Minutes:
1. Comments from the Safer Stronger Communites Select Committee on
the Main Grants Programme
Councillor Rathbone, the Chair of the Safer Stronger Communities Select
Committee presented this report.
The SSSC recommended that organisations seeking main grants of £100,000
or more, a total of 5 organisations, be subject to more rigorous monitoring and
scrutiny.
It appears that such organisations have had more problems with governors
over the last 7 years in Lewisham, for example the closure Lewisham Sub-
living Coalition has revealed where those failings are.
Organisations which have not been recommended to main grants funding due
to governance problems, or organisations which just got recommended due to
very recently urgent changes due to their governance structures- Voluntary
Services Lewisham; The Albany; Lewisham Local; Advice for Lewisham
Partnership and Age UK, total £1.85m of third sector funding per year. The
smallest of these being 5% of the main grants programme and the largest is
29%.
The feeling from the SSSC is that the kind of scrutiny the smaller and larger
organisations should be under is not the same. There are informal procedures
in place for some of the larger organisations but these should be put down
officially in agreement rather than adhoc agreement.
A review of the organisations’ governance and auditing arrangements can be
done by the time of implementation of the main grants. Any changes can be
made or at least requested by the Council before the new scheme comes into
place. In regards to the partnership organisations, receiving money via an
incubator organisation, but what is being funded is not a formally constituted
entity. This will need to be reviewed to see if it is still an appropriate
governance arrangement.
2. Appeals- Main Grants Programme
Representatives from organisations presented their appeals against the draft
recommendations of allocation of the Main Grants Programme 2019-22 as
follows
Voluntary Action Lewisham
VAL provides information, support, training and specialist advice on topics
ranging from governance and fundraising to safeguarding and GDPR, with
over 900 people and organisations on their database. VAL received criticism
in the assessment for not creating a thriving hub for the Mulberry Centre, to
which they respond that without accessibility to the building for vulnerable
users and a licence to rent the spaces are both required to do this, but are
impossible without support or funding from Lewisham. Since the submission
of the Main Grants application, a 2 year grant of £100,000 from City Bridge to
extend the impact programme has been confirmed which may be withdrawn
without core funding from LBL.
The Mayor invited members of the Cabinet to ask questions to the appellant. Appellants responded that they are having discussions with Lewisham Local about merging. Merger discussions have also been had regarding Community Southwark who have experience in running the infrastructure services other boroughs. A minimum of £50,000 is required for core funding.
The strategy for the future on income generation is ineffective without funding.
Evelyn 190
The centre provides specialist face to face advice and advocacy. Services
include representation in court and tribunal, employment and debt. Over
£190,000 was secured in financial outcomes in 2017/18, through benefits
from the DWP, council tax, housing benefits, employment etc.
In the last year, funding has been secured from Deptford Challenge Trust and
Trust for London. Five further funding applications have been submitted since.
The Mayor invited members of the Cabinet to ask questions to the appellant.
Appellants responded that the face to face work, appeals and representation,
is not provided by any other service in the borough so this support would be
needed when considering partnerships. Evelyn 190 haver considered merging
with other organisations such as the 170 Community Project and other groups
within the community for collaboration.
Sydenham Arts
£16,000 has been secured in 2019 so far for project costs. The programme
and outreach has had powerful impact in many communities including BAME,
women and LGBT artists. Core funding is critical in ensuring the most
disadvantaged could benefit from Sydenham Arts programmes with reduced
prices and free events. Cutting this funding will require increase tickets prices
to cover cost, hurting the target audiences.
The Mayor invited members of the Cabinet to ask questions to the appellant.
Appellants responded that other ways the Council can support aside from
funding, would be endorsement. If the organisation becomes commercially led
the emphasis on using the Sydenham Centre increases because partnerships
with other organisations become more affordable. Use of the centre has the
potential to increase with help through funding.
Montage Theatre Arts
The organisation provides 39 weekly classes for schools, providing the
opportunity to learn dancing and acting, for primarily 2-18 year olds. The cut in
funding effects the outreach of the programmes and funding from other
funders, who are likely to retract their contributions, without status from the
borough. The classes and programmes have been most effective for
disadvantaged children and those that are looked after, and there has been
proven success with 8 students going to Brit school.
The Mayor invited members of the Cabinet to ask questions to the appellant.
Appellants responded that schools and libraries have expressed reluctance to
advertise the work of the organisation without the Lewisham logo. A token
level of funding, that would give Montage Theatre the endorsement, would be
of help
Greenwich and Lewisham Young People’s Theatre
GLYPT believes in partnership working and has been a strong partner to
LBL.GLYPT feel they have an ambitious and dynamic vision and while they
expected a cut, the scale of the cut is what is being appealed. GLYPT has
invested in its relationship with Phoenix Housing and Electric Star. Receiving
50% of funding would have a seismic impact on what can be offered to the
public and the Council in terms of additional leverage and the breadth of work
that is offered. The reduction of participatory programmes including mental
health programmes, for example, will damage opportunities for some of the
needier communities in the borough.
The Mayor invited members of the Cabinet to ask questions to the appellant.
Appellants responded that funding from Greenwich has increased due to the
development of a model around community engagement based in that
borough. The focus is developing a cultural hub in both boroughs.
Eco Communities
The organisation has provided support to local community members
particularly those who are vulnerable, isolated and alone. Therefore the
organisation relies on methods, through schemes highlighted in the business
plan, grants and fundraising, to generate income to pay for spaces where
these services can be delivered in such high demand. The funding requested
could be used to alleviate a percentage of the building and staff costs which
will enable the continuation of services and also provide more time to explore
ways to become fully sustainable in the future.
The Mayor invited members of the Cabinet to ask questions to the appellant.
Responding to a questions regarding plans for income generation e.g. renting
out hire space, the appellant stated that due to maintenance and repair works
continually needing to be done on the building, this option is limited.
Ageing Well
The service users are people with cognitive and visual impairments and so
through long term partnerships with other organisations, Ageing Well are able
to reach these people. Financially, staffing has been severely reduced- the
organisation has been able to develop and grow stronger programming, which
is not possible without paid staff. Over the last year, there has been focus on
training volunteers by a paid worker, which is crucial to the group. Getting
grants and training volunteers is only possible with a paid worker.
The Mayor invited members of the Cabinet to ask questions to the appellant.
Appellants responded that through fundraising they have been able to attract
more grants and they believe that partnership working could be beneficial.
The Grove Centre
The grant is to pay for the lunch service the Grove Centre provides and has
been providing for the last 50 years. The grant does not financially support the
church or centre- the church subsidises the lunch service. The centre would
actually be financially better off without the service, however, this will be of
detriment to the community as it is a valuable local resource.
Church members do volunteer, as well as from Voluntary Services Lewisham,
but in a non-church related capacity. Users of the service also volunteer as a
way of giving back.
Responding to questions from Cabinet, appellant responded that the Grove
Centre is entering into partnerships with other local groups and has applied
for less funding deliberately as they are working towards the service being
self-sustaining. It is foreseeable that after one more round of funding the
centre will be fully independent. Outreach is done through leaflets and face to
face invitations, at lunches for example, as this is most effective for the target
community.
Noah’s Ark Children’s Venture
Generations of Lewisham residents have benefited from the resource of
visiting Macaroni Woods, which, without subsidised costs, would be unable to
use every year. The charity’s relationship with the borough has brought the
countryside to inner city children and positively impacted disadvantaged
children. There are strong contingency plans in place to move forward without
the funding, however, the cut is a huge loss to negotiate from. The group are
also concerned about the possible unravelling of their relationship with the
Council.
The Mayor invited members of the Cabinet to ask questions to the appellant.
Some good support could be, as well the monetary value which enable
subsidisation from Lewisham groups, is charging Lewisham groups £100 per
night. If the funding was decreased to £20,000 then this charge could be
increased to £150 per night then to £200 over time to draw down funding.
Lewisham Community Transport Scheme
The service supports the local community by transporting the disadvantaged
members to and from activities safely and affordably. The financial projection
indicates that to enable the group to develop the service to its potential LCTS
would need core funding assistance from LBL in the short term to ensure they
meet the growing demands of providing a more environmentally friendly,
passenger-led transport service
In relation to partnerships, LCTS has already developed links with other
vehicle owning organisations in order to maximise the availability of minibus
transport in the borough.
The Mayor invited members of the Cabinet to ask questions to the appellant.
In response to become financially independent, it is the plan to become
sustainable in the future and LCTS will apply for funding for core and capital
costs to reach independent. The group also want to approach more local
businesses in order to promote their service and create more funds.
The extra funding applied for is to employ 2 full-time members of staff- the
minimum amount of funding needed is £35,000.
The Mayor thanked the appellants for their time after each appeal.
The Executive Director for Community Services noted that most organisations
had stated the need for core funding to increase/receive funding from other
services. The Council should therefore endeavour to support these
organisations in other ways, if not through the Main Grants, but making it clear
to external funders that the Council understand the need for core funding
while each of them work towards self-sufficieny.
The meeting finished at 12.25pm
Supporting documents: