In other words, the public-social-private partnership (PSPP) is not only an extension of the idea of PPPs, but a prerequisite for ensuring a PPP with a social objective: “Public social partnerships (PSPs) are strategic partnership agreements based on a co-planning approach through which the public sector can connect with third sector organisations (voluntary organisations, charities and social enterprises), share responsibility for designing services based on the needs of service users. Once designed and tested, these services can then be put into operation in the longer term as part of a tendering procedure. (readyforbusiness.org/programme-offering/public-social-partnerships/) Another way of expressing this is that “community benefit” is not just a desirable complement or an afterthought, but is at the heart of the entire process of planning, designing and delivering public services. “Today`s guide promotes public-social partnerships that have been tested and successful in helping organizations better align services with the needs of the public. (www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2011/07/08133636) PSPs offer social enterprises the opportunity to act in their ideal role as intermediaries between the public and private sectors, ensuring that each partner`s contribution to the project is in an area where they have specific skills. This reduces the risks for all partners. The social partners will benefit from a PSPP in terms of planning, development and quality due to the medium- and long-term nature of the projects. The quality of the services provided under PPPs raises some concerns, both in public opinion and among some representatives of the public sector. Specifying a PSPP in terms of social objectives (as opposed to PPPs) is a positive quality factor. Due to the alignment of the model with these objectives and the resulting processes and conditions (needs analysis and product development by experts working in the social sector, partnership principles, etc.), the model attaches great importance to the quality of the implementation of the PSPP. Nevertheless, it must be said that the quality of the social products and services produced will always be the responsibility, building on the previous remarks on the concept of PPP and the associated quality model PSPP, as a prerequisite for the transition from a PPP to a PSPP, we can postulate the willingness of all parties involved to define / accept only solutions, Objectives and programmes of a medium- and long-term nature.
(By this we do not mean that the proceeds of the partnership can only be generated in the medium and long term; it is not the same thing). This applies both to the objectives themselves and in the sense that framework conditions must be created to enable the products of the partnership to have a lasting effect. This condition, unlike a PPP, stems from the fact that the agendas of a PSPP are tasks and objectives of the state (common good/well-being) that do not obey the laws of supply and demand. Rather, these objectives and contents lie in achieving an agreed level of common good for civil society. These basic social agreements are essential and necessary elements for a social peace based on security and justice, in which citizens can rely on pre-agreed levels of State functions and shape their lives accordingly. This is a prerequisite for preventing people from being disadvantaged or ending up in life situations that tend to be disadvantaged. In this way, “medium-term” SPPPs can be defined as those that have a lifespan similar to municipal and state election cycles; All those that take place on a longer basis can be described as long-term (quantitative) and can be seen as (qualitative) support for the long-term securing of state support promised in municipal constitutions and laws. The results of empirical social research show that there are three main factors that have a stronger and more predictable influence on social position and opportunities and therefore a potential disadvantage than others: These factors are: Stimulated by some of the conclusions of the Total Place pilot projects and in particular by the reflections within the Christie Commission on the future provision of public services, The public sector is increasingly recognizing the long-term benefits of meaningful collaboration with individuals and communities in the design and delivery of the services they use. The West of Scotland Community Transport Network was launched in March 2013 as a partnership between the Strathclyde Partnership for Transport and local transport organisations in the West of Scotland. The aim is to improve the quality, capacity, performance and coordination of the Community transport sector. The guidelines build on the experience of ten projects in a number of areas, including social protection, youth protection and retraining.
They tested new ways to effectively connect the public and tertiary sectors, ensuring that people and communities are at the heart of all discussions about service design and management. We stress at this point that this does not imply a normative or prescriptive definition of what should be classified as social deprivation. A descriptive approach has been chosen that takes into account the entire social system and its legitimation mechanisms. The starting point of (real) factoring is a long-term contractual agreement between the municipality and an individual, on the basis of which the individual provides a public service. Due to the secure payment flow (pay by time), this model could essentially be considered for all PSPPs. Factoring consists of the subsequent phase where the private operator/owner sells part of the future revenues from the contract with the state to a factoring institution at the current value (minus a commission) and uses the price to finance the project, so only a small amount of equity is needed. (cf. Kirchhoff 1995). This is especially useful for medium-sized companies in order to be able to compete with large, highly capitalized companies.
“To provide a high-quality public service, the needs of the individuals and communities who need to benefit from it must be at the heart of the design and organization. Observing the discussions among social enterprise representatives on the issue of “public-private partnership”, it is clear that a distinction must be made between a broad definition and a narrow definition. The definition can be seen as the basis on which a specification is to be built. The PSPP in the broad definition includes, as ppp, models of cooperation between participants. In the case of public-social-private partnership, it is not only public bodies and private companies (as in PPPs), but also social enterprises and socio-economic organisations. The focus is on partnership between participating organizations and companies with the aim of developing and implementing social goals. The two main characteristics of a PSPP in the broad definition are therefore the following: the PPP is the expression of a strong trend towards (re)privatisation that has occurred in some European countries due to the more difficult economic conditions of recent years and the associated structural crisis in the public sector (cf. Eschenbach, Müller, Gabriel: 1993). In summary, the application of a PPP model to achieve the social objectives of people in disadvantaged situations naturally leads to an extension of the PPP to a PSPP. The criteria of the PSPP rather than the PPP become applicable when public objectives such as public welfare and well-being are pursued. In this area, all indicators of medium- and long-term success that are part of the agendas and objectives of cooperation depend on the correct compliance with the specifications of the PSPP. On the other hand, the State can rely on the expertise of socio-economic and private enterprises.
In this way, all participants should be able to focus on their core competencies. The State may have the opportunity to carry out the tasks for which it is responsible in an efficient, cost-effective and timely manner due to budgetary bottlenecks. = A public social partnership (PSP) is a strategic partnership agreement that involves the third sector earlier and deeper in the design and commissioning of public services.  Local Government Minister Aileen Campbell introduced the guide, which promotes public-social partnerships, during a visit to the Out of the Blue Community Centre in Leith, Edinburgh. Public-private partnerships, as opposed to conventional public service delivery, differ from other forms of public service delivery in 3 ways: The three roles can be assumed by different partners. But in the different sectors involved (state, social economy, private sector), each has its own interests and areas of responsibility, so of course they will have different interests and priorities in terms of the roles they want to play in the partnership. Typical areas in which the state intervenes to protect people in a weak position are consumer law, residential property rental and, of course, social law. The manner in which the State(s) implement these measures must be considered in the context of the overall legal framework; Legal bases and practical methods are the subject of constant theoretical discussion (para. B example, sociological, political or philosophical) and practical (e.g.
B in popular media or political interest groups). With regard to the issue of “protection”, terms such as “common good”, “human dignity”, “equality”, “well-being”, “customer policy”, etc. Public social partnerships (PSPs) are voluntary partnerships involving one or more organisations from the public and tertiary sectors and possibly the private sector. . . . .