Agenda item

Somerset West and Taunton Council (SWT) provides financial support to a wide range of Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) organisations that help deliver corporate priorities consistent to community needs.  VCS grants were awarded by the Council via the Economic Development Function, Housing Function, Tenants Forum, Localities Function, Charter Trustees (Unparished Area) and through Section 106 planning gain.

All grantees entered into a funding agreement with the Council and grants were monitored to ensure that conditions were adhered to and that the grant funding maximised to benefit communities across the district.

Historically the Council carried out an annual review of the grants provided through the Somerset West and Taunton (SWT) Small Grants Fund, SWT Partnership Fund and presents the findings to Members.  This year the review had been extended to grants provided by the Housing Function and services commissioned to the Voluntary and Community Sector. 

The following Grant Funds were included in this review:

· SWT VCS Partnership Fund

· SWT Small grants

· SWT administration fees

· Somerset West Lottery Community Fund

· Housing Grants awarded from the Housing Revenue

The following grant funds were not in the scope of the review:

·     Tenants Forum

·     Housing/Homeless reduction grants

·     Charter Trustees Unparished Fund

·     Planning Obligations (Section 106) funds

·     Economic Development and Arts Grants

·     Other services commissioned to the Voluntary Sector.

The review took into account the amount of funding provided, the service/s provided, performance against the grant proposal and recommendations made by Somerset Community Foundation.

The review looked forward to 2020/21 and considered applications for funding and the allocation of available budgets.

The review took a close look at Citizen Advice Taunton and West Somerset Advice.  Last year Somerset County Council made a decision to cut a significant element of core grant funding to all CA services across the county. CA services provided councils with valuable assistance in relation to providing customers with housing, debt and benefits advice.  SWT provided a ‘one –off’ additional payment of £45k to help stabilise CA services. The review took a close look at how this money was invested, and considered the need for additional support.

In July 2016 TDBC and SWT entered into an agreement with Somerset Community Foundation (SCF) to provide a professional grant management service enabling the VCS Small Grants Fund.  The agreement included the administration of the fund, due diligence checks, making recommendations for grant awards to the Council and monitoring of grants.

As of April 2017 SCF received £20,000 per year for the VCS Small Grants Fund.  The agreement stated that SCF may use no more than 10% of the Small Grants Fund for the purpose of managing the fund.   In 2017 a decision was made to utilise underspent funds to increase the award to £22,000 allowing SCF to take up to 10% administration fee and award £20,000

In December 2018 the Council varied the agreement with Somerset Community Foundation, to include in addition to the Small Grants Fund the administration of the Somerset West Lottery Local Community Fund and VCS Partnership Fund.

SCF pledged to provide a minimum of 10% match funding.  In some individual grants the match fund contribution exceeded the SWTC grant.  The match fund total administration costs to the Council 2019/20 was set out in Appendix A:

CAs across the county were operating in a very challenging environment, both financially and with regard to systems that were placing ever-increasing demands on its services.

CAs (CAT, WSA and others across the county) had made good progress with pursing a number of initiatives that would lead to integrated working and efficiencies. It was acknowledged that this was difficult given that CAs continued to operate on very tight logistical and financial margins

District councils understood the importance of CA services – CAs supported customers with advice relating to housing, benefits, debt, employment and other matters. However, it was also acknowledged that district councils, including SWT, were operating themselves within an extremely challenging financial environment.

Strategically, as part of considering a way forward, it was acknowledged that whilst the District Councils had already stepped in with additional one-off funding, it could not be expected that they would continue to pick up the costs / impacts of the SCC cut (which across the county, amounted to £419,286 including LAS) 

Options that could be considered, whether individually or in combination, but which were not an exhaustive list, included:-

a)    That the District Councils consider, on an individual basis, increased core funding arrangements with their respective CA, commencing 2020/21, and that this is considered within individual MTFPs

b)    That the council’s jointly consider commissioning a single CA service

c)    That SWT considers commissioning a single CA service for the SWT area

d)    That the District Councils match the County’s management contribution for the LAS element - £6,480 per CA - for 2020/21(subject to a satisfactory number of LAS grants having come into the Districts)

e)    That the councils jointly commission some support for the CAs to explore different ways of delivering the service outcomes, including looking at transformation, technology and interventions to reduce demand/deal earlier with some of the issues that are creating demand.

Of the options given above, the preference was for option e), this was a consistent view across Somerset – i.e. all districts and also involving the County Council). Option e) would bring in independent expertise to work with all CAs (and funding partners) with a view to informing a way forward. This included debate and consideration of options a) to d). It was anticipated that each partner would need to contribute between £5k and £8k to commission a consultant. This work would commence in early 2020 and completed by July 2020, to inform the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) and a review of core grant funding for CA services. The brief for this work would be developed in Jan 2020, to be co-designed with CA services

However, in order to support this, the following would be required:

·         Option d) i.e. continued match funding (with SCC) of the administrative support to the LAS. The cost of this is £6.5k (approx.) x 2 i.e. £13k

·         A sum of money to provide capacity for CA managers to engage with the work of the consultant (option e). It is recommended that a sum of £6k x 2 (£12k) be released to facilitate this additional capacity.

In summary and in total, it was proposed that an additional £33k be provided to support CAT and WSA during 2020/21. This money would be released within a Letter of Agreement between SWT and CAT/WSA.

In addition, SWT could add value by assisting both CAT and WSA with conversations relating to their accommodation requirements. It had been mentioned that WSA were looking to move to Alcombe (Minehead), subject to resolving issues around fire risk and remedial works to the building. Alcombe is within SWT ownership. CAT were currently based at offices on Hammet Street. The possibility of the public sector assisting CAT with accommodation options was being considered should they wish to move in the future.

Debate

·         There was no prospect of Somerset County Council coming back with additional funding.

·         All councils were considering supporting the consultant in this work.

·         Concerns were expressed over the consultancy costs that each council would be contributing to.

·         Members were reassured that this was no more that £5,000 contribution per council and would bring in expertise and new ideas in exploring savings and efficiencies. Exploring additional funding that was not out of the core grant was an important part of this.

·         Officers were asked to consider any free support and commercial expertise to help the voluntary sector.

·         There would be a full review of voluntary grants next June/July with tough questions needing to be addressed over the next few months.

·         Due to the amount of funding it was considered important to recruit the right consultant with the relevant experience.

·         Underfunding of the CAB was considered a long term issue which needed to be resolved. Members of the committee wished for Somerset County Council funding with CAB be reconsidered now a balanced budget had been achieved.

·         Further concerns were expressed over the underfunding of the CAB and the perception of changes imposed to an independent body following the work proposed by the consultant.

·         Clarification was requested over which voluntary sector organisations received match funding.

The Scrutiny Committee Recommended:-

1)To continue funding at current levels for 2020/21 while the key points raised during the review detailed in this paper are addressed.

2) During 20/21 carry out a review of current areas of funding and set new funding objectives in line with the Councils corporate objectives and current needs within the community.

3) During 20/21 officers should work closely with all grant recipients to ensure targets are met and grants are offering value for money.

4) The Scrutiny Committee are supportive of the approach proposed by Districts and County Council’s with the Citizen’s Advice Bureau engaging a consultant with emphasis that the brief given to the consultant would align with the outcomes requested, in collaboration with CAB officers.

5)The word “minimum” to be removed from recommendation B in Appendix B.