Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Ray Catt.

Ian Seaton declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of Item 8 due to being a Director of the Livery Companies Apprenticeship Scheme.

To agree the minutes and non-public summary of the meeting held on 4 September 2013.

RESOLVED – That the public minutes and summary of the meeting held on 4 September 2013 be approved as a correct record.

To receive a report of the Town Clerk.

The Committee received a report of the Town Clerk that identified items which required further action by officers.

To receive a progress report of the Chief Grants Officer.

The Committee considered the regular progress report and events update of the Chief Grants Officer that highlighted the launch of the new grants programmes, Investing in Londoners.

The Chief Grants Officer presented the new brochure to Members that outlined the Investing in Londoners grants programmes. He advised additional copies would be made available and Members were asked to distribute these in the course of their contact with interested parties.

The Chief Grants Officer would be conducting visits to recipients of City Bridge Trust (CBT) grants every Friday, which Members were welcome to attend. He confirmed quarterly monitoring visit schedules would also be distributed to Members.

It was noted that several Members were planning to attend a lunchtime presentation on the Investing in Londoners grants criteria, given by the Chairman and Chief Grants Officer on the 7^th October. This event had arisen from discussion with the Assistant Town Clerk.

A Member noted that paragraphs 3.11 and 3.16 were for decision and in future it was agreed that matters for decision within the Chief Grants Officer’s Progress Report would be reflected in the report recommendations.

Members discussed the recent Freedom of the City received by Sir Bob Geldof, and it was advised that City Bridge Trust had not been involved in the nomination process and therefore no public relations around the event referred to CBT. The Chairman remarked that Sir Bob Geldof had referred to the charitable work of the City and had previously been unaware of the work of CBT.

RESOLVED – That,

a)    applicants would be under no obligation to monetise their social return on investment but would require evidence of both of a commitment and capacity to achieve and assess impact, as part of  the continued focus of the grant assessment work done by officers at the pre-Committee

To consider an introductory report of the Chief Grants Officer relative to grant recommendations.

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Grants Officer, which dealt with recommendations relating to applications received from the current grants programme. Members noted that a total of thirty-six applications would be dealt with at the meeting, twelve were recommended for approval, nineteen recommended for rejection, four had been withdrawn. One grant was noted as proposed for approval under delegated authority.

The Deputy Chairman noted that the report format discussed at the last meeting of the Committee would be implemented for reporting on the new grants programme.

RESOLVED – That,

a)    Members note the contents of the report; and

b)    the individual grant recommendations in relation to the applications set out in the summary schedule and other papers be considered.

To consider the Chief Grants Officer’s reports on grant recommendations, as follows:

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Grants Officer which recommended grants to various organisations.

Members considered each application and the following observations were noted:

Item 7.a) (Community Transport Brent) - A Member raised concern over the reserves policy which was equivalent to seventeen days’ worth of current year expenditure, and an officer advised that the organisation was investing in fundraising capabilities and reserves were improving.

Item 7.b) (Newham Music Trust) - Members raised concern over the reserves policy and an officer replied that he had been in consultation with the Chamberlain’s Department and was of the opinion that the organisation was now making progress in terms of its general financial management and sustainability.

Overall the funding level had been the same throughout 2010, 2011 and 2012 but delivered through different sources. The government’s policy on creating music hubs was now being delivered through the Arts Council rather than through the London Borough of Newham, therefore Cabinet Office funding had increased substantially.

The Deputy Chairman remarked, and it was agreed, that in future if the grant request was within the remit of Local Authority statutory responsibility, it should be stated clearly in the assessment report. It was confirmed that this proposal did not fall within a statutory duty to provide.

Item 7.c) (Community Links Trust Ltd.) - Members and officers discussed that this was an excellent programme. There were concerns raised over the cost of generating funds (£1,039,274) to which officers replied that the figures had been assessed and were legitimate costs within the current SORP.  In future, it was agreed that more explicit detail would be given in the cover notes of grant recommendation reports when costs of generating funds appeared high.

Item 7.f) (Chickenshed Theatre) – A Member remarked that they had previously attended a Chickenshed performance

£81,500 over three years (£38,000; £25,750; £17,750) towards the costs of a full-time Business Development Manager.

£100,6000 over three years (£38,500; £30,800; £31,300) for the salary of a f/t Project Leader and running costs of the Rhythmic project for children with hearing impairment.

£76,000 over two years (2 x £38,000) for the costs of a part-time (3dpw) Community Development Worker, associated ESOL programme costs and a contribution to core costs at 15%.

£24,00 over two years (£9,445;£14,555) towards the costs of a part-time Volunteer Coordinator (14hpw) and associated project costs to deliver and develop the Skills Based Volunteer Programme with young people from a range of different black and minority communities.

£115,000 over three years (£37,400;£38,300;£39,300) towards Amnesty International (UK Section) Charitable Trust’s human rights education programme in schools across London.

£38,100 over one year towards the staffing and production costs of a new inclusive performance that helps children and families in five London boroughs learn about and value different cultures.

£110,000 over two years (2 x £55,000) for the salary of a f/t Employment Co-ordinator plus running costs of the Transition to Employment project for young homeless people with mental health needs.

£143,000 over three years (£62,800; £51,900; £28,300) towards a f/t Senior Service User Officer and the running costs of a project to develop and test an innovative and replicable approach to involving offenders with multiple complex needs including poor mental health in local commissioning processes.

£90,000 over three years (£10,000; £40,000; £40,000) towards the salaries for four core posts (a project manager, and two support workers, and a volunteer co-ordinator, plus general running costs of the Re-Unite South London project reuniting mothers on release from prison with their children.

£97,600 over three years (£31,600; £32,500; £33,500) towards the costs of the Prince’s Trust’s London care leavers’ project; this comprises the amount requested, less the sum included for depreciation in the original application budget.

£71,600 (£35,600; £36,000) over two years towards the salary costs of a Senior Youth Liaison Officer and a Youth Liaison Officer (both 14hrs/week) and running costs of workshop and advocacy support to help deaf young people make a positive transition to adulthood contingent on funds being raised to make the project viable in years one and two and on City Bridge Trust not being the single largest funder in any one year.

£195,000 over three years (3 x £65,000) towards Superhighways, an ICT project supporting voluntary and community organisation in six boroughs in South London.

To consider a report of the Chief Grants Officer.

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Grants Officer which requested that Members approve two amendments to the funding criteria for the Trust’s new Investing in Londoners programmes; and that Members approve the opening of two of the funding strands at a later date, in October 2013, to allow for promotional, partnership events.

An officer clarified the first recommendation contained within the report and advised Members that the Trust would not bring grants forward for approval that required more than 50% of an organisation’s total revenue income.

RESOLVED – That,

a)    the criterion be removed whereby organisations with a turnover of £10m or more could apply only for a maximum of 50% of the project costs, thereby considering all applications on an equal basis;

b)    organisations with branches and/or running discrete activities in different parts of London be allowed to apply for/hold up to a maximum of three grants; and

c)    the formal opening of your Quality Standards in Youth Work and your Arts Apprenticeships programmes be deferred until late October 2013 to enable promotional, partnership, events.

To consider a report of the Chief Grants Officer.

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Grants Officer which recommended how Members would monitor the Investing in Londoners’ programmes and strengthen grant-holder compliance, funding effectiveness, and learning.

RESOLVED –That

a)  all Investing in Londoners’ applicants be required to submit a monitoring framework when they request funding from the Trust;

b)  officers be asked to provide sample monitoring frameworks and guidance notes for applicants on the Trust’s website;

c)  where appropriate, funding be made conditional on an organisation receiving capacity-building support with their monitoring and evaluation work;

d)  officers be asked to provide details of organisations providing monitoring and evaluation capacity-building services on the Trust’s website;

e)  current programme of 70 Monitoring Visits for 2013-14 (which will include a proportion of additional verification checks in line with the recommendations of Internal Audit) be maintained  but then discontinue this from 2014-15 onwards and in its place introduce:

                                          i.     a new programme of 40 Project Visits to see Trust-funded work in action and to meet beneficiaries;

                                        ii.    a new programme of 70 Compliance Monitoring Visits;

f)   officers be asked to commission two independent programmatic evaluations to undertake in-depth reviews of what works and how your programmes might evolve;

g)  officers be asked to continue the Trust’s programme of 25 Unannounced Visits each year;

h)  officers be asked to undertake post-holder spot-checks for 25% of grants made to organisations for posts of 17 hours per week or more; and

i)    officers be required to report monitoring and evaluation work and issues arising through your Committee meetings.

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Grants Officer which recommended that 19 grant applications from the Working with Londoners programme be rejected for the reason identified in the schedule attached to the report.

In response to a query from a Member on why certain grants objectives and aims may not sufficiently address CBT grant programme aims and outcomes, the Chairman and officers advised that organisations were assessed on a case by case basis, may be encouraged to re-apply at a later date, and with full and detailed reasons not necessarily given due to the nature of the report being public.

A Member queried what the timeline was for grant applicants to receive notice of rejection and if they could receive feedback from the relevant grants officer. Officers advised that unsuccessful applicants were advised as such in writing as soon as possible, allowing for such decisions to be approved by Committee. The letter outlined the application’s rejection, while further details could be obtained, if they wished, by contacting the Trust.

RESOLVED – That, the grant applications, detailed in the schedule attached to the report, be rejected.

The Committee received a report of the Chief Grants Officer which advised Members of the following one grant, totalling £19,995 which had been presented for approval under delegated authority to the Chief Grants Officer in consultation with the Chairman and Deputy Chairman.

The Committee received a report of the Chief Grants Officer which provided details of four applications which had been withdrawn.

The Chairman noted the correction to Lift (London International Festival of Theatre), which would be ineligible to apply until October 2013.

The Committee received a report of the Chief Grants Officer which advised Members of a variation to two grants agreed since the last meeting of the Committee.

The Committee received a report of the Chief Grants Officer relative to two visits that had been undertaken.

There were no questions.

There were no urgent items.

MOTION – That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

RESOLVED – That under section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of the Schedule 12a of the Local Government Act.

Item No.                     Exempt Paragraphs

14                                            3

To agree the non-public minutes of the meeting held on 4 September 2013.

The non-public minutes of the meeting held on 4 September 2013 were considered.

There were no questions.

There were no items of urgent business.