Agenda item

To consider a report by the Head of Environmental and Community Health Services on voluntary sector funding.

(Councillor T D Sanderson, Executive Councillor for Healthy and Active Communities, was in attendance for consideration of this item).

Consideration was given to a report by the Head of Environmental and Community Health Services (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book) seeking an indicative budget for voluntary sector support for the 2013/14 financial year and outlining options for the distribution of the funds.

The Executive Councillor for Healthy and Active Communities drew attention to the main elements and recommendations within the report and, in particular, to the proposals to establish a mixed grant system as opposed to a commissioning approach for the allocation of future funds and to introduce a Community Chest for organisations who required small grants.

The Head of Environmental and Community Services explained that the District Council currently provided funding to six organisations: Huntingdonshire Citizens Advice Bureaux, Hunts Forum, Huntingdonshire Volunteer Centre, Shopmobility, St Barnabus Community Learning Centre and Disability Information Services Huntingdonshire. This was achieved through five-year Service Level Agreements which would expire in 2013. The report had been prepared to enable negotiations to commence with the voluntary organisations on future funding arrangements. The Overview and Scrutiny Panel (Social Well-Being) had discussed the report at a recent meeting and had endorsed the recommendations.

In considering the proposal to establish an indicative budget for 2013/14 of £273,000, Members questioned how this figure had been arrived at and where alternative savings would be made in the Council’s Budget. Having been informed that the figure was based on the requirements of current service providers, Members questioned whether the methodology used was valid, particularly as an important part of the rationale for the change was that the existing beneficiaries of funding were not certain to receive it in the future.

A greater reduction in funding for the voluntary sector had originally been proposed. However, the Executive Councillor for Healthy and Active Communities explained that research had indicated that any reduction of more than 20% would have significant implications for the Council in terms of the additional demand for services it would create. In response to a question on the impact on voluntary sector organisations of a reduction of this size, the Head of Environmental and Community Services explained that most of the current recipients of funding had offered coping strategies that would enable them to continue to operate with no reduction in the level of services they provided. Following comment that it would have been useful to see a comparison of the impact of varying levels of funding reduction on the voluntary sector, the Head of Environmental and Community Services undertook to circulate this information after the meeting.

With regard to the level of the indicative budget sought, Members questioned whether consideration had been given to requiring recipients of funding to obtain match funding. They also discussed the extent to which approval of the indicative budget would influence voluntary sector organisations’ attempts to secure alternative methods of funding and investigate opportunities for shared accommodation. Comment having been made that a number of organisations had become too reliant on Council funding, Members queried whether the voluntary sector was responding to the changing economic climate and exploring opportunities, for example, to share services / facilities and raise funds. A suggestion was made that the indicative budget could alternatively be used to provide Council services directly and, therefore, replace some of the recent service reductions within the Council. The Council should clarify its priorities in this respect

The Panel discussed the proposed delivery methods for providing future financial support to the voluntary sector. Members established that as the Council was moving away from commissioning, a mix of distribution methods would not be used as is stated in the report. They then queried the rationale behind the proposal to return to the grant process and how the Council would ensure that the organisations met the objectives for which the grant was awarded. In response the Head of Environmental and Community Health Services explained that grants would be awarded for a maximum of three years and any performance issues could be addressed through the indicative budget for the following year. Applications for grants would be determined by the Executive Councillors for Resources and for Healthy and Active Communities.

The Panel discussed in detail the proposal to establish a Community Chest to create an accessible source of funds to help local community projects on a rolling programme throughout the year. The Head of Environmental and Community Services explained that the initiative had been devised in response to a number of requests for small sums of monies to help with local projects. A number of views were expressed as to whether Towns and Parishes should be able to apply to the Community Chest. Although some members were supportive of the approach, others suggested that these organisations already had the opportunity to obtain funding via their precepts. Another Member suggested that this opportunity could be valuable to smaller parishes who were often unable to raise funds for local projects. With regard to the administration of the process, it was suggested that, given the small sums involved, it should be straightforward and flexible. Having reiterated their concerns about how the indicative figure had been determined and where alternative savings would be made in the Council’s Budget, it was

RESOLVED

  that the Cabinet be recommended to

a)  suggest an indicative voluntary sector budget for 2013/14 of £273,000;

b)  agree to adopt a mix of methods of allocating funds, the method to involve a level of bureaucracy proportionate to the level of funding required, and

c)  agree to the establishment of a modest ‘Community Chest’ to create an ‘accessible’ source of funds to help very local community projects.