Safer Stronger Communities Select Committee Agenda Main Grants Programme Appendix 2
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Public Document Pack Safer Stronger Communities Select Committee Agenda Main Grants Programme Appendix 2 Monday, 20 April 2015 7.00 pm , Committee Room 2 - Civic Suite Civic Suite Lewisham Town Hall London SE6 4RU For more information contact: Timothy Andrew (02083147916) Part 1 Item Page s 6. Main grant programme funding 1 - 500 Members of the public are welcome to attend committee meetings. However, occasionally, committees may have to consider some business in private. Copies of agendas, minutes and reports are available on request in Braille, in large print, on audio tape, on computer disk or in other languages. Safer Stronger Communities Select Committee Members Members of the committee, listed below, are summoned to attend the meeting to be held on Monday, 20 April 2015. Barry Quirk, Chief Executive Thursday, 9 April 2015 Councillor Pauline Morrison (Chair) Councillor David Michael (Vice-Chair) Councillor Andre Bourne Councillor Brenda Dacres Councillor Colin Elliott Councillor Alicia Kennedy Councillor Pat Raven Councillor Luke Sorba Councillor Paul Upex Councillor James-J Walsh Councillor Alan Hall (ex-Officio) Councillor Gareth Siddorn (ex-Officio) Agenda Item 6 Lewisham Main Grants 2015-18 Assessment Form Name of organisation: 60UPCIC Current Main Grants recipient: NO Themes applied to: CTC Documents supplied: NO NONE SUPPLIED Partner Profile Assessment Criteria Score Comments Local Weak The local intelligence is general and doesn’t give statistical Intelligence breakdown of the needs in the ward it works in. There is a lack of information regarding the needs of users and non-users in the area. Transformation Weak The applicati on doesn’t show how it will transform services. It talks about monitoring as opposed to transformation. Collaboration Weak In terms of partnership working, there is little evidence of working in the defined area or how those partnerships benefit the ward and the users. Resources Weak There are no available reserves -this organisation would be reliant on the main grant Shared Values Satisfactory There are currently no staff members, however they are committed to the London Living Wage Quality and Weak There is a basic understanding in this area. I didn’t get a sense effectiveness of a track record of delivering of delivery Partner Profile Summary: Overall the application is weak. The organisation would be better applying for a smaller grant until it is more established. Page 1 Theme Assessment Theme: Communities that Care 2d Provision for Vulnerable Adults Score: Satisfactory Comments : Limited information on the programme and how it would work other than a list of activities and some acknowledgment of the need to fundraise to cover some of the costs. Activities include Over 60's Friday Friendship Club, seated exercise, arts and crafts, occasional day trips, quizzes and other groups and events to reduce social isolation. Amount Applied For: £13,923 Recommended Funding: £0 Reasons for Recommendation: Limited information in both the partner profile and the outline of the activity. Other applications covering similar areas are much stronger. Special Conditions: Page 2 Equalities Impact Assessment: Please list the protected characteristic groups that the application intended to benefit. PROTECTED CHARACTERISTIC PLEASE TICK √ FURTHER DETAIL Age √ Primarily over 60s but when partnership working over 50s or 55s Disability Gender Gender reassignment Marriage & civil partnership Pregnancy & maternity Race Religion & belief Sexual orientation Does the application aim to benefit one specific community? If so please give details. The above equalities table is taken directly from the submitted application form. Primarily over 60s but when partnership working over 50s or 55s Overall Equality Impact of Funding Recommendation: LOW Comments and mitigation: Low – other local services are supporting this client group. Page 3 This page is intentionally left blank Page 4 Lewisham Main Grants 2015-18 Assessment Form Name of organisation: 170 Centre Current Main Grants recipient: YES Themes applied to: Employment and training consortium (separate application for ATA and CTC) Documents supplied: YES Partner Profile Assessment Criteria Score Comments Local Good There is also a good understanding of the local area, including Intelligence statistical data. They also demonstrate a good understanding of the needs of non-users. Transformation Excellent Excellent demonstration of their ability to undertake transformation. They have a good track record with a number of plans for the future. Collaboration Excellent This organisation has over 40 years of experience of collaborativ e working arrangements. They have an excellent track record of partnership working with evidence of how they benefit their users. Resources Good They have been funded by Lewisham for over 20 years. They have been successful in obtaining a continuation grant from Lambeth and BBC children in need funding until 2017. Thus they have a diverse range of funding streams (6 different funders). The bulk of funding is restricted and they are currently investigating new ways of covering costs. Shared Values Excellent The organisation is committed to paying the living wage to staff. Good environmental sustainability policy and excellent demonstration of shared values across the protected characteristics Quality and Good Good demonstration of effectiveness – good monitoring system. effectiveness 170 has a Quality Assurance Policy and is a member of several umbrella organisations. Partner Profile Summary: Overall this is an excellent partner profile. The 170 Centre demonstrate a clear understanding of users’ needs and have systems in place to collate information to improve the service, and identify any problems. They have clearly outlined their plans for the future and have a number of funding streams that complement the grant funding. Page 5 Theme Assessment Theme: Communities that Care 2d Provision for Vulnerable Adults Score: Weak/ Satisfactory Comments: The application is light on detail and uses a number of unexplained acronyms. The application lists a range of activity that seems worthwhile e.g. basic IT support, job coaching and placements but without providing the necessary context regarding entry points, specific partnership working relating to the programme or onward referrals. The outcomes section provides some of the necessary detail but the key milestones do not give confidence that these will be achieved. There is also no direct reference to the application criteria with the programme of activity section. Employment support was removed from the Grants criteria following a three month public consultation in late 2014. The below passage is take from the report outlining the outcome of the consultation and the new grants criteria which was agreed by Lewisham’s Mayor and Cabinet on 12 November 2014: In relation to employment and skills, the level of funding from the existing main grants programme has been minimal in comparison to other funders. It is felt that this work is better funded through locally held Job Centre Plus budgets. Overall the partner profile is strong for this application and funding for the 170 Centre has been recommended under another theme of the Grants Programme but the proposed activity does not meet the application criteria for this round of grants. Amount Applied For: £60,025 Recommended Funding: £0 Reasons for Recommendation: The bid lacks sufficient detail and reference to the application criteria which, in any event, does not cover employment services. A similar type of service is soon to be commissioned across Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham which may be a more suitable funding source for this consortium: http://publicservicetransformation.org/media-zone/news/647-commissioning-of-a-provider-for- lambeth-lewisham-and-southwark-employment-support-service Special Conditions: NA Page 6 Equalities Impact Assessment: Please list the protected characteristic groups that the application intended to benefit. PROTECTED CHARACTERISTIC PLEASE TICK √ FURTHER DETAIL Age √ Up to working age Disability √ All those requiring basic skills support Gender √ All those requiring basic skills support Gender reassignment √ All those requiring basic skills support Marriage & civil partnership √ All those requiring basic skills support Pregnancy & maternity √ All those requiring basic skills support Race √ All those requiring basic skills support Religion & belief √ All those requiring basic skills support Sexual orientation √ All those requiring basic skills support Does the application aim to benefit one specific community? If so please give details. The above equalities table is taken directly from the submitted application form The application does not seek to benefit one particular community. Overall Equality Impact of Funding Recommendation: LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH Comments and mitigation: Low – as mentioned above similar support services of this type are soon to be commissioned across Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham. Modest reduction in current level of funding Page 7 This page is intentionally left blank Page 8 Lewisham Main Grants 2015-18 Assessment Form Section 1 – Applicant details Name of organisation: 170 Community Project Current Main Grants recipient: YES Themes applied to: ATA and CTC (Also separate application for employment and training) Documents supplied: YES Section 2 - Partner Profile Assessment Criteria Score Comments Local Excellent Long established organisation in Lewisham that provides Intelligence evidence of a thorough understanding