Agenda Document Pack - Council - 15/02/2024
North Lanarkshire Council · 15 February 2024
Back to Council — 15 February 2024 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
6 February 2024 Members of the Council Chief Executive’s Office Archie Aitken Chief Officer (Legal & Democratic) Civic Centre, Windmillhill Street, Motherwell ML1 1AB www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk Notice is given that a Special Meeting of the Council is to be held in the Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Windmillhill Street, Motherwell, ML1 1AB on Thursday, 15 February 2024 at 14:00 PM which you are requested to attend. The agenda of business is attached. Des Murray Chief Executive Members : Clerk Name: Mark Hamill Clerk Telephone: 07811294702 Clerk Email: hamillm@northlan.gov.uk D Ashraf, A Ballinger, C Barclay, B Baudo, A Beveridge, M Boyd, H Brannan-McVey, G Brennan, B Burgess, A Bustard, J Cairns, A Campbell, T Carragher, C Costello, M Coyle, S Coyle, D Crichton, G Currie, P Di Mascio, K Docherty, K Duffy, A Duffy-Lawson, H Dunbar, T Fisher, F Fotheringham, W Goldie, K Harmon, M Hughes, J Hume, L Jarvie, D Johnston, T Johnston, J Jones, P Kelly, J Keltie, A Khan, K Larson, J Leckie, G Lennon, J Logue, H Loughran, F MacGregor, A Masterton, M McBride, B McCluskey, A McCrory, B McCulloch, M McCulloch, P McDade, F McKay, R McKendrick, J McLaren, C McManus, F McNally, M McPake, J McPhilemy, A McVey, L Mitchell, L Nolan, P Patton, J Reddin, L Roarty, D Robb, G Robinson, N Shevlin, W Shields, A Smith, K Stevenson, A Stubbs, L Stubbs, R Sullivan, A Thomas, J Toner, S Watson, C Williams, N Wilson, G Woods. Page 1 of 56
Page 2
Page 2 of 56
Page 3
Agenda 1 Declarations of Interest In Terms of the Ethical Standards In Public Life Etc. (Scotland) Act 2000 2 Revenue Budget 2024/2025 to 2026/2027 and Council Tax 2024/2025 Submit report by the Chief Officer (Finance) providing financial information that enables the Council to set its Revenue Budget and Council Tax for 2024/25 and provide a forecast Revenue Budget position for financial years 2025/26 and 2026/27 5 - 18 3 Review of Grant Awards Programme (GAP) Submit report by the Chief Officer (Strategic Communication and Engagement) setting out the findings from the Review of Grant Awards Programme which was agreed by the Communities Committee, as part of the exercise to further scope out opportunities to test approaches to funding and resourcing the community and voluntary sector. 19 - 56 Page 3 of 56
Page 4
Page 4 of 56
Page 5
North Lanarkshire Council Report Council Does this report require to be approved? ☒ Yes ☐ No Ref EK/KS/FC Date 15/02/24 Revenue Budget 2024/25 to 2026/27 and Council Tax 2024/25 From Elaine Kemp, Chief Officer (Finance) E-mail KempE@northlan.gov.uk Telephone 07939 280601 Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to provide financial information that enables the Council to set its Revenue Budget and Council Tax for 2024/25 and provide a forecast Revenue Budget position for financial years 2025/26 and 2026/27. In line with the framework outlined in the Revenue Resources Budget Strategy, the Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP), approved by Policy and Strategy Committee on 8 June 2023, identified an envisaged three year budget gap of £64.560 million, with an estimated shortfall of £30.930 million in 2024/25. After reflecting the agreed advanced action of £5.182 million, this reduced the 3 year gap to £59.378 million and the 2024/25 gap to £25.958 million. This forecast position has now been updated to reflect the Local Government Finance Settlement Circular (8/2023), and some other changes to planning assumptions, which result in a net reduction in the three year forecast gap of £9.412 million to £49.966 million and a £3.312 million reduction in the 2024/25 budget gap, resulting in a revised gap in 2024/25 of £22.646 million. The gaps in 2025/26 and 2026/27 are revised to £14.460 million and £12.860 million respectively. The paper highlights that employer contributions to Strathclyde Pension Fund are reducing to 6.5%, for two years only, with a long-term contribution rate of 17.5% from 2026/27. This generates a recurring saving of £3.800 million from 2026/27 and a one-off cost reduction of £27.400 million per annum in financial years 2024/25 and 2025/26. The budget strategy recommended by the Chief Officer (Finance) recognises the opportunity to reduce service and corporate budgets by £7.000 million to reflect historic in- year underspend trends and recognises the impact of assumed Council Tax rises of 5% in both 2025/26 and 2026/27. Combined these measures reduce the anticipated three year budget gap to £28.863 million; £15.646 million in 2024/25 with anticipated gaps in 2025/26 and 2026/27 of £7.580 million and £5.637 million respectively Furthermore, with the unresolved budget gap heavily skewed towards 2024/25 the budget strategy recommends limited use of the non-recurring pension costs reductions to smooth the three year gap to £9.621 million per year to support the planned implementation of savings over the three year period, supported by the responsible use of one-off pension cost reductions. The remaining pension fund cost reductions may be utilised to support one-off investment or to add to the Council’s unallocated reserve balances to support future budget strategies in accordance with the approved Reserves Policy. Item 2 Page 5 of 56
Page 6
1. Background 1.1. The statutory requirements in relation to budget setting are contained within Section 93 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. This is reinforced by CIPFA’s guidance which requires that total estimated expenses for the year can be funded by the income estimated from grants, Council Tax and other income. Failure to meet these requirements would result in serious consequences for Council operations and individual members. Section 102 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 sets out specific processes for the Controller of Audit to report to the Accounts Commission on the failure to set a budget. The Commission can recommend that Scottish Ministers direct the Council to rectify this. 2. Report Revenue Expenditure Budget 2024/25 to 2026/27 2.1. Appendix 1 highlights the updated revenue budget position for 2024/25, and Appendix 2 summarises the position across the three years. Adjusted 2023/24 Budget 2.2. The starting point for determining the revenue budget for 2024/25 is the 2023/24 revised base budget of £991.427 million. Expenditure Budget 2024/25 2.3. The 2023/24 revised base budget has been adjusted to reflect the planning assumptions detailed in the Medium Term Financial Plan 2024/25 to 2028/29 approved by Policy and Strategy Committee in June 2023, any subsequent updated financial planning assumptions, and estimated changes arising from the provisional Local Government Finance Settlement 2024/25. These are outlined below and summarised in Appendix 1. 2.4. The total expenditure budget for 2024/25 reflects additional net expenditure requirements totalling £34.761 million with the most significant relating to employee Recommendations It is recommended that Council: (1) Acknowledges the key movements on financial planning assumptions in relation to expenditure and resources at paragraphs 2.1 to 2.9, (2) Recognises the subsequent impact on the financial outlook for 2024/25 to 2026/27, summarised in Appendices 1 and 2, which show a budget gap for 2024/25 of £22.646 million and £49.966 million over the three year period, (3) Acknowledges the budget strategy recommended by the Chief Officer (Finance), (4) Confirms the level of Council Tax for 2024/25, and (5) Agrees the general fund contingency reserve as advised by the Chief Officer (Finance), outlined in paragraph 2.23. The Plan for North Lanarkshire Priority Improve North Lanarkshire's resource base Ambition statement (25) Ensure intelligent use of data and information to support fully evidence based decision making and future planning Programme of Work Statutory / corporate / service requirement Page 6 of 56
Page 7
cost pressures. After accounting for Directed Expenditure and Ring-Fenced Grant movements of £14.679 million, the Council’s revised net forecast expenditure budget for 2024/25 is £1,040.867 million. This incorporates updates to planning assumptions since the Medium Term Financial Plan. The main updates are as follows: 2.4.1. The 2024/25 expenditure budget reflects the additional recurring cost of £11.010 million for the 2023/24 pay award agreed for both teachers and single status employees. It should be noted that an element of additional cost relates Adult Social Care, recognising that some of the funding provided for pay by the Scottish Government is in respect of those employees. This will be given full consideration in discussion with the Integrated Joint Board. In addition, this plan provides for £13.000 million employee cost pressures for 2024/25 and assumes that any pay settlement costs above this level will be funded by the Scottish Government. It should also be noted that this position assumes that members agree to accept the Scottish Government’s funding in lieu of a Council Tax freeze, thus reducing the estimated cost of Council Tax Reduction by £1.299 million. In addition, the forecast cost of energy has been reduced by £1.000 million and there is an estimated £0.500 million increase in respect of the Community Investment programme update (offset by increased Council Tax Income growth of £0.500 million. See paragraph 2.8 below). 2.4.2. As indicated above, the Local Government Finance Settlement includes a net increase in ring fenced and directed resources of £14.679 million. This includes a net increase in ring fenced grant funding of £0.018 million. However, it should be noted that this excludes the change in funding from ring fenced to general revenue grant in relation to Early Learning and Childcare. In addition, further directed resources of £14.661 million have been provided primarily in respect of Adult Health & Social Care (£12.138 million) mainly for the Real Living Wage uplift. There is also an assumed one-off £1.535 million to replenish Council reserves reflecting the Scottish Government’s partial one-off solution for the funding of the 2023/24 pay award, which is due to be reimbursed in 2024/25. There are other less material movements of £0.211 million in respect of Education services, and a number of other minor expenditure requirements of £0.777 million. 2.4.3. Members are advised this budget is presented on the basis that funds equivalent to a 1% increase in Council Tax are ringfenced to meet the borrowing costs of the Community Investment programme expenditure. Available Resources 2.5. Resources available to the Council in setting its 2024/25 budget total £1,013.249 million, as set out below and detailed in Appendix 1. 2.6. The provisional 2024/25 Local Government Finance Settlement issued in December 2023, details the level of grant available to the Council for 2024/25. The Scottish Government has indicated that it will work in partnership with local government to implement the budget and the joint priorities in return for the full funding which includes: • additional resource to support the 2023/24 teacher and local government pay uplifts. • additional funding to support social care and integration, which recognises the commitments on adult social care pay in commissioned services via agreed contract uplifts and inflationary uplift on free personal care rates. Page 7 of 56
Page 8
2.7. It is anticipated the level of government grant (Aggregate External Finance) for 2024/25 will be £836.672 million, which includes assumptions on undistributed funding of £23.248 million in respect of Teacher Induction Scheme, Discretionary Housing Payments, Social Care Pay in commissioned services and Scottish Disability Assistance. After accounting for the anticipated funding for the 2023/24 pay award and the additional directed funding, there is an overall reduction in core funding of £2.295 million, which is different to the flat cash position previously anticipated. 2.8. The Council Tax base budget of £166.849 million is anticipated to increase by £2.100 million through growth in housing stock, which also reflects the updated Community Investment Fund update reported to Policy and Strategy Committee in September 2023, indicating an increase in ambition growth of £0.500 million. In addition, the 2024/25 Scottish Government Draft Budget made available £144 million to fund a freeze in Council Tax across each of Scotland’s 32 local authorities with North Lanarkshire’s share currently estimated at £7.128 million. This report assumes members agree to implement the Council Tax freeze, which means the previously assumed 1% increase in Council Tax income to fund the Community Investment programme of £1.720 million, has been removed. 2.9. In September 2023 Policy and Strategy Committee approved the policy to annually uplift discretionary fees and charges by 5%. This is anticipated to generate an additional £0.500 million of income, as assumed when reporting the Medium Term Financial Plan in June 2023. Budget Gap 2.10. Total resources outlined equate to £1,013.249 million compared with an estimated expenditure budget for 2024/25 of £1,040.867 million, which results in a shortfall of £27.618 million, as highlighted in Appendix 1. 2.11. However, as indicated in the updated Financial Outlook provided in Appendix 2, operational decisions previously approved totalling £0.682 million have been identified, with a saving of £0.472 million forecast for 2024/25 and £0.210 million for 2025/26. Further details in respect of the operational decisions are provided at Appendix 3. In addition, as part of the Medium Term Financial plan, a £4.500 million saving was approved by Policy and Strategy Committee in June 2023 as a result of the short to medium term financial benefit within the PPP financial model arising from the implementation of the new accounting standard IFRS16 (Leases). Therefore, the revised 2024/25 budget gap is reduced to £22.646m. 2.12. In addition, Appendix 2 contains an update on the Financial Outlook for 2025/26 and 2026/27, highlighting anticipated budgets shortfalls of £14.460 million and £12.860 million respectively, after adjusting for previously approved base budget adjustments and the recurring benefit of long-term reduced employer pension contributions to Strathclyde Pension Fund. The revised three year budget gap is therefore anticipated to be £49.966m. One-off Budget Implications 2.13. The Council’s employers pension contribution rates for non-teachers are set by Strathclyde Pension Fund and reviewed on a three-yearly basis. The employer’s contribution rate is currently set at 19.3%. The preliminary results of the most recent triennial actuarial valuation showed a significant increase in the scheme funding level from 106% at 31 March 2020 to 147% at 31 March 2023. This improved funding position allows flexibility in a number of areas, including in employer contribution rates. Page 8 of 56
Page 9
Following the valuation, Strathclyde Pension Fund approved a revised draft Funding Strategy Statement which reflects a prudent and sustainable long-term rate of 17.5% to apply from financial year 2026/27 onwards, and a short-term reduction to 6.5% for financial years 2024/25 and 2025/26. 2.14. The budget position for financial years 2024/25 to 2026/27 is outlined in Appendices 1 and 2 reflecting the proposed long-term pension contribution rate of 17.5%, estimated to generate a recurring saving of £3.800 million from 2026/27. However, the short-term reduction to 6.5% is estimated to decrease costs by £27.400 million per annum in financial years 2024/25 and 2025/26, providing significant non-recurring benefits for the Council. Recommended Budget Strategy 2.15. The Section 95 Officer has recommended a budget strategy that recognises the three year budget gap of £49.966 million, the potential to increase Council Tax in 2025/26 and 2026/27 to protect service provision and the availability of non-recurring cost reductions as described in paragraph 2.14. 2.16. In addition, previous trends of year-on-year underspends across services and within corporate budgets gives confidence that a recurring £7.000 million budget reduction can be recommended to reduce the recurring budget gap in 2024/25. 2.17. Furthermore, an assumed 5% increase in Council Tax in 2025/26 and 2026/27 would generate additional income of £14.103 million (£6.880 million in 2025/26 and £7.223 million in 2026/27) after accounting for the assumption that the equivalent of 1% Council Tax would be set aside to support capital investment priorities through the Community Investment Fund. It should be noted that Council Tax rises for 2025/26 and 2026/27 would be subject to the annual budget process. 2.18. These assumed measures would reduce the three year budget gap to £28.863 million but heavily skewed towards a 2024/25 budget gap of £15.646 million with anticipated gaps in 2025/26 and 2026/27 of £7.580 million and £5.637 million respectively. 2.19. Therefore, the Section 95 Officer recommends that this £28.863 million budget gap is smoothed over the three year planning period with savings of £9.621 million required to be delivered in each financial year. It is also recommended that this smoothing measure is supported by limited use of the one-off cost reductions associated with reduced Strathclyde Pension Fund employer contributions of £6.025 million in 2024/25 and £3.984 million in 2025/26. 2.20. This approach is recommended to ensure that a more manageable level of savings can be delivered in a planned way in each of three financial years. The planned delivery of savings over this three year period will support the Council’s medium term financial sustainability and utilises the Strathclyde Pension Fund employer contribution cost reductions in a responsible way. The remaining Strathclyde Pension Fund employer contribution cost reductions can be utilised to support one-off investment or set aside to add to the Council’s unallocated reserve position. 2.21. The financial impact of this recommended approach is summarised Appendix 2. Page 9 of 56
Page 10
General Fund Reserves 2.22. In January 2020, the Policy and Strategy Committee approved a Reserves Policy which sets out the types of reserves held by the Council, establishes procedures for their governance and outlines the approach to be taken in determining the appropriate reserve levels held by the Council. The policy provides guidelines which ensure reserves are established and managed in a way that safeguards long term financial sustainability and supports good financial management, allowing the Council to balance current obligations, whilst preparing for future commitments and financial risks. 2.23. Within the General Fund Reserve, a Contingency Fund is maintained. This is held for unexpected events or emergencies. Based on previous assessments of risk facing the Council, the level of contingency has been set at £8.000 million over recent years. Given the Council’s track record of effective financial management it is recommended that the sum of £8.000 million remains appropriate for 2024/25. 2.24. The Council also maintains a Change Management Fund to support future budget pressures, one-off costs of approved savings, and transformation initiatives, whilst ensuring the Council has a strategic plan that is prudent, affordable and sustainable in the medium to longer term. 2.25. Based on the latest financial projections it is estimated that the Change Management Fund balance as at 1 April 2024 will be £18.400 million, as detailed in the forecast at Appendix 4. The forecast also reflects estimated fund requirements for approved savings and one-off costs to support future budgets savings to 2028/29, of £22.900 million. This therefore requires an increase to the fund of £4.500 million which will be considered as the Council finalises its 2023/24 financial statements. 2.26. Given the Council is looking over the medium-term timeframe both in relation to anticipated challenging future budget positions and future organisational ambitions, it is essential that the Council takes a prudent approach to retaining the remaining balances for the period ahead. The overall reserves position will continue to be updated as part of the regular budget monitoring reports presented to Finance and Resources Committee and will be subject to a full review as part of the year end closedown process. Treasury Management Strategy and Prudential Indicators 2.27. The Treasury Management Strategy outlines the Prudential and Treasury Indicators that allow the Council to demonstrate that investment plans are managed within a sound financial environment. These indicators are endorsed by Finance and Resources Committee and remitted to Council for approval to meet the full requirement of the Prudential Code. Areas of Risk and Uncertainty 2.28. As always, in preparing the Revenue Budget, estimates have been made that contain an element of risk and uncertainty. It should be noted that forecasts of pay and non- pay inflation and assumptions over future local government finance settlements from the Scottish Government and significant additional risks and uncertainties to this budget. However, it is currently not possible to forecast the financial impact of such risks with any greater degree of certainty. Therefore, the financial impact of these risks remains under continuous review. It is envisaged that any unbudgeted pressures arising will be managed on a one-off basis from unallocated reserves, with any Page 10 of 56
Page 11
recurring impact addressed in future Medium Term Financial Plan, when there is greater certainty of impact. 2.29. As highlighted in paragraph 2.8 above, the gap presented in Appendix 1 and 2 includes Scottish Government funding towards a Council Tax Freeze of £7.128m. It is expected that any decision to raise Council Tax would result in the loss of this funding and corresponding increase in the budget gap of this amount. 2.30. The grant settlement received by the Council may be subject to change as the Finance Budget Bill progresses through Parliament. Should further undirected funds be received on a recurring basis as a result of this process, they will be held in reserves on a one-off basis to mitigate against these risks and to mitigate future budget gaps. 3. Measures of success 3.1. Ensuring that the Council sets a balanced budget for 2024/25. 4. Supporting documentation Appendix 1 North Lanarkshire Council Revenue Budget 2024/25 Appendix 2 Updated Financial Outlook Appendix 3 Base Budget Adjustments Appendix 4 Change Management Fund Forecast Elaine Kemp Chief Officer (Finance) Page 11 of 56
Page 12
5. Impacts 5.1 Public Sector Equality Duty and Fairer Scotland Duty Does the report contain information that has an impact as a result of the Public Sector Equality Duty and/or Fairer Scotland Duty? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? If Yes, has an assessment been carried out and published on the council’s website? https://www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk/your-community/equalities/equality- and-fairer-scotland-duty-impact-assessments Yes ☐ No ☐ 5.2 Financial impact Does the report contain any financial impacts? Yes ☒ No ☐ If Yes, have all relevant financial impacts been discussed and agreed with Finance? Yes ☒ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? The financial impacts are detailed in the report. 5.3 HR policy impact Does the report contain any HR policy or procedure impacts? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, have all relevant HR impacts been discussed and agreed with People Resources? Yes ☐ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.4 Legal impact Does the report contain any legal impacts (such as general legal matters, statutory considerations (including employment law considerations), or new legislation)? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, have all relevant legal impacts been discussed and agreed with Legal and Democratic? Yes ☐ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.5 Data protection impact Does the report / project / practice contain or involve the processing of personal data? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, is the processing of this personal data likely to result in a high risk to the data subject? Yes ☐ No ☐ If Yes, has a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) been carried out and e- mailed to dataprotection@northlan.gov.uk Yes ☐ No ☐ 5.6 Technology / Digital impact Does the report contain information that has an impact on either technology, digital transformation, service redesign / business change processes, data management, or connectivity / broadband / Wi-Fi? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? Page 12 of 56
Page 13
Where the impact identifies a requirement for significant technology change, has an assessment been carried out (or is scheduled to be carried out) by the Enterprise Architecture Governance Group (EAGG)? Yes ☐ No ☐ 5.7 Environmental / Carbon impact Does the report / project / practice contain information that has an impact on any environmental or carbon matters? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.8 Communications impact Does the report contain any information that has an impact on the council’s communications activities? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.9 Risk impact Is there a risk impact? Yes ☒ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the key risks and potential impacts, highlighting where the risk(s) are assessed and recorded (e.g. Corporate or Service or Project Risk Registers), and how they are managed? The production of the annual budget report, annual updates to the Medium Term Financial Plan and regular updates to the Council’s Financial Outlook presented to Elected Members all support the Council in managing the risk of ongoing financial sustainability which is a key corporate risk. The delivery of recurring savings and sustainable use of reserves mitigate against risks to the Council’s financial sustainability. 5.10 Armed Forces Covenant Duty Does the report require to take due regard of the Armed Forces Covenant Duty (i.e. does it relate to healthcare, housing, or education services for in-Service or ex- Service personnel, or their families, or widow(er)s)? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the provision which has been made to ensure there has been appropriate consideration of the particular needs of the Armed Forces community to make sure that they do not face disadvantage compared to other citizens in the provision of public services. 5.11 Children’s rights and wellbeing impact Does the report contain any information regarding any council activity, service delivery, policy, or plan that has an impact on children and young people up to the age of 18, or on a specific group of these? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact and the provision that has been made to ensure there has been appropriate consideration of the relevant Articles from the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). If Yes, has a Children’s Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment (CRWIA) been carried out? Yes ☐ No ☐ Page 13 of 56
Page 14
Appendix 1 £m £m 2023/24 Adjusted Base Budget 991.427 Additional Net Expenditure Requirements Employee - Pay Award Recurring impact 23/24 11.010 Employee - Pay Award 24/25 13.000 Contract Inflation 1.390 Energy 1.300 Strategic Priorities 3.990 Other Net Expenditure 4.071 34.761 Additional Net Directed Expenditure and Ring Fenced Grants Ring Fenced Funding 0.018 Education 0.211 2023/24 Pay Award One-off; Replenish Reserves 1.535 Adult Health & Social Care 12.138 Other Net Directed Spend 0.777 14.679 Expenditure Budget 2024/25 1,040.867 Available Resources: Anticipated Aggregate External Finance 836.672 Funding for Council Tax Freeze 7.128 Council Tax Base Budget 166.849 Council Tax Base Growth 2.100 Income Generation from Sales, Fees & Charges 0.500 176.577 2024/25 Available Resources 1,013.249 Recurring Budget Shortfall/ (Excess) 27.618 Previously Approved Actions Operational Decisions; previously approved (0.472) PPP Affordability; previously approved (4.500) (4.972) Net Recurring Budget Shortfall/ (Excess) 22.646 Revised Estimated Recurring Budget Shortfall 2025/26 14.460 2026/27 12.860 One - off Budget Implications; 2023/24 2024/25 Reduction in SPF Employers Contribution (27.400) (27.400) North Lanarkshire Council Revenue Budget 2024/25 Page 14 of 56
Page 15
Appendix 2 2024/25 £m 2025/26 £m 2026/27 £m Total £m Budget Shortfall MTFP June 2023 30.930 14.870 18.760 64.560 Previously Agreed Advanced Action; Base Budget Adjustments (0.472) (0.210) (0.682) PPP Affordability (4.500) (4.500) Net Budget Shortfall MTFP June 2023 25.958 14.660 18.760 59.378 Changes in Expenditure Requirements; Adjustments to Pay Assumptions 2024/25 - 2026/27 1.500 (0.200) (2.100) (0.800) Pay Award 2023/24; increased recurring cost 11.010 11.010 Reduction in Employers Pension Contributions (3.800) (3.800) Adjustment to Non Pay Inflation Assumptions (1.000) (1.000) Change in Council Tax Reduction Assumption (1.299) (1.299) Community Investment Fund inc. City Deal 0.500 0.500 Changes in Resources; SG Funding Pay Award 2023/24 (10.410) (10.410) Funding in Lieu of Council Tax Increase (7.128) (7.128) Removal of 1% Tax increase CIF 1.720 1.720 Net Impact of LG Finance Settlement 2.295 2.295 Increased Ctax income from CIF Growth (0.500) (0.500) Reversal of One-off funding for 2023/24 Pay Award 1.535 1.535 2023/24 Pay Award One-off; Replenish Reserves (1.535) (1.535) Total Changes (3.312) (0.200) (5.900) (9.412) Revised Budget Gap 22.646 14.460 12.860 49.966 Recommended Budget Strategy Budget Reduction; recurring underspends (7.000) (7.000) Council Tax increased by 5% (with 1% for CIF) (6.880) (7.223) (14.103) Net Recurring Shortfall / (Excess Resource) 15.646 7.580 5.637 28.863 Carry forward unresolved gap 6.025 3.984 Recurring Savings (smoothed) (9.621) (9.621) (9.621) (28.863) Cumulative unresolved gap 6.025 3.984 0.000 0.000 In Year Funding of Unresolved Gap One-Off Reduction in Employers Pension Contributions (27.400) (27.400) 0.000 (54.800) In-Year One-Off Resources Available (21.375) (23.416) 0.000 (44.791) Updated Financial Outlook Page 15 of 56
Page 16
Appendix 3 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 Total £m £m £m £m Previously approved; Reduction in children's services HQ employee cost budgets 0.117 0.117 Reduction in supplies & services / employee cost budgets in water management/ bridge & transportation engineering 0.039 0.039 Asset rationalisation savings 0.082 0.173 0.255 Review of procurement and management support structure 0.059 0.059 Review of staffing resource on completion of the Enterprise Project 0.037 0.037 Maximise charging other non Council funds for services provided 0.050 0.050 Corporate management structure changes 0.125 0.125 0.472 0.210 0.000 0.682 Operational Decisions Page 16 of 56
Page 17
Appendix 4 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £m £m £m £m £m Opening Balance Projected Balance at P9 18.400 12.326 8.625 4.995 0.000 Less: Known Commitments Revised One off Costs of Approved Savings (2.374) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Less: Estimated Future Commitments Indicative One off Costs of Future Savings (3.700) (3.700) (3.630) (4.995) (4.500) Forecast Closing Balance 12.326 8.625 4.995 0.000 (4.500) Change Management Fund Forecast Page 17 of 56
Page 18
Page 18 of 56
Page 19
North Lanarkshire Council Report Council Does this report require to be approved? ☒ Yes ☐ No Ref SP/LP/GS Date 15/02/24 Review of Grant Awards Programme (GAP) From Stephen Penman, Chief Officer (Strategic Communication and Engagement) E-mail PenmanSte@northlan.gov.uk Telephone 07947997750 Executive Summary Working with the Community and Voluntary Sector (CVS) is crucial to meet the ambitious plans for the area set out in the Plan for North Lanarkshire, reflecting the diverse needs of communities. Grants to CVS organisations are a key mechanism in building the capacity of the sector to work in partnership with the council and community planning partners to address various social, economic, and environmental challenges. In recent years demand for grant funding has far exceeded available resource, resulting in extremely challenging decisions around resourcing eligible initiatives. Associated administrative processes, and compliance and reporting requirements for CVS organisations, are overly complex and resource intensive. Additionally, the Grant Awards Programme requires to be realigned to keep pace with the local priorities agreed with communities through the nine Local Outcome Improvement Plans and ensure funding allocated reflects the result of engagement with communities. There is an emerging need to strike a better balance between funding for repeat applicants and new applicants and to increase the number of successful applicants to maintain a focus on the impact the funding can have in a way which is more closely aligned to local priorities. The purpose of this report is to provide Council with details and findings from the Review of Grant Awards Programme (GAP) agreed by the Communities Committee, as part of the exercise to further scope out opportunities to test approaches to funding and resourcing the community and voluntary sector. The extensive review results in recommendations generating a range of improvements for modernising, simplifying, and making the funding stream more transparent to community and voluntary sector applicants. It is anticipated that the improvements and recommendations will also help ensure a sustainable model for the future and drive similar improvements within other community focussed grants available to support CVS organisations delivering important outcomes for North Lanarkshire communities. The report provides an overview of the review process, key findings from the various engagement activities and how the information has been triangulated to ensure a robust approach to identifying the proposed improvements. These improvements are detailed, along with an outline of associated actions for implementation. Item 3 Page 19 of 56
Page 20
1. Background 1.1 The current Grant Awards Programme (GAP) was approved by the former Learning and Leisure Services Committee in August 2013, and since then has operated in its current format. The programme seeks to support community and voluntary organisations contribution to achieving the outcomes for North Lanarkshire. The programme is open to voluntary organisations or community groups operating in North Lanarkshire and may be used for various purposes including employee costs, accommodation costs and programme costs. At present (with the exception of a historical anomaly set out at paragraph 2.1.2 of this report) organisations can apply for a minimum of £1,000 and a maximum of £50,000 annually. The programme provides an annual opportunity for eligible community and voluntary organisations to apply. 1.2 Over the last 10 years, the financial challenges faced by the council have resulted in a significant budget reduction for this funding stream. Additionally, the programme has seen year-on-year variation in the number of applications submitted with a trend towards an increasing number of applications from first time applicants with the overall total of funding requested far exceeding the available budget in recent years. Under the current criteria and process, all these factors have resulted in lower awards being offered varying significantly from what was requested by the applicants and potentially minimising the impact of the intended activity associated with original applications. 1.3 Following the development of Community Boards and the launch of Local Outcome Improvement Plans (LOIPs), many organisations are now working towards identified local area priorities. This provides an ideal opportunity to consider the alignment of Recommendations It is recommended that the Council: (1) Acknowledges the feedback received from the Grant Award Programme stakeholders involved in this review, particularly the improvement suggestions from community and voluntary sector organisations and advocacy organisations supporting seldom heard voices (2) Endorses the triangulation analysis used to determine improvement actions (3) Approves the implementation of the improvement actions contained in sections 2.8 through to 2.9 (4) Approves the implementation timeline outlined to deliver the new approach for our Grant Awards Programme for the 2025-2026 funding round (5) Approves the budget projections and funding model (6) Approves that the Grant Awards Programme budget proportion to be notionally allocated towards each area based on population size and levels of deprivation. (7) Approves the creation of a member officer working group as set out in paragraph 2.14. The Plan for North Lanarkshire Priority All priorities Ambition statement (24) Review and design services around people, communities, and shared resources Programme of Work Resilient People Page 20 of 56
Page 21
GAP to priorities identified by communities. There is an opportunity to ensure that current GAP is utilised to fund locality activity, in support of the LOIP priorities for the nine Community Board areas. 1.4 The main driver for the GAP review is to identify improvements while considering options to provide maximum benefit and impact from award payouts to successful organisations. However, it should also be noted that the council is facing an overall budget gap over the next three years and that significant service reviews should make savings as part of the action required to address this gap. 2. Report 2.1 Current Grant Award Programme 2.1.1 North Lanarkshire Council provides annual funding through the Grant Awards Programme to local voluntary organisations and community groups (and some eligible companies). Currently applicants to the GAP must demonstrate how they contribute to the priorities in The Plan for North Lanarkshire: 2.1.2 Community and Voluntary organisations can apply for funding, by submitting an application. Organisations can request funding between £1,000 and £50,000. Because of the manner in which the overall Grant Award Programme has been formulated historically, with smaller grant funds and some direct awards being amalgamated into the overall scheme, one organisation (Focus Youth Project, Bellshill) has received £88,000 for a number of years. The key stages in the current assessment and scoring process are as follows 1. Pre-assessment: Submitted applications are checked against pre-assessment criteria to ensure that all supporting documents/evidence has been provided, for example a completed and signed application form, constitution/governance documents, financial statements and bank statements. This is to ensure that the application is compliant and eligible 2. Assessment: Officers from Community Partnership, Social Work and Community Learning and Development arrange an assessment visit; during which further diligence checks are carried out to ensure that the organisation is operating according to their governing document and with appropriate policies and procedures in place. An assessment report is then prepared and is retained as an official record of the assessment. The assessing officer is asked to conclude if the application merits consideration for funding; merits consideration but with conditions applied or if the application should not be considered for funding. 3. Scoring: Following the submission of assessments, scoring panels are convened consisting of two senior officers from council services and one senior officer from Voluntary Action North Lanarkshire. The panel members independently review all information available for the organisation to determine a score. All members then meet to discuss the application, and to agree a final collective score. Levels of award applied are based on securing a balanced budget while offering awards to the greatest number of CVS organisations as possible. This typically involves setting a cut-off score to determine a list of successful applicants and then creating a formula to set allocations. The cut-off score is dependent on the volume of applications and if the total amount of funding requested exceeds the available budget. This often Page 21 of 56
Page 22
results in organisations receiving less than applied for, in turn making it difficult to deliver the benefits of an application as envisaged. 2.2 Data analysis 2.2.1 The budget allocation for the last 10 years is detailed in Table 1 below. The total budget movement is £1,260,515 equating to a 68.83% reduction since 2013. Table 1: Grant Awards Programme (Annual Budget: 2013 – 2023) Year Annual Budget Budget movement 2023/2024 £570,955 n/a 2022/2023 £570,955 n/a 2021/2022 £570,955 n/a 2020/2021 £570,955 ↓ £63,010 reduction of 10.0% 2019/2020 £634,005 ↓ £176,842 reduction of 24.0% 2018/2019 £810,847 ↓ £50,000 reduction of 5.8% 2017/2018 £860,847 ↓ £293,500 reduction of 25.4% 2016/2017 £1,154,347 ↓ £416,186 reduction of 26.5% 2015/2016 £1,570,533 ↓ £260,937 reduction of 14.25% 2014/2015 £1,831,470 n/a 2013/2014 £1,831,470 n/a 2.2.2 Since the pandemic, application levels have increased. Table 2 below shows the total number of applications over the last three years and further breaks down the numbers of applications from previously funded organisations and new organisations / first time applicants. This equates to a 72% increase in the number of applications received. 2.2.3 Linked to the increase in application levels is the total amount of funding being requested. Table 3 below illustrates the trend over the same period. • In the 2021/2022 funding round the GAP was oversubscribed by 126% (£723,903) compared to the available funds. • In the 2022/2023 funding round the GAP was oversubscribed by 257% (£1,468,686) compared to the available funds. • In the 2023/2024 funding round the GAP was oversubscribed by 374% (£2,135,756) compared to the available funds. 55 78 95 52 50 56 3 28 39 2021/2022 2022/2023 2023/2024 Table 2 Application Information 2021 - 2024 Total number of applications Number of previously funded organsations Number of new applicants Page 22 of 56
Page 23
Table 3: Amount of Funding Requested 2021 – 2024 2.2.4 Award levels and values over the last three years are illustrated in Table 4 below. During the period, an average of 78% of applicants received a funding award. An average of 53% of successful applicants received funding between £1,000 and £5,000; 20% received funding between £5,001 and £10,000; 17% received funding between £10,001 and £20,000; 3% received funding between £20,001 and £30,000; 5% received funding between £30,001 and £50,000, 2% received funding over £50,000. In the 2021/2022 funding round 94% of applicants received an award. This correlates with the lower number of applications received for that year. In the 2022/2023 funding round 73% of applicants received an award, and in the 2023/2024 funding round it was 68%. The lower figures reflecting the increased number of applications submitted. Page 23 of 56
Page 24
Table 4: Award Levels and Bandings 2021-2024 2.3 Review methodology / approach 2.3.1 The Grant Award Programme Review process was designed specifically to consider process improvements in relation to: • Alignment to the Local Outcome Improvement Plans (LOIPs) • observed changes to thinking in terms of grant giving at the national level. • Updating the scoring process to enable a fairer distribution of funding between new applicants and repeat applicants. • Simplifying the application process focusing on need and outcomes • Monitor activities and their impact while demonstrating best value and safeguarding the public pound. 2.3.2 Instrumental to the process was the focus on research and benchmarking and the use of a variety of methods for stakeholder engagement. A staged approach was developed to enable the review to move forward at a reasonable pace. Details are as follows: - Stage 1: Internal Review, Benchmarking and Research Stage 2: Engagement with Internal Stakeholders Stage 3: Engagement with external stakeholders Stage 4: Engagement with funded organisations / wider CVS and community boards 2.3.4 Stage 1: Internal Review, Benchmarking and Research This involved: - • An internal review of processes to identify improvement actions around the administration of the GAP. • Benchmarking and research on other operating models • Gather all application paperwork and forms and details of applicants over last 5 years. • Engagement with NLC Grants Administration Officers • Gathering intelligence about other grants. 26 27 40 10 14 1011 9 92 2 13 3 31 1 13 21 30 2021/2022 2022/2023 2023/2024 Award Levels 2021-2024 Awards between £1,000 to £5,000 Awards between £5,001 to £10,000 Awards between £10,001 to £20,000 Awards between £20,001 to £30,000 Awards between £30,001 to £50,001 Awards over £50,000 Unsuccessful Page 24 of 56
Page 25
2.3.5 A benchmarking template was developed to allow the research team to take a unified approach to the research of grant awards within other local authority areas and with other funding bodies. This involved using a checklist to record the various processes in place and the capture of any available literature and documents. 2.3.6. Benchmarking with other local authorities Benchmarking took place with West Dunbartonshire Council, South Lanarkshire Council, Fife Council, Renfrewshire Council, East Ayrshire Council, North Ayrshire Council and Glasgow City Council. Key findings from this work with other local authorities identified the following practice for consideration: • The potential to use a light tough micro-fund which can be used to test new ideas and projects. • Some local authorities no longer provide a grant for voluntary organisations (often the equivalent to our own GAP), replaced instead by the creation of grants for themed work or business areas linked to local and national priorities. • Most of the benchmarked local authorities now only offer small level awards. The variance in the upper limits for these awards are £780 - £4,000. Two local authorities have award programs offering larger levels of funding. This includes Renfrewshire Council, which runs the Sustainable Community Fund offering small, intermediate and large grants up to £100,000, and Glasgow, where the flagship funding programme is the Communities Fund which offers a minimum award of £20,000 up to £200,000. A summary of findings is available at Appendix 1 to this report. 2.3.11 Research with grant-making bodies The following grant-making bodies were selected for research: • National Lottery Community Fund • Heritage Fund • Robertson Trust • Foundation Scotland • Corra Foundation 2.3.12 Further detail of information from engagement with grant making bodies is available at appendix 2. Key findings from the engagement with grant-makers include: • Most grant-giving bodies have moved to online applications or working towards this. • For small grants, there has generally been a move towards monitoring based on trusted relationships with open and honest communication, alongside a reduction in formal monitoring returns. These have been replaced with end-of-funding reporting and the use of case studies or impact statements focussing on the difference funding makes to grant holders, people and communities. • Most of the national funders provided cautionary advice that they are positively influenced when applicants are funded by local authorities, with a view that the local authority has already undertaken a robust review of successful applicants’ governance, policies and procedures. • There has been an emerging trend for similarly focussed organisations from the same area to apply separately for funding. In these circumstances joint bids are encouraged and, if this is not viable, then dialogue is required to ensure enough points of difference to avoid duplication. The exception is where significant need Page 25 of 56
Page 26
has been evidenced/demonstrated, providing the justification for having similar focussed projects operating in the same area. 2.4 Stage 2: Engagement with Internal Stakeholders Several internal stakeholders were identified, and plans were developed to ensure that their opinions and suggestions around the current GAP could be captured and used by officers to inform the recommendations for improvements. The methods used included surveys, focus groups and professional dialogue sessions. The following engagement activities have taken place, and details from each activity is outlined: • Engagement with elected members (survey and focus group session) • Engagement with assessing and monitoring officers. 2.4.2 Engagement with elected members (survey and focus group session) Elected members were invited to complete a short SurveyMonkey questionnaire focussing on their own views of the GAP and potential improvements that could be made. The survey was completed by 24 councillors and six attended a focus group session on 21st April 2023. The hour session provided councillors with an opportunity to find out more about the purpose of the grants review, the various project stages, data and information and an overview of the key feedback from the various engagement activities to date. This enabled further discussion and feedback. A summary of information from the survey and engagement sessions with elected members along with links to further detail are provided at appendix 3. 2.4.5 Engagement with assessing and monitoring officers 57 officers who have been involved in assessing and monitoring the GAP over the last five years were invited to complete a short SurveyMonkey questionnaire to seek their views regarding potential improvement to GAP and to the monitoring and assessment process. 30 respondents completed the survey. Giving an participation rate of 52.6%. A summary of engagement assessing and monitoring officers along with links to further detail are provided at appendix 4. 2.5 Stage 3: Engagement with Equalities Groups and Seldom Heard voices 2.5.1 An important element in the process was engagement with seldom heard voices and equalities groups to help ensure that the design and decision-making process is reflective of the make-up of communities with a wide range of perspectives, experiences and needs. The following organisations were involved in the process: - • Airdrie & Coatbridge Islamic Centre • North Lanarkshire Muslim Women and Family Alliance • Lanarkshire Ethnic Minority Action Group • North Lanarkshire Disability Access Panel • Ethnic Minority Law Centre • Scottish Refugee Council • African Collaborative • Deaf Services Lanarkshire 2.5.3 Some key themes from this engagement included: - Page 26 of 56
Page 27
• Consideration of additional capacity building support. • Help seldom heard voices/organisations to apply for funding. • Consideration of how organisations are supported who provide the advocacy, support and vital or statutory services on behalf of the council. • Fairer allocation of funding for services rendered to reflect equalities needs. • Consideration of the potential of a separate funding stream for equalities work. Appendix 5 provides a summary of feedback engagement with seldom heard/equalities groups 2.6 Stage 4: Wider Engagement with funded/applicant organisations / wider CVS and community boards 2.6.1 The starting point for research was to collate a list of all applicants over the last five years. 96 unique organisations were identified as outlined in the list at appendix 6. Engagement included an online survey and follow up online and face to face focus groups. 64 organisations took part in the survey with a participation rate of 67% and a total of 31 organisations participated in the online and face to face sessions (13 in person and 18 online) 2.6.2 Generally, the participants of the focus groups reinforced the improvement from the CVS questionnaire. It is of interest to note that there remains a strong sense of support about the benefits of considering linkages to the LOIPs. 2.6.3 A SurveyMonkey questionnaire was also developed for Community Board members. and the opportunity to participate was promoted via Community Matters. Many CVS organisations are members of the community boards and so were advised not to complete a further survey. 20 responses were received, 18 from organisations and two from organisations from individual residents. 2.6.4 An overview of feedback and proposed improvements from the survey and focus groups can be accessed at appendix 7 2.7 Common themes and suggestions from engagement with stakeholders 2.7.1 Feedback from all stakeholder engagement highlighted a number of key and recurring themes. • improvements to and simplification of the current application form and associated guidance notes to support application submission appropriately. • Clarity over the decision-making process and any associated points systems to ensure decisions are understood. • Improvements to the monitoring process to be simpler and proportionate to the level of award given, and more focussed on outcomes and impacts. Much of this approach could be online and supported by a shift to an end-of-project report, with case studies, testimonies, or impact statements. • Participants also identified information that it would be useful to gain from the monitoring process including details of any match funding because of the GAP awards. • Better sharing of good practice and examples of success. These success stories and impacts could be available on the North Lanarkshire Council website. • Providing grants for longer periods of time could be more beneficial, as could setting a range of fixed amounts for grants applications and awards. • Capacity building and improvement in applications submitted at pre-application support for new organisations and those who have identified barriers to access (i.e. equalities groups) and providing more targeted feedback (particularly for unsuccessful applicants). • Ensuring equity of funding allocation across different demographics and groupings within communities. Page 27 of 56
Page 28
• Sustainability Helping groups that have received large amounts of core funding for a number of years to source funding from other avenues to reduce dependency and expectation around GAP. This would give an increased opportunity for new groups / first applicants to gain funding. • Risk to previously and repeat funded organisations linked to reviewed approach highlighted that groups regularly in receipt of larger amounts of GAP funding may receive less allocation compared to previous year’s awards – therefore reducing level of service provision. Several participants stated core staffing costs should not be removed from GAP as this is a key need. • Ensuring key funding themes are reflected in applications, for example LOIP priorities and some cross cutting themes including; for example drugs & alcohol projects, addiction, tackling poverty and cost of living themed initiatives. • Encouraging partnership/joint applications from voluntary organisations highlighted as an idea to be considered re future GAP funding, particularly if place-based delivery is the focus. 2.8 Recommendation for Improvement / Redesign of GAP 2.8.1 The triangulation of data, information and opinions received from the engagement activities with multiple stakeholders is fundamental to the approach for developing robust improvements. 2.8.2 This methodology ensures the voices and concerns of all relevant parties are considered, leading to more effective and sustainable solutions. By involving various stakeholders, a more comprehensive understanding of the community's needs and aspirations for improvements can be achieved. 2.8.3 This approach fosters transparency and, when multiple parties are involved, decisions and actions are more likely to be made openly and with accountability. This transparency not only builds trust but underlines the credibility of the improvements. For the purposes of the GAP review the following triangulation plan was developed: Figure 1: Triangulation Plan for developing improvements Page 28 of 56
Page 29
2.9 Improvement recommendations: Based on all the feedback and research throughout the review, the recommendations are: 2.9.1 Recommendation 1 - Purpose of grant scheme It is recommended that the LOIP priorities currently used as a focus for local partnership activity are embedded into the GAP process and any other North Lanarkshire funding streams. The LOIP priorities for each of the nine community boards are outlined in the table 7 below and reflect crosscutting priorities of tackling poverty; digital inclusion; mental health and well-being; and young people. Table 7: - Local Outcome Improvement Plan Priorities by Town Applicants applying for funding to operate in specific areas will be required to identify the priority or priorities they plan to address from those listed for the place. Applicants looking to deliver services across North Lanarkshire can select any of the priorities but will be expected to highlight contributions towards the cross-cutting priorities. For those organisations who do not clearly link directly to a specific LOIP priority, there will still be an option for them outline priorities they connect to and other North Lanarkshire forums/committees/working groups that they are involved in to identify support for key workstreams, for example Education and Families, Community Learning and Development, partnerships hosted through health and social care and the third sector interface. 2.9.2 Recommendation 2: Who can apply? It is recommended that the eligibility includes: - • Community and Voluntary Sector organisations operating in North Lanarkshire inclusive of registered charities and Scottish Charitable Incorporated Organisations. • Eligibility of Companies Limited by Guarantee to specifically those businesses who are asset locked/not for profit with a board of directors elected by members (who predominately reside in North Lanarkshire) and have a minimum membership of 20 individuals and must have a dissolution/winding up clause Page 29 of 56
Page 30
which does not transfer any assets to private individuals or companies, and who have relevant objects related to community / social and charitable activities. • In respect to social enterprises and community interest companies, the above criteria remain applicable, but extended to request that applicants also submit a statement of any social/community investment or benefit delivered over the previous two-year period. Applications will not be considered from individuals, companies limited by guarantee with shareholders and without membership; sole traders, political groups, or organisations with political purposes; or from organisations who have failed to comply with previous funding agreements and organisations who operate unlawfully or against public policy. Specific changes/additions to those who are not eligible include; • organisations who have a closed membership (no open to all clause within governing documents) • any type of business looking for funding to run commercial activities. Any activities/initiatives must be open to community members on a low cost/no cost basis. • Subcontracting projects solely to other organisations or businesses to deliver and manage on behalf of. Partnership projects will be considered, but they should be outlined at the time of application and involve the applicant organisation for a substantial part of the project. 2.9.3 Recommendation 3 - How much can be applied for? The recommendation is for the maximum award level to be reset to £10,000. In doing so, the value reflects the typical upper limit of the award payout for most of the successful applicants (as per Table 4 in section 2.2.4) and will remain higher than many other Scottish Local Authorities. It is anticipated that the new limit will also encourage joint applications. In reaching this new limit, the impact of this adjustment has been checked against the last five years of applications using four different levels (£10,000, £15,000, £20,000 and £25,000). Nine organisations have consistently been granted more than £15,000 in successive years since 2021. In order to mitigate an immediate impact on organisations whose funding would be very significantly impacted, a taper arrangement is proposed and set out in paragraph 2.11. 2.9.4 Recommendation 4 – Types of activity that can be funded It is recommended that the council maintains current arrangements (employee costs, accommodation costs, administration costs and programme costs) with the addition of category limits put in place, as follows: Employee Costs: cannot exceed 25% of the total amount requested. Facilities/Property Costs: cannot exceed 25% of the total amount requested. Project costs: up to 100% of the upper limit This adjustment is to reflect an increased emphasis on the delivery of projects to benefit the wider community, especially new activities and initiatives which directly link to the LOIP priorities and / or other important areas of work. Page 30 of 56
Page 31
Applications cannot be made for: - • Activities that commenced prior to receipt of formal notice of award. • Items of equipment of a personal nature, or • Repairs/improvements to premises not owned by or leased to the organisation applying. • For any payment of any type to committee members, directors or trustees. 2.9.5 Recommendation 6 – Assessment It is recommended that assessing officers using appropriately updated guidance will assess the details provided in the application as follows: • Focus on dialogue around contributions the organisations will make towards the LOIPs and other important plans and locality structures to validate the linkages and offer guidance and support as may be necessary. • To ensure understanding of how the organisation will monitor and evaluate their work So that the visit can be more purposeful and focussed, the traditional diligence and governance checks will be dealt with using the introduction of a new CVS registration form, which will be updated and retained on file for a three-year period. At the end of the three-years period an updated registration will be required from the organisation. Going forward only registered and validated organisations will be eligible to apply for council funding. 2.9.6 Recommendation 7 – Scoring panels: It is proposed that scoring panels are retained but rather than the current model which is centrally co-ordinated / officer led that they will be aligned to the community planning structure with involvement from communities linked to local priorities. As the community boards continue to mature and develop, there is an opportunity to strengthen community participation in decision making. The new scoring system will be used from 25/26 reflecting the new Local Partnership Teams structure: 1. North (Cumbernauld, Kilsyth, and Northern Corridor) 2. Airdrie and Coatbridge 3. Bellshill and Motherwell 4. Shotts and Wishaw The new panels will be set-up in time for the 2025 – 2026 funding round and will consist of: • 1 manager from NLC – Community Partnership Team • 1 manager from our community planning partner agencies • Chairperson of community boards • 1 additional community board representative from each community board • All panels will be supported by a grants officer and manager The local Community Partnership Manager or Assistant Manager will chair the panel. Community Boards and community planning partners will be issued a briefing paper followed by recruitment and training ahead of the launch of the revised scheme. Page 31 of 56
Page 32
2.9.7 Recommendation 8; scoring The current GAP uses a scoring system where the lowest score is the better score and is based on consideration of how well the application directly meets the key priorities linked to TPFNL, equalities and targeting activity to areas of deprivation. Organisations can also receive a penalty of one point (per category), e.g. if the organisation has not demonstrated well enough how they target a data zone in the highest 20%, how they contribute to an equality need, or if the monitoring and assessment reports raised any issues then a penalty point is added. Therefore, even if an organisation only shows direct impact for one category and scores badly in other areas their base score remains very low even if they have penalty points added. It is recommended that a new points system is allocated whereby an upper limit of fixed points can be secured for each section of the application. Points will be allocated based on the standard and quality of answers and details provided by the applicant. The new scoring system will allow applicants to gain up to 100 points across all sections of the application. 2.9.8 Recommendation 9- Award Allocation and Decision Making: Each scoring panel will be allocated a share of funds based on a weighted formula reflecting the accumulated population for the component towns and for the level of income deprivation experienced across those towns. This formula will be applied to the budget after any assumptions and ringfenced amounts have been deducted. More details on is provided later in the report. It is recommended that the following key points will apply: • Each scoring and decision-making panel will need to produce a balanced awards forecast. They must adhere to the new upper awards limit of £10,000 whilst bearing in mind that scoring high could result in fewer full awards being made. • Award levels will be linked to scores, with 100 available points being the maximum achievable and a lower threshold being the minimum to be eligible for an award. • Due to the anticipated variance, the threshold and proposed award levels will be reviewed annually by the Community Partnership Team and provided to the panels in the form of a guidance note. • Panels will have the authority to request to lower the upper limit for their areas. This may be to enable more organisations to receive funding or because the available funds are lower than expected. The mechanism for doing this will be to raise the matter with the local community boards, and for the boards views to be sought. • Similarly, panels can seek permission from the community boards to ringfence no more than 25% of the total overall budget to use for a participatory budget exercise for delivery during the same financial year that the awards would be made. The total amount agreed, can be split at the discretion of the panel, including for a higher-level award or for smaller micro awards. The funding can also be used in support of discretionary themes or emerging trends / issues etc. • If applicant organisations are not current members of the North Lanarkshire Social Enterprise Network they will be encouraged and supported to join the Network in furtherance of the aims of the strategy. 2.10 Implementation of new approach The implementation timeline for the new approach will be as outlined in Table 8 below: - Page 32 of 56
Page 33
Table 8: Implementation timeline for new approach for the GAP Action: Date: Launch of updated Grant Awards Programme Monday 8 July 2024 Drop-in / Online Advice and Support Sessions Dates throughout July and August 2024 Application deadline Noon on Friday 30 August 2024 Assessments issued Monday 16 September 2024 Assessment visits From Monday 23 September 2 – Friday 18 October 2024 Submission of Assessment Reports As soon as possible but no later than close of business on Wednesday 23 October 2024 Scoring Panels (using new scoring processes, but coordinated centrally) From Monday 4 November to Friday 15 November 2024 Award meeting Friday 22 November 2024 Committee Paper presented to Communities Committee February 2025 Decision notices Emailed from date of committee for one week Award payouts From April 2025, as soon as possible following receipt of signed acceptance forms and other required documents. 2.11 Budget and Funding Distribution The budget for grant awards for 2023/2024 financial year was £570,955. The Playschemes Travel Passes scheme accounts for a small sum within this budget of £3,850, leaving £567,105 for distribution through grant awards. In line with the council’s strategy, savings are prepared for a three-year period from 2024/25 to 2026/27. Given the existing and forecast budget gap as a whole, it is proposed that the amount available for the Grant Award Programme is subject to a headline reduction of 15% over the three-year period, giving an ongoing revenue saving of £85,066. Because the application and assessment process is already underway for 2024/25 and it is not possible to change this if awards are to be made in a timely way, implementation is proposed for year two (2025/26). However, given also the need to taper the savings made so that some organisations are not subject to sudden financial shocks, it is proposed to make a 7.5% saving in year two followed by the full amount in year three. Nine organisations have consistently been granted more than £15,000 in successive years since 2021. In order to ensure their ability to continue to deliver their objectives Page 33 of 56
Page 34
and protect their staff, it is further proposed to utilise existing earmarked one-off resources to further taper the reduction as follows: 2025/26: one-off award of 50% of differential between £15,000 and previous £50,000 threshold (£79,000 total) for all organisations with historic grant of more than £15,000. 2026/27: one-off award of 25% of differential between £15,000 and previous £50,000 threshold (£39,000 total) for all organisations with historic grant of more than £15,000. In addition, as set out in paragraph 2.1.2, Focus Youth Bellshill has historically received up to £88,000, previously as a direct funding package but now amalgamated into the overall Grant Award Programme. To alleviate the substantial cost pressures which may be experienced as a result of the proposed changes, a further one-off grant, in addition to the arrangements set out above, of £15,000 in each of 2025/26 and 2026/27 is considered appropriate. Table 9 below shows the total revenue and one-off impact contained in these proposals. Table 9 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 Budget reduction (vs 2023/24 levels) - 7.5% 15% Budget available (£) £567,105 £524,572 £482,039 Maximum award £50,000 £15,000 £10,000 Revenue saving - £42,533 £85,066 One-off resources - £94,000 £54,000 2.11.3 Since the approval of the current GAP in August 2013, there has not been any planned division of funds across towns or community board areas. Year on year, this can lead to significant variance in terms of the proportion of funding received in each town. 2.11.4 To recognise the challenges associated with differing demographics and areas of deprivation, and to encourage joint bids in areas where similar or complementary activity takes place, a weighted formula reflecting population (85%) and deprivation experienced (15%) has been calculated. Using this formula, it is proposed to allocate funding to combinations of community board areas as follows: Table 10: Proposed % budget allocation to Community Boards Community Boards % allocation for (2025/26) onwards Airdrie & Coatbridge 30.7 Bellshill & Motherwell 28.5 North (Cumbernauld, Kilsyth & Northern Corridor) 25.5 Wishaw & Shotts 15.3 TOTAL 100% Page 34 of 56
Page 35
2.12 Ongoing implementation, Training and Capacity Building 2.12.1 Engagement to train and build the capacity of community and voluntary organisations to adapt to improvements in the GAP funding stream will be crucial to its implementation. This will be an ongoing and planned process in the longer term. Recognising the tight timescales associated with delivery for 2024/25 the Community Partnership Team will deploy all available resources and work closely with VANL to assist and advise organisations requiring help with the new application process through • delivery of drop-in events in each of the towns • online events • the offer of bespoke and 1-1 support as required 2.12.2 In parallel to this, work will start immediately to develop a robust plan to support CVS organisations for the 2025-2026 funding round which will go live at the end of August 2024. 2.12.3 The plan will involve conducting a thorough needs assessment gathering data on the current skill sets and resource of these organisations. The data gained will serve as a foundation for informing and designing a tailored capacity building programme that addresses identified gaps and aligns with the evolving requirements of the GAP funding process. This could cover a range of topics such as grant proposal writing, financial management, project evaluation and community engagement. 2.12.4 Furthermore, resources and tools, such as sample grant proposals and financial templates, will be available to support the grant application process. 2.13 Communication and ongoing stakeholder engagement Plans to communicate the changes to stakeholders, including potential applicant organisations and the wider public will commence immediately following approval. This will include: • Making contact with all organisations who have applied for GAP funding over the last five years to share application packs by email and then follow up with telephone calls • Promotion with wider community using community networks, social media and local knowledge • Organisations will be signposted to attend the drop-in information events that will be held online and in-person. • Continuously to check-in with CVS organisations and the wider community; and to monitor things closely to ensure that issues are kept to a minimum and addressed as quickly as possible. • Specific engagement with those organisations historically awarded more than £15,000 to ensure understanding of changes, availability of one-off resource and assist in planning for the future. 2.14 Future direction 2.14.1 Due to the evolving picture of grant-giving across Scotland it is important to keep pace with emerging national trends, enhancements, or adaptions. It is worth noting that the current Local Outcome Improvement Plans will expire in 2027 and a further, smaller Page 35 of 56
Page 36
review will be carried out around the same time to ensure that the alignment to local priorities can be updated accordingly. 2.14.2 Aligned to this smaller review, consideration will be given to all the resources available to communities through Community Grants and Playschemes, with proposals brought forward which ensure alignment with the LOIPs and where added value could be achieved. 2.14.3 The GAP helps CVS organisations deliver vital services and activities across most of our communities, but often residents are not aware of what is available to them. Sharing information, good practice and opportunities for partnership working should be encouraged and there is commitment to: • Ensuring that communities and organisations have easy access to information to enable them to connect with local organisation and activities they are interested in. • Publish case studies, impact statements, good news stories and photos demonstrating the values of the council’s commitment through the Grant Award Programme. • Hosting regular meetings with other funding providers with a view to collaborating and pooling of resources for common interest projects and initiatives. It is the intention to build on existing relationships and to explore the creation of a formal funding partnership for North Lanarkshire. 2.14.5 While the recommendations in this report ensure better alignment of grants with the Plan for North Lanarkshire, it is considered that it would be timely to carry out a wider examination of the relationship and dependencies between the council, the third sector and communities. This is particularly important given the budget challenges facing the council as third sector organisations are increasingly key providers of services which benefit people, the economy and the environment. 2.14.6 It is therefore considered appropriate to recommend the creation of a member officer working group to examine these issues and gather evidence with a view to making further recommendations to council in due course. While the terms of reference would be for the group to determine, it could gather evidence from key stakeholders and consider how the longer-term sustainability of the third sector in North Lanarkshire could be supported. It is envisaged that the working group will meet throughout the remainder of 2024 and make recommendations in December 2024. 2.15 Equality Impact Assessment 2.15.1 The outcome of this review also requires Equality Impact Assessments (EIAs) to be completed. The EIAs are part an integral part of the process and will be regularly updated, taking into consideration the community engagement completed so far, as well as any further engagement activity. 3. Measures of success 3.1 The Grant Award Programme is assessed as making a meaningful contribution to Local Outcomes as contained in Local Outcome Improvement Plans 4. Supporting documentation Page 36 of 56
Page 37
Appendix 1: other local authorities Appendix 2: national grant-giving bodies Appendix 3: engagement with elected members Appendix 4: engagement with monitoring officers Appendix 5: engagement with equalities groups/seldom-heard voices Appendix 6: applicants to GAP in last five years Appendix 7: engagement with CVS organisations Appendix 8: engagement with community board members Stephen Penman Chief Officer Strategic Communication & Engagement Page 37 of 56
Page 38
5. Impacts 5.1 Public Sector Equality Duty and Fairer Scotland Duty Does the report contain information that has an impact as a result of the Public Sector Equality Duty and/or Fairer Scotland Duty? Yes ☒ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? The EQIA highlights that there are a number of CVS organisations who provide services and supports to a range vulnerable groupings may potentially be impacted by the decision to change the GAP to a small grants programme. Successful organisations will receive less funding and may need to review / reduce their service offer. If Yes, has an assessment been carried out and published on the council’s website? https://www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk/your-community/equalities/equality- and-fairer-scotland-duty-impact-assessments Yes ☒ No ☐ 5.2 Financial impact Does the report contain any financial impacts? Yes ☒ No ☐ If Yes, have all relevant financial impacts been discussed and agreed with Finance? Yes ☒ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? One-off funding of £148,000 required to offset impact on community organisations. 5.3 HR policy impact Does the report contain any HR policy or procedure impacts? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, have all relevant HR impacts been discussed and agreed with People Resources? Yes ☐ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.4 Legal impact Does the report contain any legal impacts (such as general legal matters, statutory considerations (including employment law considerations), or new legislation)? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, have all relevant legal impacts been discussed and agreed with Legal and Democratic? Yes ☐ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.5 Data protection impact Does the report / project / practice contain or involve the processing of personal data? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, is the processing of this personal data likely to result in a high risk to the data subject? Yes ☐ No ☐ If Yes, has a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) been carried out and e- mailed to dataprotection@northlan.gov.uk Page 38 of 56
Page 39
Yes ☐ No ☐ 5.6 Technology / Digital impact Does the report contain information that has an impact on either technology, digital transformation, service redesign / business change processes, data management, or connectivity / broadband / Wi-Fi? Yes ☒ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? If the improvements are approved, the application process will move to an online platform. Where the impact identifies a requirement for significant technology change, has an assessment been carried out (or is scheduled to be carried out) by the Enterprise Architecture Governance Group (EAGG)? Yes ☐ No ☐ 5.7 Environmental / Carbon impact Does the report / project / practice contain information that has an impact on any environmental or carbon matters? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.8 Communications impact Does the report contain any information that has an impact on the council’s communications activities? Yes ☒ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? A communication plan will be developed to update various stakeholders, including community and voluntary sector organisations, elected members, community planning partners and staffing on the approved improvements and changes. 5.9 Risk impact Is there a risk impact? Yes ☒ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the key risks and potential impacts, highlighting where the risk(s) are assessed and recorded (e.g. Corporate or Service or Project Risk Registers), and how they are managed? Reputational damage as result of any agreed reduction in budget allocation for grant distribution. The risk will be managed through implementation of communication plan and early and ongoing discussions with impacted organisations Risk that there may be a reduction of services / projects and initiatives delivered by third sector organisations due to reduced funding being available. This will be managed by providing impacted organisations with additional guidance and support to access other external funding sources. 5.10 Armed Forces Covenant Duty Does the report require to take due regard of the Armed Forces Covenant Duty (i.e. does it relate to healthcare, housing, or education services for in-Service or ex- Service personnel, or their families, or widow(er)s)? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the provision which has been made to ensure there has been appropriate consideration of the particular needs of the Page 39 of 56
Page 40
Armed Forces community to make sure that they do not face disadvantage compared to other citizens in the provision of public services. 5.11 Children’s rights and wellbeing impact Does the report contain any information regarding any council activity, service delivery, policy, or plan that has an impact on children and young people up to the age of 18, or on a specific group of these? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact and the provision that has been made to ensure there has been appropriate consideration of the relevant Articles from the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). If Yes, has a Children’s Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment (CRWIA) been carried out? Yes ☐ No ☐ Page 40 of 56
Page 41
Appendix 1 – other local authorities West Dunbartonshire Common Good Fund Limit: Total amount of funds available each year is limited, not fixed to an upper or lower level, restricted. Dumbarton area only. Website: Dumbarton Common Good Fund | West Dunbartonshire Council (west-dunbarton.gov.uk) South Lanarkshire Gala Days and Summer Festival Grants Limit: Organisations running local gala events and summer festivals can apply for financial help. We also provide a great deal of “in kind” assistance in the run up to and during these events. At the moment we have funding available to help 30 traditional gala days. Website: Gala days and summer festival grants – South Lanarkshire Council Community Grants Limit: Only one award is made to any group in each financial year. The maximum award available for any one application is normally limited to £1,000 although, to ensure that funding is spread across as many groups as possible, standard awards tend to be lower than £1,000. Applications are assessed on their individual merits. Website: Community grants – South Lanarkshire Council Warm Welcome Limit: To support you, we have created a small grants scheme offering up to £1,000 specifically for extra costs you might incur by offering a Warm Welcome. Website: Support for groups offering a Warm Welcome – South Lanarkshire Council Fife Community £2 for £1 Community Halls Grant Scheme Limit: For every £1 fundraised (not donated), Fife Council will match £2, up to a maximum of £780 and the calculation will be done on a pro rata basis, e.g. Invoices / Receipts submitted by Hall Management Committee = £1,170 So, calculation made is £1,170 / 3 = £390 x 2 = £780 (maximum award). Website: Fife Grants | Fife Council Culture Grants Limit: Culture grants from £100 to £500 are available to groups in Fife. Website: Fife Grants | Fife Council Page 41 of 56
Page 42
Community Food Growing Limit: Grants are discretionary and only one application will be considered from a group in any financial year (1st April to 31st March). Available to Community Food Growing Groups only. Website: Fife Grants | Fife Council Fife Strategic Events Fund Limit: The Fife Events Strategic Fund can award up to £10,000 to events that have the potential to grow, generate significant economic benefits for the area, attract new visitors to Fife and increase Fife’s profile on the national or international stage. Website: Fife Grants | Fife Council Local Community Planning Limit: Projects requiring funding from the Local Community Planning Budget should meet some of the priorities of your local area’s community plan Local Community Plans. There are individual plans for each area once you click on the “Local Community Plans” link (highlighted above) then scroll to the bottom of the page “related publications”. Fife Grants | Fife Council Renfrewshire Cultural Grants Limit: The maximum grant award is £20,000 for up to 16 months of activity. Website: Grants for community and voluntary organisations – Renfrewshire Website Sustainable Communities Fund Limit: 3 tiers of funding, small awards up to £10,000; intermediate awards between £10,000 and £25,000; large awards up to £100,000. Applications for more than £100,000 may be considered Website: Grants for community and voluntary organisations – Renfrewshire Website Winter Connections Limit: We have £85,000 of funding available for the Winter Connections programme. Local community and voluntary organisations based in Renfrewshire can apply for a grant of up to £2,000. Website: Winter Connections – Renfrewshire Website Whole Family Wellbeing Fund Limit: There will be access to two funds; one for smaller grassroot projects; one for scaling up implementation of evidenced based parenting support; and one for projects focusing on step change. Organisations can make joint applications however can only apply for one of the two funds. Fund 1 – Community Grassroots: maximum of £50,000 with bids being accepted between £500 - £5,000 Fund 2 – Community Step-Change: maximum of £200,000 with bids being accepted up to £50,000 Website: Whole Family Wellbeing Fund – Renfrewshire Website East Ayrshire Community Grants Limit: Differing levels of funding caps, overall maximum £3,000 Website: Community grants to local organisations · East Ayrshire Council (east-ayrshire.gov.uk) North Ayrshire Community Benefit Fund Page 42 of 56
Page 43
Limit: £1,000 - £4,000 Website: Apply for community funding (north-ayrshire.gov.uk) Glasgow City Glasgow Communities Fund Limit: £20,000 - £200,000 Website: Streamlined grant scheme application process given green light – Glasgow City Council Page 43 of 56
Page 44
Appendix 2 – national bodies National Lottery Awards for All Limit: £300 to £10,000 – changes to grant will apply on 15 November 2023 – groups can now apply for up to £20,000 and have project funded for up to two years. Website: National Lottery Awards for All Scotland | The National Lottery Community Fund (tnlcommunityfund.org.uk) Community Led Limit: £10,001 to £15,0000 Website: Community Led | The National Lottery Community Fund (tnlcommunityfund.org.uk) Young Start Limit: £10,001 to £100,000 Website: Young Start | The National Lottery Community Fund (tnlcommunityfund.org.uk) Scottish Land Fund Limit: £5,000 to £1,000,000 Website: Scottish Land Fund | The National Lottery Community Fund (tnlcommunityfund.org.uk) Improving Lives Limit: £10,001 to £200,000 Website: Improving Lives | The National Lottery Community Fund (tnlcommunityfund.org.uk) Cost of Living Support Scotland Limit: £10,001 to £75,000 Website: Cost-of-Living Support Scotland | The National Lottery Community Fund (tnlcommunityfund.org.uk) Robertson Trust Wee Grants Limit: £2,000 for one year only Website: Wee Grants | The Robertson Trust Large Grants Limit: £50,000 for up to 5 years Website: Large Grants | The Robertson Trust Foundation Scotland Available Funding Limit: Various Funding Programmes – search bar to explore – funding list link on website Website: Available Funds | Foundation Scotland Page 44 of 56
Page 45
Appendix 3 Overview of Engagement with Elected members Engagement with elected members (survey and focus group session) Elected members were invited to complete a short SurveyMonkey questionnaire focussing on their own views of the GAP and potential improvements that could be made. The survey was completed by 24 councillors giving a participation rate of 31%. Some of the improvement suggestions from this exercise include: - • Introduction of short videos and case studies highlighting successful applicants • Provide a list of grants and how to apply and provide advice and support • Maximise the opportunities for new organisations to receive grant funding • Improve marketing and advertising for all funding opportunities • Promote and raise awareness of funding to organisations that have the potential to become more involved • Clearer guidance / step-by-step process, eligibility, and interlinked opportunities in a visual way • Increase the length of time available for organisations to submit applications • Links to Local Outcome Improvement Plans (LOIPs) • Increase grant limits and capacities through external funding • Introduce new funding themes, such as: - support for emergencies, redevelopment grants to help regenerate places, plots of land and buildings, funding for community boards to support voluntary organisations, small start-up grants, community council funding, and funding for rural development As part of the SurveyMonkey, councillors were asked if they would be interested in participating in a focus group session. 16 of whom responded positively. This session was arranged for Monday 21 August 2023 and 6 councillors attended. The 2 hours session provided councillors with an opportunity to find out more about the purpose of the grants review, the various project stages and actions taken. Important data and information and an overview of the key feedback from the various engagement activities. (Appendix 6 contains a copy of the PowerPoint presented at the session). The information presented aimed to provide elected members with fuller information to help explain the rationale for the emerging recommendations. While still ensuring that members had the opportunity to feed into the decision-making process. Following this, councillors were able to ask questions, provide comments and observations and feed-in any other improvement ideas. The following points were noted: - Page 45 of 56
Page 46
• If alignment towards the Local Outcome Improvement Plans is agreed, then there will be a need to offer appropriate guidance and support. • Important to manage expectations of organisations and ensure transparency in approach to decision making • As budgets become tighter, it will be important to avoid duplication of funding for similar activities unless it is evidenced by need • Consideration of implementing longer term funding term, for example over a 3-to-5-year period. Some discussion that 5 years may be too long • Concerns raised for implementation of a commissioning model • Consideration of the Glasgow model and of the lessons / findings from the review they have completed in recent years • Important to keep the funding agile and flexible • Important to link funding to strategic objectives • Consider Glasgow model which pivots around geographical equity. Appendix 4 Engagement with Monitoring officers Page 46 of 56
Page 47
Overview of feedback from monitoring officers 57 officers who have been involved in assessing and monitoring the GAP over the last five years were invited to complete a short SurveyMonkey questionnaire (Appendix 7 provides a copy of the questionnaire that was used) to seek their views regarding potential improvement to GAP and to the monitoring and assessment process. 30 respondents completed the survey. Giving an participation rate of 52.6%. Most of the respondents were positive about the process and their role within it. However, it was clear that training and support has been absent in recent years, with most agreeing that training would be useful to them. The top response for training options include: - Guidance on how an application can be used to evidence links to council priorities; preparing and planning for monitoring and assessment visits, conducting assessment and monitoring meetings, and report writing. 2.4.6 Improvement suggestions received from this stakeholder group include: - • Not all groups and organisations are within one community board area. Some are authority wide. Any changes require to offer a solution to reflect this. • More notice before we launch new grant initiative as sometime the community knows about them before the officers. • I think we should have a tiered approach to grant funding, with application & monitoring processes to suit level of funding. • Organisations who qualify could have minimum 3 years funding to ensure stability with agreement to reduce any award after this period which should have provided opportunity to source other funds. • It would be useful if we could have case studies of current and previous good examples of grant assessment and monitoring reporting processes. • A review of the application form is overdue • I find the monitoring process repetitive, and the 6- and 12-months visits seem to come around very quickly, and often I feel I’m going over the same type of questions with the organisation. They are a well-functioning organisation, and continue with similar work, so there is often not much to update from the last reports. • The funding is vital for North Lanarkshire organisations. However, with the decrease in allocation it is vital that support is provided and targeted where gaps in provision and service delivery have been evidenced and identified and in relation to LOIP priorities. 2.4.7 Similarly, monitoring and assessing officers agreed that it would be useful to: - • Move to an on-line application process • Improve the guidance notes with additional explanations/clarification points • Offer more time to submit applications • Limit the total amount of grant funding that any one organisation can receive • Allocate funding to community board areas Appendix 5 Page 47 of 56
Page 48
Engagement with Equalities Groups/Seldom Heard Voices Notes from Professional Dialogue Sessions with Organisations who support or offer services to Seldom Heard Voices Overview of feedback from engagement with Equalities Groups/Seldom Heard Voices The following organisations participated in research: - • Airdrie & Coatbridge Islamic Centre • North Lanarkshire Muslim Women and Family Alliance • Lanarkshire Ethnic Minority Action Group • North Lanarkshire Disability Access Panel • Ethnic Minority Law Centre • Scottish Refugee Council • African Collaborative • Deaf Services Lanarkshire Several ideas for improvements emerged from discussions, including: - • Consideration of additional capacity building support • Help seldom heard voices / organisations to apply for funding • Consideration of commissioning or service level agreements when the advocacy / support organisation is providing vital or statutory services on behalf of the council • Fairer allocation of funding for services rendered • Consideration of a separate funding stream for equalities work Page 48 of 56
Page 49
APPENDIX 6 Organisations applying for GAP over the last 5 years 1. Abronhill Regeneration Forum 2. African Collaboration Group 3. Auchinloch Community Council 4. Banton & Kelvinhead Community Centre Association 5. Bazooka Arts 6. Bear Necessities 7. Bellshill & Mossend YMCA 8. Carbrain Boys Club 9. Cliftonville & Coatdyke Community Group 10. Cool School Uniforms 11. Craigneuk Community Sports Trust 12. Craigneuk Lifelong Learning Association 13. Cruse Bereavement Care Scotland 14. Cumbernauld & Kilsyth Care 15. Cumbernauld Action on Care of the Elderly 16. Cumbernauld Free Church of Scotland 17. Cumbernauld Poverty Action 18. Cumbernauld Resilience 19. Cumbernauld YMCA 20. Deaf Services Lanarkshire 21. Deafblind Scotland 22. Elutheria Ltd (The Safety Zone) 23. Enable Scotland 24. Ethnic Minorities Law Centre 25. Focus Youth Project 26. Friends of Airdrie and Coatbridge Islamic Centre 27. Friends of Cumbernauld Care Home 28. Garrion People Housing Co-op 29. Getting Better Together – Shotts Healthy Living Centre 30. Glenboig Development Trust 31. Glencassels Development Project 32. Jack and Jill Parent Support Group 33. Jackson Youth Club 34. Kanokwai Judo Club 35. Kilsyth Old People’s Welfare Committee 36. Kirkshaws Neighbourhood Centre 37. LAMH Recycle Ltd 38. Lanarkshire Cancer Care Trust 39. Lanarkshire Community Food and Health Partnership 40. Lanarkshire Deaf Club 41. Lanarkshire Rape Crisis 42. Lead Scotland 43. MADE 4U in ML2 44. Moira Anderson Foundation 45. Nifty Fifties 46. North Lanarkshire Disability Access Panel 47. North Lanarkshire Muslim Women and Family Alliance 48. NSPCC Scotland 49. One Parent Families Scotland 50. Palacerigg Animal Park CIC 51. Palacerigg Community Trust 52. PALS (Play and Learning Support) 53. Parent Action for Safe Play 54. Parkinson’s Self-Help Group (North Lanarkshire) 55. Phew respite Scotland 56. Ponies Help Children 57. Radio Clyde Cash for Kids 58. Reeltime Music Page 49 of 56
Page 50
59. Scottish Refugee Council 60. Shotts Salvation Army 61. SNAPS (Special Needs and Parents Supports) 62. Spina Bifida Hydrocephalus Scotland 63. St Andrews Hospice (North Lanarkshire) 64. St Patricks Furniture Project 65. Strathcarron hospice 66. The Haven Caring counselling Communication Centre 67. The Health and Wellness Hub 68. The Indigo Childcare Group 69. The Miracle Foundation 70. Thorniewood Community Council 71. Utheo Ltd 72. Venture Scotland 73. Victim Support Scotland 74. Viewpark Conservation Group 75. Viewpark Family Centre Association 76. VIP Arts & Sports Academy 77. Wishaw Young Men’s Christian Association 78. Forgewood Housing Association 79. Lanarkshire Muslim Welfare Society 80. Motherwell Baptist Church Community Project 81. Parkinsons Self Help Group (Motherwell) 82. The Well Foundation 83. Relationships Scotland – Lanarkshire Couple Counselling 84. Scottish Jewish Heritage Centre 85. St Aidan’s Youth Club (Wishaw) 86. The Spark (Scottish Marriage Care) 87. Make and Create Arts 88. Scottish Waterways Trust 89. Voice of Experience Forum 90. Lanarkshire Women’s Group 91. Landed Peer Education Service 92. Petal Support LTD 93. Simon Community Scotland 94. Terrence Higgins Trust 95. The Conservation Volunteers 96. Windmills Lanarkshire LTD Page 50 of 56
Page 51
Appendix 7 Feedback from engagement with CVS Organisations Overview of feedback from CVS engagement 64 organisations took part in the online survey. Giving a participation rate of 67%. The questionnaire was arranged into 8 sections, with a total of 34 questions. The main purpose of the focus group sessions was to share and discuss key highlights from the CVS questionnaire, to expand on a crucial part of the engagement was with the CVS organisations who apply for funding from the GAP. The starting point for research was to collate a list of all applicants over the last 5 years. Of which there was 96 unique organisations. (Please refer to Appendix 6 for the list) The key improvement findings from the CVS questionnaire The questionnaire presented several improvement ideas and asked participants to confirm if they would find them useful. The top responses deemed to be useful are present in Table 5 below: - Table 5: Top 5 Improvement suggestions considered useful by respondents Suggestions % of respondents who would consider this useful 1.Offering pre-application advice and support 75% 2. describing more clearly who is eligible to apply for grant funding 56% 3. Improving the guidance notes with additional explanations and clarification points 53% 4. Move to an online application process 53% 5. Allocating funding amount to every town based on population size and deprivation 44% 5 (joint). consider the use of a commissioning/ service level agreements model 44% Other improvement suggestions Ideas for other funding themes: Organisations were asked to provide ideas for new funding themes. The suggestions include: - • Family support • funding to deliver school holiday activities for ASN children • community engagement • funding for recycling and re-use projects • amateur sports • mental health and well-being support Page 51 of 56
Page 52
• continue with warm spaces funding and other similar hub tape projects focusing on reducing isolation Improvements to application process / form and guidance notes: Improvements to the current guidance notes were mentioned by almost 25% of respondents. (The current guidance notes can be accessed here). Some of the suggestions for this include: - • Include information on the decision-making process • Share information on the points system • Provide guidance on the evidence that you hope to see. • Provide details on word count required for each question • Describe more clearly who is eligible to apply for GAP funding Similarly, there was consistent mention of the need to improve the application process, particularly the application form. (The current application form can be access here). Other suggestions include: - • Offer pre-application support and advice • Consider moving to a more straightforward application form, with focus on simplifying the sections on equalities, the linkages to high level ambitions statements, and the introduction of prompt questions to enhance the details presented under the proposed activities section • Move to an online application • General need to review method of checking organisational contributions regarding the Equality Act 2010. • Turnaround time for informing organisations of the outcome could be quicker • Consider multi-awards per project rather than per organisation Monitoring Process: Several suggestions from the CVS organisations relating to improvements for the monitoring process, is provide below: - • Whilst many organisations report the current monitoring process to be useful / very useful. There is a sense from comments that it would be better if it adjusted to be proportionate to the level of award given, and more focussed on outcomes and impacts. • Chang to an end of project report, with case studies, testimonies, or impact statements. • Start to ask for details of any match funding brought in because of the GAP awards • Post success stories and impacts on the North Lanarkshire Council website • Monitoring officers could check-in with organisations more frequently by telephone or by video call and record/log updates. Then the organisation could supply an update report (or similar) at the end of the funding period. General Improvements: CVS respondents provided details of a few other general improvements for GAP. This includes: - • Providing grants for longer periods of time. • Consider setting a range of fixed amounts for grants applications and awards. For example, £5,000, £10,000, £15,000 rather than current potluck award amounts. A sense of fairer distribution would be beneficial. • Providing feedback (particularly for unsuccessful applicants) either in the decision letter or by telephone. • Trying to ensure equity of funding allocation across different demographics within communities Page 52 of 56
Page 53
• Helping groups that have been receiving large amounts of core funding for a number of years to source funding from other avenues, this would give an increased opportunity for new groups / first applicants to gain funding Improvements relating to overall experience: Several respondents provided comments on improvements which would impact positively on their overall experience. Including: - • The introduction of a slimline version of the application to reflect that most organisation receive much lower awards compared to what was requested. • More assistance • Online application • Longer funding terms e.g., 2 to 3 years • Add details of scoring system into the guidance notes • Improve monitoring, by turning the exercise into an online survey or allow organisation to provide their own reports. CVS focus group: Following on from the CVS questionnaire, interested organisations were invited to participate in a focus group session. Two sessions were arranged. Table 6 below provides the details: - Table 6: Focus Groups Sessions with CVS organisations Date: Format: Number of participants: Number of organisations represented: Monday 10 July 2023 In-person 15 13 Wednesday 13 July 2023 Online 17 18 Totals: 32 31 Generally, the participants of the focus groups reinforced the improvement from the CVS questionnaire, and which are detailed in the previous section of the report. It is of interest to note that there remains a strong sense about the benefits of considering linkages to the LOIPs came through again. Further, the following additional comments and suggestions were contributed: - • Other ideas for funding themes include, drugs & alcohol projects, addiction, tackling poverty and cost of living themed initiatives. • Ensure GAP funds distributed to support community-based adult learning is equal to youth- based funded provision • Targeting specific locations/places within Community Board areas. • Governance and diligence checks should be completed at pre-application stage rather than during assessment visits. • Consider types of accessibility support for people when completing applications. For example, verbal electronic communication/assistive technology aids to help people with sight and/or hearing issues. • Better manage expectations regarding application guidance to avoid disappointment when groups apply for funding and receive less. Tiered process would be fairer, for example, by providing a smaller grants programme and a capped larger programme. • Access previous applications for updating, rather than start process from scratch each time. Page 53 of 56
Page 54
• Risk highlighted that groups regularly in receipt of larger amounts of GAP funding may receive less allocation compared to previous year’s awards – therefore reducing level of service provision. • Also raised that groups applying for smaller funding amounts may be disadvantaged by a commissioning model. • Several participants stated core staffing costs should not be removed from GAP • Increased partnership/joint applications from voluntary organisations highlighted as an idea to be considered re future GAP funding, particularly if place-based delivery is commissioned. Page 54 of 56
Page 55
Appendix 8 Engagement with Community Board members Community Board were provided with an opportunity to complete a survey promoted via Community Matters. Many CVS organisations are members of the community boards and so were advised not to complete a further survey. The target for this engagement activity was individual members of the board and organisations who haven’t applied for GAP funding. 20 responses were received. 18 from organisations and 2 from individual residents. From this engagement exercise, 19 respondents were award of the GAP. This along with the 94 applications in the last 5 years, can be taken a a positive indication of our CVS organisations generally being aware of GAP even though some choose not to apply. Table 6: Top 5 Improvement suggestions considered useful by respondents Suggestions % of respondents who would consider this useful 1.Offering pre-application advice and support 95% 2. If every town has a set amount of funding to be allocated based on population size and deprivation 75% 3. Describe more clearly who is eligible to apply for grant funding 70% 3. (joint) Move to an online application process 70% 4. Improve the guidance notes with additional explanations/clarification points 55% 5. Introduce an upper limit on the total amount of grant funding that any one organisation can receive 50% This has commonalities with the results from the CVS survey listed in Table 5 above. With most of the tops answer matching (although in different rankings). The top suggestion for both being – offering pre- application advice and support. In terms of assistance that could be offered, the respondents indicate the following: - • Face-to-face chat. • Provide support with the application process and writing. • Allocate a specific grant officer. • Ensure grant information is sent to the appropriate community groups well in advance of submission date. In terms of suggestions for new funding themes. Respondents suggested: - • Health and Wellness • Digital • Partnership projects • Charities and smaller groups • Local education for the groups. • Start of costs (including staffing) for organisations in their infancy In terms of other ideas for improving GAP, the community board members suggested the following: - • Public information / breakdown on how much funding is awarded and to Page 55 of 56
Page 56
whom, how is this decided and for what areas etc? • More flexible approach to funding criteria and closing dates. • More allocations of funding to smaller organisations. • A helpline and support for unsuccessful applications. • More direct funding to grass root community organisations. Page 56 of 56