Agenda item

Report of the Chief Grants Officer.

The Chief Grants Officer introduced a progress report on social investment activity within the Corporation.

Stepping Stones Fund

The Principal Grants Officer reported that 40 applications had been received totalling £1.7m. These were currently being assessed, with some being rejected and some asked to provide further information. Members noted that the City Bridge Trust Committee would consider recommendations for funding at their meeting in June 2015. In response to Members’ questions, the Principal Grants Officer responded that there were three strands for applications: capacity building, outcome mapping and risk finance. He advised that the majority of the applications had been received under the first strand, with only a small number received for the latter.

Work of the Economic Development Office (EDO)

The City Affairs Officer reported that PwC has been commissioned to conduct the EDO’s research project to examine London’s potential to act as a global hub for social investment. Interview requests were being sent out, and a report was expected to be published in May 2015.

Social impact

Eva Varga, an independent consultant engaged with the social investment market at a European level, took the Board through her paper on social impact measurement. Members noted that, although there was an aspiration to find a standardised measurement for social impact, there were significant difficulties in comparing the impact of different types of social investment and developing a universal assessment would be a long process.

Members discussed the potential trade-off between financial and social benefits from investments, and Ms Varga advised that a win-win situation could be achieved through compromise. Within the Board’s overall portfolio, some investments would maximise both, whereas others would prioritise one over the other. Members discussed the investments in the context of the SIB portfolio overall and agreed that comparing financial and social return against risk would be a valuable tool for the future.

Job Description for Co-Opted Members

Members revised the wording of the job description, and agreed that it would be advertised externally and to the Court of Common Council at the same time, with no requirements for a certain number of internal or external appointments. After a short discussion, Members confirmed these should be co-opted Members and as such would have no voting rights; this would be stated in the job description.

RESOLVED – That:

(a)  A job description for co-opted Board Members be approved subject to the amendments suggested;

(b)  An informal discussion be held for Members and officers to consider social impact measurement; and

(c)  That the report be noted.