BMC Public Health, 11(1), 638. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-638
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, C., & Morris, S. (2019). Evaluating outcome-based payment programmes: Challenges for evidence-based policy. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 1–17. doi: 10.1080/17487870.2019.1575217
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, A., & Mays, N. (2020). Case Studies. In C. Pope, & N. Mays (Eds.), Qualitative research in healthcare (4th Edition). London: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, A., Tan, S., Lagarde, M., & Mays, N. (2018a). Narratives of promise, narratives of caution: A review of the literature on Social Impact Bonds. Social Policy & Administration, 52(1), 4–28. doi: 10.1111/spol.12260
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraser, A., Tan, S., Kruithof, K., Sim, M., Disley, E., Giacomantonio, C., … Mays, N. (2018b). An evaluation of Social Impact Bonds in health and social care: Final Report. Policy Innovation Research Unit (PIRU), London, commissioned by the UK Department of Health.
   Google Scholar
• Giacomantonio, C. (2017). Grant-Maximizing but not Money-Making: A Simple decision-tree analysis for Social Impact Bonds. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. San Francisco: The Sociology Press.
   Google Scholar
• HM Government. (2011). Growing the social investment market: A vision and a strategy. London.
   Google Scholar
• Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710. doi: 10.5465/amr.1999.2553248
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maier, F., Barbetta, G. P., & Godina, F. (2018). Paradoxes of social impact bonds. Social Policy & Administration, 52(7), 1332–1353. doi: 10.1111/spol.12343
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, P., Lloyd, R., & Nash, F. (2017). Qualitative evaluation of the London homelessness Social Impact Bond (SIB): Final report In: DCLG (ed.). Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
   Google Scholar
• Mulgan, G., Reeder, N., Aylott, M., & Bo’sher, L. (2011). Social impact investment: The challenge and opportunity of social impact bonds. London: Young Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Newman, J. (2001). Modernising governance, new labour, policy and society Sage. London.
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, K., Lorenc, T., & Innvær, S. (2014). New directions in evidence-based policy research: A critical analysis of the literature. Health Research Policy and Systems, 12(1), 34. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-12-34
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pawson, R., Tilley, N., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Pleace, N., & Bretherton, J. (2013). The case for housing first in the European Union: A critical evaluation of concerns about effectiveness. European Journal of Homelessness, 7(2).
   Google Scholar
• Roy, M. J., McHugh, N., & Sinclair, S. (2017). 14. Social impact bonds–evidence-based policy or ideology? Handbook of Social Policy Evaluation, 263.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, K. (2013). Beyond evidence-based policy in public health: The interplay of ideas. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Spurling, L. (2017). The impact evaluation of the London Homelessness Social Impact Bond. London: Department for Communities and Local Government.
   Google Scholar
• Stoesz, D. (2014). Evidence-based policy reorganizing social services through accountable care organizations and social impact bonds. Research on Social Work Practice, 24(2), 181–5. doi: 10.1177/1049731513500827
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warner, M. E. (2013). Private finance for public goods: social impact bonds. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 16(4), 303–319. doi: 10.1080/17487870.2013.835727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods. London: Sage publications.
   Google Scholar