|
Bath & North East Somerset Council | |||
|
Planing, Transportation and Environment Committee |
AGENDA | |
MEETING DATE: |
25th January 2001 | ||
REPORT AUTHOR: |
Cherrill Copperwheat, Environmental Practice Manager | ||
RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: |
David Davies, Head of Planning Services and Steve Howell, Head of Transportation, Access and Waste Management Services | ||
TITLE: |
|||
WARD: |
All | ||
BACKGROUND PAPERS: Minutes of P,T&E Committee January 2000. Voluntary Sector Funding Manual. | |||
AN OPEN PUBLIC ITEM | |||
1 SUMMARY
1.1 This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Member/Officer Working Party in respect of funding provided by P,T&E Committee to the voluntary sector for Heritage and Environment and Community Transport. The report of the Working Party has been placed in the Members' rooms. A summary is attached to this report as Appendix 1.
2 RECOMMENDATION
That Committee:
2.1 notes the report of the Working Party and accepts the main conclusions as set out in 6a) to 6i) of the Summary of the Working Party's Report (Appendix1 to this report).
2.2 agrees in principle to continue to support and fund voluntary sector activity related to Heritage and Environment initiatives and in the provision of Community Transport;
2.3 agrees the revised objectives and scope (criteria) for Heritage and Environment funding as set out in Appendix 2 to this report, to apply from April 2002 onwards;
2.4 reaffirms the purpose and criteria of funding Community Transport as set out in Appendix 3 to this report and agrees the principle of widely interpreting the definition of mobility included in this criteria in the application of funding for future years;
2.5 agrees the principle behind options 6i(ii) for consideration as part of the budget-making process for 2002/3;
2.6 Agrees options 6i(iii), and 6i(iv) of the Summary of the Working Party's Report (Appendix 1 to this report);
2.7 decides if it wishes to pursue option 6i(v) as set out in the Summary of the Working Party's Report (Appendix 1 to this report).
3 RESOURCE AND CORPORATE POLICY IMPLICATIONS (WHERE NECESSARY, THE VIEWS OF THE COUNCIL'S STATUTORY OFFICERS ARE REFLECTED IN THE COMMENTS BELOW)
3.1 Financial: The main conclusions and recommendations in general include the principle of increasing the funding available to voluntary sector organisations. It is anticipated that there will be increased demand for Community Transport funding as a result of applying the current criteria more widely and that this increase could be significant. Currently the Financial Plan includes additional funding for transport in 2002/2003, although the exact areas of expenditure have yet to be decided. There may be scope to allocate some of this funding to increase expenditure on Community Transport, although the results of the current Best Value Review of transport services will influence this decision.
It is also anticipated that the demand for Heritage and Environment funding will continue to increase, in particular if a more proactive approach to publicising the funding is adopted. Any increased funding for Heritage and Environment activities can be achieved only through cuts in others services.
The legal power by which the funding to voluntary sector organisations is possible is covered by Section 137 of the Local Government Act (1972), which allows for expenditure in the interest of the local area and which will bring direct benefit to the area. It allows authorities to spend money on services and areas of activity where there is no specific duty or power. It is a discretionary power and there is an annual financial limit on expenditure. The limit is monitored by the council's Financial Services and is currently well below the maximum allowed.
It should be noted, however, that the provision of funding to help improve facilities and operation of services relating to Community Transport is a power given to the authority under Section 106(2) of the Transport Act 1985 and increases in this area are unlikely to affect S137 expenditure.
3.2 Staffing: There are no staffing implications.
3.3 Equalities: The issue of equality of access to the voluntary sector funding scheme(s) was a priority consideration of the Working Party. It was recognised that the funding was part of the corporate scheme, which itself has been set up with equality issues high on the agenda. The recommendations of the Working Party embrace equality of access issues and seek to improve on the existing scheme (s). However, Members should be aware that the Voluntary Sector Officer Liaison Group is currently monitoring all funding schemes corporately. This is to assess whether patterns of funding are discriminating against black and other ethnic minority groups in B&NES and to establish any action is necessary to further review prioritise and patterns of funding.
3.4 Economic: Providing funding for voluntary sector organisations for Heritage and Environment and Community Transport generates activity which can support the local economy; can create learning and employment opportunities; and can attract funds from a variety of sources into the area.
3.5 Environment: The voluntary sector scheme specifically aims to enhance the environment and encourages local people to take an active part in learning more about and caring for their local environment. The Community Transport Scheme helps to address the environmental effects of traffic whilst at the same time cater for the mobility impaired.
3.6 Council Wide Impacts: The provision of Community Transport has potential benefits to Social Services, Education Services and the Health Authority. Potentially it could also be developed to assist with youth and rural mobility issues.
4 BACKGROUND AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK
4.1 At its January 2000 meeting the P,T&E Committee resolved to set up a Working Party to review the scheme for determining the funding allocations to voluntary sector organisations and to report its findings to the November Committee. In October 2000, the Working Party informed Spokespersons that the report would not be ready until January.
4.2 The funding scheme operated by P,T&E Committee is part of the Corporate Voluntary Sector Funding Scheme. P,T&E Committee funds organisations that provide Community Transport or undertake Heritage and Environment projects and initiatives.
4.3 The Working Party's report sets out the background and legal framework to the voluntary sector funding scheme.
5 WORKING PARTY REPORT
5.1 A full copy of the Working Party's report has been placed in Members' rooms. A summary is attached as Appendix 1 to this report.
5.2 The Working Party report sets out the background and terms of reference of the Working Party and details of the current schemes. It then goes on to consider:
· Whether or not the funding schemes should be continued (including considering if P,T&E the most appropriate Committee)
· If so, whether or not the schemes should be changed (in purpose; in what is funded; in size).
· How any proposed changes could be achieved (including recommendations and options)
5.3 Appendix 1 of this report sets out the main conclusions of the Working Party (Points 6a to 6h) and options to be considered (Point 6i). This report asks Committee to accept the conclusions and to consider options 6i (ii to v). Committee is asked to consider option 6i (i) as part of another, separate report on this agenda (Voluntary Sector Grant Applications 2001/2002).
5.4 Appendix 2 sets out the revised objectives and criteria to be agreed for Heritage and Environment funding. Appendix 3 sets out the current criteria and definition of `mobility impairment' used for funding community transport, which the Committee is asked to reaffirm on the basis that the definition is applied fully.
6 CONSULTATION
6.1 This report has not been sent to Trades Unions because there are no staffing implications.
Document4
This version was printed 05-Jan-01 10:24
1 The Working Party considered the current funding to voluntary sector organisations from the P,T&E Committee. This includes funding schemes for
a) Heritage and Environment; and
b) Community Transport
These schemes differ from one another in a number of aspects, including criteria and methods of allocation. This is partly due to the nature of the activities being funded, but some of it is historical practice. The schemes are operated in accordance with corporate procedures for voluntary sector funding.
2 The current (2000/2001) total budget for this funding is £78,343, which is split
between the TAWM Services for Community Transport (£57,947) and Planning Services for Heritage and Environment (£20,396). The budget is fully allocated each year. Applications for funding are greater than the budget available, particularly for Heritage and the Environment.
3 The Working Party considered the schemes under the following main headings:
· The dimensions and details of the current schemes.
· Whether or not the scheme should be continued (including consideration of the appropriateness of Heritage funding to P,T&E Committee ); and if so,
· Whether or not the scheme should be changed:
· Should the purpose of the funding be changed?
· What should the schemes fund?
· Should the schemes be changed in size?
· How any proposed changes could be achieved (options).
4 The issue of equality of access to the funding was of particular concern to the Working Party. The schemes are widely publicised as part of the corporate mechanism for voluntary sector funding, but there was concern that this was not as inclusive as it could be and perhaps a more proactive or imaginative approach should be adopted. This would cost more, reducing funds available to the voluntary sector, and with current budget levels would raise expectations that could not be met. There is a need therefore to either increase resources to help address this or to establish a better mechanism of targeting and /or evaluation and prioritising of applications.
5 Furthermore, the Working Party was concerned by the relatively narrow interpretation of the criteria adopted for the allocation of funds to community transport. The purpose of the funding is to support the provision of community for the `mobility impaired'. The definition of `mobility impaired' covers people with difficulties for a wide range of reasons, including for example mothers with young children. However, the funding is applied currently only to providers of transport for the elderly and physically disabled. This is for historical reasons based on the practices of the former local authorities in the area. The Working Party feels that this should be more widely applied, as intended by the definition, but recognises the financial implications of this.
6 The main conclusions of the Working Party are:
a) the benefits of funding the voluntary sector were many and far outweighed the disadvantages. Therefore, funding should be continued in principle.
b) the two main areas of funding i.e. Heritage and Environment and Community Transport, were appropriate. The voluntary sector is a key deliverer of the Committee's service objectives in these areas. The aspects of `heritage' funded under the schemes were in alignment with the responsibilities of P,T&E Committee (they did not for example duplicate funding provided by CCL Committee).
c) the objectives of Heritage and Environment) funding should be revised for greater clarity and a proposed revision is recommended (see Appendix 2 of the January 2001 report to P,T&E Committee).
d) the scope of Heritage and Environment funding should be more clearly defined and a proposed revision is recommended (see Appendix 2 of the January 2000 report to P,T&E Committee).
e) the objective of and criteria for Community Transport funding should be more widely interpreted in its application to ensure full social inclusion and take account of young people `s needs. It should also develop mechanisms for some schemes for longer term funding and SLA-type approaches.
f) mechanisms to provide longer term funding for some schemes (mainly Community Transport and core-funding for B&NES-wide environmental and heritage groups) should be worked up by officers and where appropriate Service Level Agreement-type approaches developed.
g) that, in principle, funding for voluntary sector activity should be increased. However, the difficulties of doing this without affecting other services are recognised.
h) maintaining the status quo is not acceptable.
i) that the following options should be considered by committee:
i) increase budget to meet need. This is an option that might be adopted in the short term but would be subject to cuts in other service areas and could not be sustained.
ii) recognise the role of Community Transport in satisfying transport needs within the B&NES area. The current Best Value review of transport will assist with this. Consider the use of planned increases in funding for transport within the Financial Plan to also support community-based transport ventures in the future (2002/3 onwards). Potentially this will increase funding for Community Transport only.
iii) devise a scoring mechanism (to be used in either/both scheme(s)), to prioritise funding applications, so that in different years different levels of funding can be decided upon depending on other budgetary demands and the merits of the applications. The Working Party would not wish this to cause a lowering of the funding below current levels.
iv) Maintain flexibility within the scheme(s) to allow for specific targeting of funding over a period, as agreed by Committee from time to time.
v) explore and potentially encourage the setting up of a Community Foundation for the longer term. This is likely to be community led and therefore the Council's ability to influence could be small. Such a Foundation can attract funding for voluntary sector activity from a variety of sources, including the Council. This could provide an alternative approach or, with a contribution from the Council (which might for example include the current levels of funding for Heritage and Environment), could supplement Council resources for specific activities, which the Council wishes to support.
Voluntary Sector Funding (P,T&E Committee)
Objectives of funding for Heritage and Environment
Broad purpose:
To encourage voluntary groups to become actively involved in working alongside the Council in its efforts to care for the District's rich diversity of built and natural environment.
Objectives:
· To deliver effective stewardship, including improvement and enhancement, of B&NES' built and natural environmental heritage.
· To encourage people to identify, plan and help resolve environmental and heritage issues in their own locality
· To celebrate local distinctiveness and what it means to communities
To secure added value by levering in other funds and engaging volunteer support for action in B&NES.
Eligibility Criteria for funding Heritage and Environment
· Projects, which create, improve and conserve wildlife habitats.
· Projects, which protect and/or rescue historical buildings, artefacts and their landscape setting from permanent loss or damage and restore them to something like their original condition.
· Projects which create new, predominately green, landscape features comprising the use of native species wherever appropriate and which conserve and/or enhance existing landscape features. Excluding maintenance of tree or shrub areas or hedges and walls, where there is not a benefit to wildlife. But not excluding projects that recreate, conserve "historic" landscapes using contemporary species.
· Projects which interpret wildlife habitats, landscape or heritage features and their landscape settings.
· Projects which increase public access, particularly for those who are disadvantaged, to wildlife habitats, and heritage and landscape features.
· Projects that deliver life long environmental education and interpretation.
· Projects in which local people
· Core costs of organisations that deliver the above type of project through local people and volunteers.
The following types of project or work will NOT be eligible:
· Projects which cannot be seen from by the public from roads, paths or open spaces.
· Work required as a planning condition.
· Ongoing maintenance of non-native vegetation, hedges and walls where there is not a benefit to wildlife.
· Projects which damage existing valuable wildlife or landscape features.
Purpose and Criteria for Community Transport Funding
Transport for People with Mobility Impairment
DEFINITION: Mobility-impaired people are those who experience difficulty with or are unable to travel on foot, on buses or trains or by car. This impairment may arise from general frailty due to old age, personal disability (whether physical, sensory or mental), encumbrance (e.g. with luggage, shopping or small children), or lack of affordable services.
1. The Directorate seeks to improve travel and access conditions for those people
with mobility impairment.
2. The Directorate will assist the development and creation of public transport and
brokerage schemes which supplement mainstream public transport.
3. The Directorate will consider recommending the financial support of voluntary
and community transport schemes which seek to:-
(i) Create, develop or operate services open to any group in an area i.e. brokerage and group hire schemes;
(ii) Create, develop or operate services complementary to existing public transport services, open to all people in an area who suffer from mobility impairment.
4. The extent and frequency of community transport and other accessible services
which the Council considers it appropriate to support in order to ensure that the needs of the public are met, will be identified by a process of review, including monitoring and consultation, and with reference to the changing accessibility of the population to employment and community facilities.
CRITERIA FOR FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF VOLUNTARY GROUP TRANSPORT SERVICES
1. Applications for funding by voluntary groups will normally only be considered
where proposed projects have been discussed with, and agreed in principle by, the Directorate's Transportation Planning Manager from inception and are in accordance with the Directorate's aims as set out above. The Transportation Planning Manager is:-
M.J. Finch
Riverside
Temple Street
Keynsham
Bristol BS31 1LA Tel. 01225 477639
2. Projects would be expected to operate as economically as possible.
3. The group have in place a properly constituted decision-making body (e.g.
management committee) to oversee the project and make necessary policy decisions.
4. Any project funded would be expected to develop its own equal opportunities
policy.
5. Applications for funding a project engaged in hiring and/or sharing minibuses,
after discussion as outlined in paragraph 1 above, will normally only be granted for revenue expenditure including in the following list:-
(i) Salaries of staff of projects, employers' national insurance contributions recruitment and any other employment costs:
(ii) Contribution to the administrative costs of the projects (rent of premises, telephone, stationery, printing, postage etc) particularly during the early life of a project when potential income from charges for transport is unlikely to be achieved.
(iii) Costs of setting up premises for a new project (e.g. office equipment):
(iv) Contributions to the out-of-pocket expenses of volunteers working for the project in accordance with the Council's approved scale.
6. Again after discussions as outlined above, the Council may, at its discretion,
consider applications for funding from projects providing a service or advice to individuals which involves additional expenditure to that in the list at item 5.
7. All drivers of minibuses owned or used by voluntary organisations awarded a
Council grant must be trained and assessed as competent by a training scheme recognised by the Council.
8. Minibus hire charges levies to user groups shall be reasonable, cover running
costs and be reviewed annually in relation to increase in retail price index.
9. Fares charges to individuals should be broadly equivalent to prevailing bus fares
and application should be made to join the local authority's concessionary fare scheme. Fares should be reviewed annually in relation to increase in local bus fares.
10. The applicant will be expected to raise funds from sources outside the Council by
the efforts of its member, in particular for the purchase of vehicles. Proposals to obtain funding from outside sources will need to be described at the time of application so that the financial or other implications can be properly considered.
MEETING: