Please Contact: Emma Denny
Please email: emma.denny@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Please Direct Dial on: 01263 516010
5 April 2013
A meeting of the Cabinet of North Norfolk District Council will be held in the Council Chamber at
the Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer on Monday 15th April 2013 at 10.00 a.m.
At the discretion of the Chairman, a short break will be taken after the meeting has been running
for approximately one and a half hours. Coffee will be available in the staff restaurant at 9.30 a.m.
and at the break.
Members of the public who wish to ask a question or speak on an agenda item are requested to
arrive at least 15 minutes before the start of the meeting. It will not always be possible to
accommodate requests after that time. This is to allow time for the Committee Chair to rearrange
the order of items on the agenda for the convenience of members of the public. Further information
on the procedure for public speaking can be obtained from Democratic Services, Tel: 01263
516010, Email: democraticservices@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Sheila Oxtoby
Chief Executive
To: Mr T FitzPatrick, Mrs A Fitch-Tillett, Mr T Ivory, Mr J Lee, Mr W Northam, Mr R Oliver,
Mr R Wright
All other Members of the Council for information.
Members of the Management Team, appropriate Officers, Press and Public.
If you have any special requirements in order
to attend this meeting, please let us know in advance
If you would like any document in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format
or in a different language please contact us
Chief Executive: Sheila Oxtoby
Corporate Directors: Nick Baker & Steve Blatch
Tel 01263 513811 Fax 01263 515042 Minicom 01263 516005
Email districtcouncil@north-norfolk.gov.uk Web site northnorfolk.org
AGENDA
1.
TO RECEIVE APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
2.
MINUTES
(Page 1)
To approve, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 04
March 2013.
3.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
To receive questions from the public, if any.
4.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
To determine any other items of business which the Chairman decides should be
considered as a matter of urgency pursuant to Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government
Act 1972.
5.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members are asked at this stage to declare any interests that they may have in any of the
following items on the agenda. The Code of Conduct for Members requires that
declarations include the nature of the interest and whether it is a disclosable pecuniary
interest.
6.
CONSIDERATION OF ANY MATTER REFERRED TO THE CABINET BY THE
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE OR COUNCIL FOR RECONSIDERATION
To consider matters referred to the Cabinet (whether by the Overview and Scrutiny
Committee or by the Council) for reconsideration by the Cabinet in accordance with the
provisions within the Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules or the Budget and Policy
Framework Procedure Rules.
7.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS FROM THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
To consider any reports from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, which may be
presented by the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, and determination of
any appropriate course of action on the issues so raised for report back to that committee.
8.
JOINT STAFF CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
(page 6)
To receive and consider the minutes of the meeting of the Joint Staff Consultative
Committee held on 11 February 2013.
9.
CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION (CCTV) WORKING PARTY
(page 10)
To receive and consider the minutes of the meeting of the CCTV Working Party held on 12
February 2013.
10.
DISCRETIONARY HOUSING PAYMENTS POLICY
(page 13)
(Policy Document – p. 16) (Equality Impact Assessment Form – p.24 )
Summary:
The purpose of the report is for Members to review the
Discretionary Housing Payments Policy in the context of the
Government changes to benefits that reduce entitlement and so
increase demand for additional discretionary help through this
scheme. The Government has allocated additional funding to this
scheme in recognition of this.
Conclusions:
The revised Policy recognises the changes in both funding and
those people affected by the changes in benefits.
Reasons for
Recommendations
Members are asked to agree the recommendation because the
Council needs to adopt a consistent approach to assessing and
awarding Discretionary Housing Payments and to ensure the
effective use of limited resources.
Recommendations: That Cabinet recommends to Full Council the adoption of the
Discretionary Housing Payments Policy
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
Contact Officer:
Telephone no:
Email:
11.
Cllr W Northam
All
Louise Wolsey
01263 516081
Louise.wolsey@north-norfolk.gov.uk
BIG SOCIETY FUND REVIEW AND PROPOSALS
(page 29)
(Appendix A– p. 39) (Appendix B – p.43) (Appendix C – p.47) (Appendix D – p.49)
(Appendix E – p. 50)
Summary:
This report provides an appraisal and review of the Big Society
Fund, which has successfully operated for a year, administered
by Norfolk Community Foundation. The fund has helped many
community projects get off the ground and has hence achieved
some very positive results for local communities in the District.
Having considered a range of issues relating to the
administration process and the outcome of the funding scheme,
it is recommended that the Fund is continued in 2013/14 but that
changes be made to the way in which it is administered.
Options considered:
There are various options in relation to the future of the Big
Society Fund, ranging from not operating the fund to increasing
its value. The success of the fund in its first year suggests that
the scheme should be continued for a further year, with a similar
(but slightly increased value), discontinuing it would not be a
reasonable option; however it is considered that the
administration of the fund can be improved by undertaking this
in-house; as opposed to an external organisation. The
implications of these alternatives are discussed in the report,
together with other recommendations on how the effectiveness
of the Fund in achieving its objectives can be improved.
Conclusions:
The review of the Big Society Fund has concluded that the
scheme was successful in facilitating the delivery of many
beneficial community projects. The outcomes of the funding
scheme, however, could be better achieved by changing the way
in which the fund is administered and by setting up a different
process of support and funding for larger or more complex
projects.
Recommendations: Cabinet should make the following recommendations to Full
Council:
1. The SLA with NCF be delivered for the remaining
period (i.e. administration of outstanding
(conditional) grant awards, monitoring of projects
awarded funded in the first year and providing
reports as appropriate).
2. Set up a Big Society Fund for 2013/14 of £225,000 for
applications for grant aid of not more than £15,000
per project, in accordance with the draft prospectus
included as Appendix A.
3. Set up an ‘Enabling Fund’ of £225,000 in order to
support initiatives developed in partnership with
local communities (to help realise opportunities
arising from the provisions of the Localism Act and
to respond to local needs) or for community projects
above £15,000 in value which otherwise meet the
provisions set out in the Big Society Fund
Prospectus.
4. Establish a ‘Localism Board’ to provide a steer for
officers on the development of initiatives supported
by the enabling fund noting that decisions on
funding for them would be brought back to Cabinet
or Council for decision as appropriate (with
appropriate local member involvement).
5. The Big Society Fund should be administered’ inhouse’ by NNDC officers.
6. To approve the terms-of-reference for the ‘Big
Society Fund Grants Panel’ set out in Appendix B
and delegate any subsequent minor amendments of
those to that Panel.
7. To appoint 5 members (plus two substitutes) to the
former Big Society Board (which determined the
small grant applications last year) in accordance with
the proposed terms of reference, to constitute the
new Big Society Fund Grants Panel.
8. To note that minutes of the Big Society Fund Grants
Panel will be reported to Cabinet and that an annual
report will be produced summarising how resources
have been applied and the outcomes achieved.
Reasons for
Recommendations:
These recommendations are made in the light of the appraisal of
the scheme’s operation in the first year, taking account of the
views of the review group set up by Overview and Scrutiny
Committee. It represents the most effective means of operating
community grant funding for the next financial year.
LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS AS REQUIRED BY LAW
(Papers relied on to write the report and which do not contain exempt information)
Service Level Agreement with Norfolk Community Foundation (2012)
Notes from the meeting of the Big Society Fund Review Group – Available from Democratic
Services
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
Contact Officer:
Telephone no:
Email:
12.
Trevor Ivory
All
Robert Young
01263 516162
Robert.young@north-norfolk.gov.uk
THE COUNCIL’S APPROACH TO INITIATIVES ARISING FROM COMMUNITY RIGHTS
UNDER LOCALISM
(page 55)
(Appendix F – p.64) (Appendix G – p.65)
Summary:
Options considered:
This report sets out the Council’s procedures for implementing
actions in response to Community Right to Challenge and Bid
and what the Provisions mean for communities and the Council.
The following options were considered as a Council approach to
processing Expressions of Interest and Nominations that are
required through Government regulations relating to Community
Right to challenge and Community Right to bid.
Consider community expressions of interest and Challenges
through existing Council committees. This approach however,
may lack the focus required to develop officer and member
knowledge and awareness of the particular regulations set out
by Government, or enhance the processes adopted and required
for considering aspects of legal and financial procedure.
Conclusions:
This report has reviewed the current provisions that Government
have provided to support the local community interest in running
local government services as well as the procedures for listing
assets of community value. It sets out how the Council should
respond in respect of enabling communities develop their
ambitions under the Community Right to Challenge and Right to
Bid processes, and identifies the sort of issues and requirements
that may arise from an asset and service management role.
More specifically the report has assessed the implications and
actions that members and officers may wish to consider when
taking forward actions that could support the Council’s strategic
decision-making and delivery of various approaches under the
Localism agenda.
Recommendations:
Cabinet is asked to resolve:
1. That a ‘Localism Board’ (comprising relevant Cabinet
members and officers) be set up to provide a steer
with respect to Localism initiatives and community
projects (particularly in relation to expressions of
interest for local public services (under the
Community Right to Challenge) and nominations for
assets of Community Value (under the Community
Right to Bid)). Noting that decisions resulting from
the Board’s recommendations (with appropriate local
member involvement) would be reported to Cabinet/
Council as appropriate.
2. That the process identified in Appendix F be adopted
in respect of expressions of interest for local public
services (under the Community Right to Challenge)
3. That the process identified in Appendix G be adopted
for the consideration of nominations for assets of
Community Value (under the Community Right to
Bid).
Reasons for
Recommendations:
The Council is required by law (Localism Act 2011) to implement
regulations under Community Rights to Challenge and Bid. The
recommendations provide the most appropriate means by which
the Localism Agenda can support the wider community in North
Norfolk. For the Community Right to Challenge and Right to Bid
to be effective, the Council must ensure that sufficient
information is made available and that due processes are
established and followed within the regulation’s that have been
approved.
LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS AS REQUIRED BY LAW
(Papers relied on to write the report, which do not contain exempt information and which are not published
elsewhere)
Localism Act 2011
Public services (Social Value) Act 2012
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
Contact Officer:
Telephone no:
Email:
13.
Trevor Ivory
All
Robert Young
01263 516162
Rob.young@north-norfolk.gov.uk
EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
To pass the following resolution:
“That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be
excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that they
involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs _ of Part I of
Schedule 12A (as amended) to the Act.”
14.
PRIVATE BUSINESS
Agenda Item 2__
CABINET
Minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on Monday 4 March 2013 at the Council
Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 10.00 am.
Members Present:
Mrs A Fitch-Tillett
Mr J Lee
Mr W Northam
Mr R Wright
Also attending:
Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds Mrs L Brettle
Ms V Gay
Mrs P Grove-Jones
Mr P High
Ms B Palmer
Mr J H Perry-Warnes
Mr E Seward
Mr R Shepherd
Ms V Uprichard
Officers in
Attendance:
117.
Mr T FitzPatrick (Chairman)
Mr T Ivory
Mr R Oliver
The Chief Executive, the Corporate Director (NB), the Corporate
Director (SB), the Head of Finance, the Coast and Community
Partnerships Manager, the Communications Manager and Policy and
Performance Management Officer.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
None received.
118.
MINUTES
The Minutes of the meeting held on 4 February 2013 were confirmed as a correct
record and signed by the Chairman.
119.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
None received.
120.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None received.
121.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None received.
122.
CONSIDERATION OF ANY MATTER REFERRED TO THE CABINET BY THE
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE OR COUNCIL FOR
RECONSIDERATION
None received.
Cabinet
1
4 March 2013
1
123. CONSIDERATION OF ANY REPORTS FROM THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY
COMMITTEE
None received.
124.
JOINT STAFF CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
RESOLVED:
That the minutes of the meeting of the Joint Staff Consultative Committee held on 19
November 2012 be approved.
125.
PLANNING POLICY AND BUILT HERITAGE WORKING PARTY:
HOUSING LAND SUPPLY – PUBLICATION OF STATEMENT OF
FIVE YEAR SUPPLY OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LAND
Mr. Oliver, Chairman of the Working Party, pointed out that the advice of the
Department for Communities and Local Government had been sought as there was
some uncertainty concerning a requirement in the National Planning Policy
Framework relating to authorities with a record of under-delivery of housing.
RESOLVED:
(1) That the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Policy and Built Heritage
Working Party held on 14 January 2013 be approved.
(2) That, subject to the advice of the Department for Communities and Local
Government in respect of the 20% buffer, the Statement of Five Year Supply
of Residential Land be approved.
Reasons for decision:
To publish a statement on how much of the land identified within the District as being
available for housing development might reasonably be expected to be developed
over the next five years.
126.
BUDGET MONITORING REPORT 2012/13 – PERIOD 10
Mr W Northam presented the report summarising the budget monitoring position to
the end of January 2013. At the end of period 10, a forecast underspend for the
current financial year on the revenue account was shown. The overall position would
continue to be monitored.
Mr Northam drew attention to service variances, commenting that the figures for
Development Management were encouraging, with the income figure for the period
running in advance of profile.
In the Capital Programme, approval was sought for virements and changes set out
in paragraph 6.3 of the report, proposed following a review of individual capital
schemes. The virements, to cover expenditure on the Cromer Red Lion
Refurbishment, Sheringham East Promenade Public Conveniences, Sheringham
Little Theatre and Car Park Resurfacing and Refurbishment, were from the
completed Fakenham Factory Extension Scheme, which was expected to be £24,382
under budget.
Cabinet
2
4 March 2013
2
The recommendation was moved by Mr Northam and seconded by Mr R Wright.
RESOLVED:
1. That the contents of the report and the current monitoring position be noted.
2. That the current position in relation to the 2012/13 capital programme be
noted and the amendments to the capital schemes, as identified in paragraph
6.3 of the report, be approved.
Reasons for decision:
To update Members on the current budget monitoring position of the Council.
127.
ANNUAL ACTION PLAN 2013/14
In presenting the report, which had followed a rigorous development process, Mr T
FitzPatrick drew attention to a revised Appendix E which had been circulated, setting
out performance indicators and measures. On H003 – the number of development
briefs produced on allocated sites – the 2013/14 target was three and not four as
described.
Mr Oliver referred to C003 – major planning applications processed within thirteen
weeks - where the target had been increased from 72% to 80%, in an effort to
improve performance.
The recommendation was moved by Mr FitzPatrick and seconded by Mrs A FitchTillett.
RESOLVED:
That the Annual Action Plan for 2013/14, as set out in Appendix D of the report, and
the recommendations for performance indicators, as set out in Appendix E, as
amended, be approved.
Reasons for decision:
To agree a balanced and effective Annual Action Plan and associated performance
targets to deliver the priorities and objectives as laid out in the Corporate Plan
2012-2015.
128.
NORTH WALSHAM RETAIL AND LEISURE DEMAND, CAPACITY AND
FEASIBILITY STUDY
Mr T Ivory introduced the report, which was part of the continuing programme of
work to tackle a backlog of issues. The programme has led to some success in
housing, with one brownfield development having already taken place and a further
brownfield site currently being developed by the Victory Housing Trust. The present
study had been commissioned to investigate the idea that retail units would revitalise
the town centre; the consultants had, however concluded that, at this stage, there
was insufficient footfall to attract interest from large retailers to justify investment.
One way in which the necessary invigoration might be generated was via a new
supermarket. Various sites had been looked at by the consultants. A potential
location was Paston College’s Lawns site, but the College did not support this idea
Cabinet
3
4 March 2013
3
as it would impact on its own immediate investment plans and could adversely
affect student numbers. However, it was now understood that, within the last week,
a developer had been in contact with the College and it was possible that a viable
scheme could emerge from discussions.
Mr Ivory moved the recommendation and was seconded by Mr Northam.
Mr E Seward, who supported the investigation into alternative sites in the town
centre, agreed that things had moved on since the report had been prepared. He
agreed with the report’s suggestion that any course of action should await the
determination of the planning application for supermarket development on the
Marrick’s Ropes site.
Mr FitzPatrick pointed out that the report accompanying the agenda included an
incorrect Appendix F. The viability assessment should have been for the Paston
College site and not Vicarage Street car Park. A revised version of the Appendix
had been tabled prior to the meeting. The Coast and Community Partnerships
Manager referred Members to the sketch scheme for two options for a possible
supermarket development shown at figure 2 on the revised Appendix. A high level
timeline had been produced to show key tasks and associated timescales,
beginning with the College’s decision-making process through to construction
between July 2015 and December 2016. As already discussed by Members, the
Appendix acknowledged that the future of this potential development opportunity
hinged upon the outcome of the planning application for the Marrick’s Ropes site.
RESOLVED:
That the Council, through its property consultants, continues to investigate the
opportunities to provide investment and development which will support the overall
vitality and viability of North Walsham Town Centre and that any relevant actions or
interventions are brought to Cabinet at the appropriate time for decision.
Reasons for decision:
To provide the information necessary to make decisions about future investment and
development in North Walsham.
129.
THE NORTH NORFOLK BIG SOCIETY FUND - 4TH ROUND LARGE GRANT
APPLICATIONS
Mr T Ivory presented the report. The four grants proposed would bring to an end the
Big Society allocation for the current year. Over the past 12 months, the Fund had
enabled approximately £400,000 to be invested in community projects in the District,
at a time of austerity. In moving the recommendation, Mr Ivory pointed out that all
decisions taken by the North Norfolk Big Society Board, at four meetings over the
year, had been unanimous and he commended and thanked Board members for
their input and support.
Mr J Lee was delighted to second the proposal and that the decision to set up the
fund had been vindicated by its success.
Mr Northam was pleased to see the proposed grant to Mundesley Youth and
Community, which would give great encouragement to a hard working group of
Cabinet
4
4 March 2013
4
people who had tapped in to local goodwill in establishing the first three phases of a
community hub and putting together the Multi Use Games Area to complete the
project.
RESOLVED:
That grants be awarded from the Big Society Fund for the projects proposed by
Mundesley Youth and Community, Holt Playing Field Association, Holt Town Council
and the Copeman Centre, Briston, in accordance with the amounts and conditions set
out in the report.
Reasons for decision:
To fulfil the commitment within the small government big society action plan 2012/13
to “encourage the growth of the Big Society within communities”.
The Meeting closed at 10.24 am
_______________
Chairman
Cabinet
5
4 March 2013
5
Agenda Item 3
JOINT STAFF CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
Minutes of a meeting of the Joint Staff Consultative Committee held in the Committee
Room, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer on 11 February 2013 at 2.00pm
Members Present:
Mrs S Arnold
Mr P W High
Mr R Oliver
Mr N Smith
Staff Side Present:
Mr S Case
Ms C Lowin-Green
Officers in Attendance:
Ms J Cooke, Head of Organisational Development
Mr I Vargeson, Democratic Services
8
Mr P Godwin (Chair)
APPOINTMENT OF VICE-CHAIRMAN
RESOLVED
That Mr R Oliver be appointed Vice-Chairman of the Joint Committee.
9
SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS
The Staff Side had raised the question of Members being able to be substituted at
meetings where they were unable to attend. This received general support.
RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL
1. That the constitution of the Joint Committee be amended to allow two Member
substitutes
2. That the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Groups be invited to nominate one
substitute Member each.
10 APOLOGIES
Apologies were received from Cllr Mrs B McGoun.
11 MINUTES
With regard to Minute 7 (a) – Staff Morale, the Head of Organisational Development
was unable to recall any reference to levels of stress having increased in the IT
section, as recorded. This was noted.
On Minute 7 (e) – Job Evaluation, the Head of Organisational Development pointed
out that she had not said that a report would be submitted to this meeting. A report
would in fact be brought to the JSCC once details had been agreed with the
Management Team and copied to UNISON. The Joint Committee accepted this and
agreed to the deletion of the final sentence of Minute 7(d)
Subject to the amendment of Minute 7(d) as referred to above, the Minutes of the
meeting of the Joint Staff Consultative Committee held on 19 November 2012 were
confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
1
6
12
TIMING OF MEETING
Mrs S Arnold asked whether meetings could revert to the previous timings. She had
difficulty in being available at 1.30 pm for the pre-meeting and wondered whether
other Members also found this timing inconvenient. No objections were raised to this
proposal.
RESOLVED
That future meetings of the Joint Committee commence at 2.30 pm, with the premeeting for Members at 2.00 pm.
13
JSCC UPDATE
a) Local Government Pension Scheme: Consultation
The Head of Organisational Development informed the Joint Committee that it
had not been practicable to respond to the consultation document on the new
scheme. If UNISON wished to make any comments, it should do so direct to the
Council.
The issue of Auto-Enrolment had been addressed by the report at Agenda Item 8
(Minute 18 below).
b) Staff Morale
The Chairman believed that the subject of staff morale needed to be kept to the
fore, especially in the current economically constrained times. He wondered
whether there were any initiatives, such as the previous staff development
arrangements, which could be brought in to boost morale. In reply to a question,
the Head of Organisational Development said that the next assessment of staff
engagement would be made in July. She pointed out that the Council had some
very positive practices as an employer and these could be documented if this was
thought to be beneficial. Whilst accepting the need to be watchful, Mr N Smith
referred to recent figures which suggested that the situation was not as bad here
as in other authorities.
In reply to a question from Mr P High, Ms Lowin-Green confirmed that things had
improved in the Revenues and Benefits team since the shared IT services
arrangement had finished and been brought back in-house. Mr S Case
commented that the staff had done very well to keep going in the circumstances;
they had been kept informed wherever possible, which had been helpful.
c) Job Evaluation
Ms Lowin-Green informed the Joint Committee that the process had been
discussed in the meeting between UNISON and the Chief Executive. The Head of
Organisational Development undertook to talk to staff about the process as soon
as she was in a position to do so.
d) Council Budget
The Chairman understood that the situation in 2013/14 was manageable, but he
viewed the future prospects of retaining services with some trepidation. He was
aware that some authorities were intending to keep as much work as possible inhouse and supported this.
2
7
14 ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None.
15 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None.
16 SICKNESS ABSENCE UPDATE
In presenting the report, the Head of Organisational Development mentioned the
increase in absence for the October-December 2012 quarter over the same quarter
for the previous year. A feature of this had been 4 members of staff being absent for
depression-related reasons. All four had returned to work.
In reply to a question from Mrs S Arnold, the Head of Organisational Development
outlined the ways in which support had been given to staff unable to get to the office
during the recent bad weather, either directly as a result of the inclement conditions
or because of the ramifications of school closures. This had mainly taken the form of
home working where possible, or, in the case of part-time staff, temporary changes in
working arrangements, in an effort to ensure that time was not lost. Ms Lowin-Green
pointed out that some difficulty had occurred through the incidence of the bad
weather at that particular point in the flextime period. The Head of Organisational
Development stated that this issue could have been looked at earlier had it been
realised that it was a problem for staff. It had been raised at the recent meeting
between UNISON and the Chief Executive and was something that would be taken
into account in any similar circumstances in the future. The Chairman said the matter
had been noted; the situation could not have been predicted and it was agreed that
the Council had been as reasonable as possible in reacting flexibly to the
circumstances.
The report was noted.
17 LIVING WAGE
The Chairman felt that the adoption of the Living Wage would be a positive move for
the Council: very few members of staff were below the Living Wage and would be
affected and the authority would be furthering its reputation as a good employer. The
Head of Organisational Development said that she had raised this matter with the
Chief Executive, who would be discussing it with the Leader of the Council.
Ultimately the Council had to decide whether to opt in or opt out of the Living Wage
initiative.
Although it was understood that this would directly affect only two employees at
present, some Members wondered whether there could be other consequences
arising from the adoption of such a policy. Mr N Smith thought that it might be
possible for wage increases under this initiative to have ramifications elsewhere. Mr
R Oliver said that it might have the adverse effect that less experienced job
applicants were bypassed. Mr Case believed that the Council, as an employer, could
help to get people away from benefits through paying the Living Wage as a minimum
level.
The Chairman pointed out that the matter had been raised at the request of UNISON.
He concluded from the debate that there were both advantages and disadvantages
3
8
from the Council’s point of view and, as the Head of Organisational Development
confirmed, nothing else could be done pending the discussions between the Leader
and Chief Executive.
18 LOCAL GOVERNMENT PENSION SCHEME: AUTO-ENROLMENT
The report was noted.
19 NEXT MEETING
Members noted that under changes to the 2012/13 programme of meetings the
JSCC meeting originally scheduled for 25 March had been rearranged, leaving 17
May 2013 as the next meeting date. It was felt that this was too far ahead and that
the 25 March date should be reinstated.
RESOLVED
That the next meeting of the Joint Committee be scheduled to take place on Monday,
25 March 2013 at 2.30 pm.
The meeting concluded at 2.55 pm.
_______________
Chairman
25 March 2013
4
9
CCTV WORKING PARTY
12 FEBRUARY 2013
COUNCIL CHAMBER
Present:
1.
Cllr Richard Shepherd (RS)
Cllr Robert Stevens (RS)
Nick Baker (NB)
Maria Garofalo (MG)
Steve Hems (SH)
Peter Battrick (PB)
TO ELECT A CHAIR
•
2.
Cllr Peter Moore (PM
Cllr Annie Claussen-Reynolds (ACR)
Cllr Brian Hannah (BH)
Cllr Rhodri Oliver (Observer)(RO)
Duncan Ellis (DE)
Maxine Collis (MC)
Jeanette Wilson (Minutes) (JW)
Duncan welcomed all to the inaugural meeting and asked for proposals for Chair:
o RS proposed Cllr Annie Claussen-Reynolds
o PM seconded
o Cllr Annie Claussen-Reynolds was duly elected as chair
TO RECEIVE APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Cllr Lindsay Brettle, Cllr Mike Baker
3.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
•
4.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
•
5.
Introductions were made
TERMS OF REFERENCE
•
7.
No declarations of interest
INTRODUCTIONS
•
6.
None received
Having been circulated before the meeting, these were agreed
PRESENTATION AND OVERVIEW OF THE SERVICE
•
•
MC gave a slide presentation which included the background into how CCTV Control
Room and cameras were obtained and their purpose, the current set up,
stakeholders with current contributors
Reference the capital costs slide, DE confirmed that we had spent £963k in total, of
10
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
8.
PROJECT PLAN/TIMEFRAMES
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
9.
this £752k was Home Office Grant, £182k was NNDC’s own funding and £29k was
“other contributions. DE provided a breakdown of these and ACR asked for these
figures to be circulated to Members
Figures from DE were and ACR asked that each member receives a copy of these.
These are an update to reflect capital costs to date and the revenue costs in a little
bit more detail
SH confirmed the position with fly tipping/dog fouling and explained that CCTV is
used on an opportune basis. For instance, the team had some issues in towns,
particularly Cromer, with businesses storing waste outside their properties which
attracted waste from others. The cameras were used to identify individuals and
vehicle movement. Dog fouling is a difficult area to monitor, people tend to walk their
dogs early am or early pm but the cameras have proved useful. No RIPA and
surveillance work has been done recently but do use CCTV on an review basis
NNOPT (Operational Partnership Team) with members being Environmental Health,
Police and Victory Housing Trust. The purpose is to look to reduce Anti-Social
Behaviour (ASB) through identifying victims of ASB and perpetrators to bring about a
satisfactory resolution. For instance, cases in Fakenham with issues of young
people causing problems in their vehicles in a particular area, CCTV proved useful in
identifying individuals
The authority has between 10 to 15 insurance claims a year with our insurance
company paying us approximately £25 which could be increased
NB asked MC to give more detail on costs and income on some items not shown, for
instance, the lorry park in Fakenham - £11,000
DE agreed that as part of the review we need to include all costs and expenditure
including management unit charges
Excepting staff costs, BT fibre optic cable costs were in excess of £55k per year.
Going wireless is the only way to reduce/eliminate this cost, but is unlikely to work in
this area.
PM commented that CCTV is not just for businesses but for public safety
Documents previously circulated were discussed
Timetable includes slippage dates but DE confirmed this will not affect budget. The
working party are aiming to report to the September Cabinet as this fits in with the
budget setting process
PB mentioned that he has had a conversation with local media on this review and
made them aware of this group. They have stated that they would like an update
following the stakeholder consultation in early April
In between meetings, all agreed that email updates must be provided
DE was asked to establish when dates will be released for room bookings
JW and MC to work on CCTV Working Group dates
BH mentioned that the Police will make their own comments but this subject has
already been raised at last OPT meeting. He went onto say that North Norfolk has
been held up as a model and talked about nationally and at the Association of Chief
Police Officers
BH reminded Members of the Councils obligation to s98 Crime and Disorder
CONSULTATION METHODS/TIMEFRAMES
11
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Maxine referred to the slide presentation again;
Key Stakeholders – A lengthy discussion took place and the following was voted on
and agreed:
o Police to attend the next CCTV Working Group possibly before March – JW
and MC to organise and the afternoon of 27 February before Full Council at
approx. 2.30pm was suggested but to canvas dates
o A meeting/workshop at Cromer be set up with key stakeholders (named
representative from each of the seven Town Councils and Chamber of
Commerce), members who would like to attend and key officers. This will
include a presentation from the Council and if possible the Police and be on a
workshop basis with a general discussion at the end of the meeting – It was
agreed to hold this in March and DE/MC to organise
It was agreed to write to businesses who contribute to CCTV to inform them of
developments as a matter of courtesy
PB mentioned that CCTV appeared in the top ten of the Breckland DC public
consultation. Rob Young holds all the detailed responses
It was agreed that CCTV should go with the general consultation with the group
requesting to be given the opportunity to review the questions before consultation
commences
It is hoped that by the April meeting there will be greater clarity concerning the Public
funding consultation.
When writing to the key stakeholders inviting them to attend a meeting, it was agreed
that MC should not put any background upfront but just the TOR of the group. It was
agreed that a presentation will be given at the meeting to give additional
information/clarify the Council’s situation.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
•
MC to arrange a visit to a CCTV control room for any interested Members
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
•
•
JW and MC to organise
Meeting closed at 11.55
12
Agenda Item No____10________
DISCRETIONARY HOUSING PAYMENTS POLICY
Summary:
The purpose of the report is for Members to review the
Discretionary Housing Payments Policy in the context of
the Government changes to benefits that reduce
entitlement and so increase demand for additional
discretionary help through this scheme. The
Government has allocated additional funding to this
scheme in recognition of this.
Conclusions:
The revised Policy recognises the changes in both
funding and those people affected by the changes in
benefits.
Reasons for
Recommendations
Members are asked to agree the recommendation
because the Council needs to adopt a consistent
approach to assessing and awarding Discretionary
Housing Payments and to ensure the effective use of
limited resources.
Recommendations:
Members are asked to approve the revised
Discretionary Housing Payments Policy
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected All
Contact Officer, telephone number and email:
Louise Wolsey Tel 01263 516081 louise.wolsey@north-norfolk.gov.uk
1.
Introduction
1.1
The Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP) scheme was introduced in 2001.
It enables the Council to pay, at its discretion extra money towards housing
costs to top up Housing Benefit (HB) and previously Council Tax Benefit
(CTB).
1.2
The Government provides funding for the scheme up to a ceiling but local
authorities can spend more than this from their own resources. NNDC
expenditure has not gone above the ceiling.
1.3
Payments are made in line with the Policy. Payments address anomalies
within the benefit system and assist where the standard benefit scheme
proves harsh for people and they are unable to meet their housing costs
Discretionary Housing Payments (DHP’s) are not intended to be long term ongoing payments; they are awarded on a short term basis to provide people
with the opportunity to take action to improve their circumstances. However,
13
some payments may be long term as the intention is that some customers will
not be expected to move.
1.4
In practice the majority of payments have historically been made to private
tenants whose Housing Benefit is too low for them to be able to pay their full
rent and for rent deposits and rent in advance, where it is appropriate to do so
i.e. to a help an existing customer move to more affordable accommodation.
2.
Background
2.1
The legislation that governs DHPs is covered by the Discretionary Financial
Assistance Regulations 2001, now amended to ensure the scheme covers
the introduction of Universal Credit and the abolition of CTB.
2.2
The Department of Works and Pensions (DWP) has provided authorities with
a guidance manual and good practice guide offering advice to Local
Authorities on how DHP’s can be used to provide support to customers
affected by some of the key welfare reforms introduced from April 2013,
including;
• Introduction of size criteria in the social rented sector
• Reductions in local housing allowance
• Introduction of the benefit cap – when it is phased in across the next
few months
The revised Policy takes account of this guidance with specific mention to
customers adversely affected by the welfare reforms.
Appendix 1 - The Discretionary Housing Payment Policy
2.3
When considering whether to make an award there are a number of
objectives that need to be considered
• Alleviate poverty
•
Encourage and sustain people in employment
•
Tenancy sustainment and homelessness prevention
•
Safeguarding residents in their own home
•
Helping those who are trying to help themselves
•
Keeping families together
•
Supporting vulnerable or the elderly in the area
•
Helping customers through personal and difficult events
•
Supporting young people in the transition to adult life
•
To assist customers affected by the Welfare reforms
2.4
Authorities will not be able to use DHP’s to help with council tax liabilities after
April 2013.
3
Conclusion
The Council needs to adopt a consistent approach to assessing and awarding
DHPs and to ensure the effective use of limited resources.
4
Implications and Risks
14
It is anticipated that there will be an initial transitional period where there will
be high demand for DHPs. It is envisaged that any customers will apply for
and be given an initial short term award of DHP to give them time to find an
alternative solution to the shortfall in rent caused by the reforms. However, in
some cases consideration will have to be given to making longer term DHP
awards. e.g. where it is unreasonable to expect the customer to move as the
property has been significantly adapted. Customers who apply for repeat
awards may l find DHP top up gradually being reduced and stopped if they do
not find an alternative solution to their shortfall in rent. The panel considering
applications for DHP’s is composed of Housing Benefit Officers and Housing
Officers.
5
Financial Implications and Risks
Central government funding towards DHP’s has been increased from £20m
per annum up to £165m for 2013/14 and £135m for 2014/15. The increased
funding is to assist benefit recipients through the transitional period of the
reforms.
The table below illustrates the current national funding position.
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
£m
£m
£m
Baseline Funding
20
20
20
LHA reforms
40
40
40
30
30
(up to) 75
(up to) 45
165
135
Social Size Criteria
Benefit Cap
Total
60
Local authorities have a large degree of discretion but must be aware of the
purpose of the increased funding when considering applications for DHPs.
NNDC funding for 2013/14 is £112,312 compared to £52,277 for 2012/13.
6
Sustainability
No implications
7
Equality and Diversity
An Equality Impact Assessment has been undertaken. (Appendix 2)
8
Section 17 Crime and Disorder considerations
No implications
15
Discretionary
Housing Payment
Policy
Version 1
1
16
Foreword
Approved by Cabinet on ……………………………………………
2
17
Contents
Foreword ....................................................................................2
Contents .....................................................................................3
Overview.....................................................................................4
Aims and Objectives .................................................................4
Policy Statement........................................................................7
Review Process ............................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Distribution and Amendment ....... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Document Information and Version Control ...........................8
Equality Impact Assessment - Appendix 1
3
18
Overview
From 2 July 2001 all Local Authorities have had the discretion to top up the Housing
and Council Tax benefit using a Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP).The
legislation that governs DHP can be found in the Discretionary Financial Assistance
Regulations 2001(SI2001/1167)
The purpose of this policy is to specify how North Norfolk District Council (NNDC)
will operate the DHP scheme from 1 April 2013.
Aims and Objectives
NNDC will consider making a DHP to applicants who meet the qualifying criteria as
specified in this policy. Each application will be considered by the DHP panel which
will consist of Officers from the Housing Benefit and Housing team. Each
application will be treated on its own individual merit. All customers will be treated
equally, fairly and consistently under the scheme.
Through the operation of this policy the aims and objectives are to :
•
Alleviate poverty
•
Encourage and sustain people in employment
•
Sustain tenancies and prevent homelessness
•
Safeguard residents in their own home
•
Help those who are trying to help themselves
•
Keep families together
•
Supporting vulnerable or the elderly in the area
•
Helping customers through personal and difficult events
•
Support young people in the transition to adult life
•
Assist customers affected by the Welfare reforms
A DHP can be claimed to provide customers with further financial assistance
towards housing costs. Housing costs are not defined within the regulations and this
gives Authorities some broad discretion to interpret what is and is not a housing
cost.
Housing costs may include:
•
Rent in advance
•
Rent deposits
•
Other lump sums associated with housing (e.g. removal costs)
Housing costs exclude:
4
19
•
Ineligible service charges
•
Increased rent due to rent arrears
•
Certain sanctions and reductions in Benefit.
Note: DHP cannot be used to top up Council Tax Support and will not be awarded
to make up for recovery of overpaid Housing Benefit.
Who can apply for a Discretionary Housing Payment
A claim must be made by the customer in writing on the prescribed DHP form. A
claim for DHP can be accepted from an appointee or third party where it is
considered reasonable to do so.
• The customer must be in entitled to Housing Benefit and have a rental
liability.
Criteria for the award of DHP
In deciding whether to award a DHP the following will be considered.
•
Any steps taken by the customer to reduce their rent liability
•
The medical circumstances of the customer, their partner and the household
•
The income and expenditure of the customer, their partner and the
household
•
The length and award of any previous DHP award
•
Whether the tenancy is sustainable long term with the assistance of DHP
•
Whether the tenancy is under threat, including eviction and homelessness
•
Whether other options are available
•
Whether it would be advantageous to transfer from Rent Officer referral to
Local Housing Allowance
•
Any savings held by the customer, their partner and the household
•
The level of debt the customer, their partner and the household have
(including Council Tax arrears)
•
Any ‘exceptional nature’ of the customer, their partner and the household’
circumstances
•
Whether there are sufficient funds to meet the DHP
•
The possible impact on NNDC for not making the award
•
The priority need of the customer
•
Any special circumstances brought to the attention of the Benefits service
•
Whether sufficient information is available
5
20
•
Whether the customer is living in accommodation that has been significantly
adapted
Administration of DHP
DHP decisions are by a panel which will consist a minimum of a Benefit officer and
a Housing officer. Where reasonably possible a decision will be made within 28
days of receipt of the application. The panel may wish to liaise with third parties in
respect to the DHP request, e.g. the customer’s landlord and social services.
Decisions will be recorded on the Benefit claim and the customer will be notified of
the decision in writing.
If the customer is in receipt of a DHP and has a change in circumstances, the DHP
will be reviewed.
There is no fixed or prescribed length of time for which a DHP can be awarded.
This will be determined by the panel. A DHP can be re-applied for when it ends. A
DHP will not extend over a financial year and may need to be applied for again in
the new financial year.
Payment of the DHP will be made to either:
•
The customer
•
The partner of the customer
•
An appointee
•
The customers’ landlord
•
An appropriate third party
Appeal process
A DHP is not the same as a payment of Housing Benefit and therefore is not subject
to the statutory appeals process.
If the customer (or their appointee) disagrees with a decision relating to a DHP they
can ask for this to be looked at again. This request must be made in writing within
21 days stating the reasons why they disagree. The Appeals process has two
stages as follows:First review by new panel members not part of the original decision
Second review by the Benefit manager
Reviews will be completed and notified within 21 days.
The decision will be final and can only be challenged via the judicial review process
or by complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman.
6
21
Overpayments of DHP
The Benefits service will recover any DHP that has been overpaid. An invoice for
the overpaid DHP amount will be sent to the customer or the person to whom the
award was paid. e.g. overpaid DHP when there has been a change in
circumstances or when Housing Benefit entitlement ends.
Fraud
NNDC is committed to the fight against fraud. A customer who tries to fraudulently
claim a DHP by falsely declaring their circumstances or by providing a false
statement or evidence, may have committed an offence. Where it is suspected that
fraud may have occurred the matter will be investigated.
Publicity
NNDC will publicise the DHP scheme through the press, and its website and other
appropriate media outlets and will work with all interested parties to promote the
scheme. A copy of this policy will be available on request.
Policy Statement
This policy will take effect from 1st April 2013
The master copy of this document, a record of review and decision making
processes will be held by XX. All documentation will be available for audit as
necessary.
This policy will be available to all staff and Members on the corporate document
register on the intranet.
7
22
Document Information and Version Control
Document Name
Document Description
Discretionary Housing Payment policy
Purpose of the policy is to specify how
NNDC will operate the DHP scheme from
1/4/13
Current/Expired/Under Review
Louise Wolsey Revenues & Benefits
Manager
Document Status
Lead Officer
Sponsor
Produced by (service name)
Relevant to the services listed or all NNDC
Approved by
Approval date
Type of document
Liz Codling Benefits Manager
Housing Benefits
NNDC Cabinet
Code/Guidance/Plan/Policy/Procedure/
Protocol/Service Level Agreement/Strategy
Current
Annual
March 2014
Equality Impact Assessment details
Review interval
Next review date
Version
1
Originator
L Codling
Description including reason for changes
Changes in Housing Benefit Legislation
8
23
Date
March
2013
EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM
Appendix 2
What are you completing this impact
assessment for? Revised Discretionary Housing
Payment Policy
Discretionary Housing Payment Policy
The policy for how Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP) decisions will be made has been revised.
The main areas of expenditure will not just be meeting shortfalls resulting from the Local
Housing Allowance (LHA) reforms in the private sector but, due to Welfare Reform, affecting vulnerable
households across all tenures.
Central government funding towards DHP’s has been increased from £20 m per annum up to
£165 m for 2013/14 and £135 m for 2014/15. The increased funding is to assist benefit recipients through
the transitional period of the reforms.
At what stage are you completing the impact
assessment?
Section 1 – Aims & Objectives.
The EIA follows the revision of the DHP Policy.
The policy aims to provide interim support in relation to housing payments. The policy is based on the fundamental aim that awards, except in exceptional
circumstances, will be interim support for households while long term solutions are found. The applicant must also be showing a commitment to finding a
solution by actively engaging with agencies including their social landlord if appropriate and/or advice and support services including Job Centre Plus.
NNDC funding for 2013/14 is £112,312 compared to £52,277 for 2012/13.
Section 2A – Groups that may be affected by the proposed changes.
Any recipient of Housing Benefit (HB) can apply for a DHP. The funding to pay in DHP is cash limited, consequently the policy aims to identify priority
groups for support and guidance on criteria to be adopted when considering applications for a DHP.
The Government has made a number of changes to benefits that reduce entitlement to benefit and so increase demand for additional discretionary help
through this scheme. The Government has allocated additional funding to this scheme in recognition of this. Discretionary Housing Payments are not
intended to be long term on-going payments; they are awarded on a short term basis to provide people with the opportunity to take action to improve their
circumstances. However, some payments may be long term as the intention is that some customers will not be expected to move.
The Department of Works and Pensions (DWP) has provided authorities with a guidance manual and good practice guide offering advice to Local
Authorities on how DHP’s can be used to provide support to customers affected by some of the key welfare reforms introduced from April 2013. These
Version 1 – March 2013
24
EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM
Appendix 2
include;
•
•
•
Introduction of size criteria in the social rented sector
Reductions in local housing allowance
Introduction of the benefit cap – when it is phased in across the next few months
Reductions in benefit summary
as at 1/4/13
£ weekly
£ annual
Cases
Reason
RSL room restriction 14%
RSL room restriction 25%
Benefit cap
6326.88
2200.27
1131.77
335324.64
116614.31
35084.87
531
107
18
Version 1 – March 2013
25
EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM
Appendix 2
Section 2B – what is the potential impact on the different groups disability, gender, race, age, faith and belief and sexual orientation)
Race - There is no differential impact due to race
Gender - There is no differential impact due to gender
Transgender / Transsexual - There is no differential impact due to a person being transgender or transsexual
Disability – There is no differential impact due to disability.
Sexual Orientation - There is no differential impact due to sexual orientation
Age – Pensioners are exempt from the introduction of size criteria in the social rented sector changes.
Religious belief - There is no differential impact due to religious belief
Gypsies & Travellers - There is no differential impact due to a person being a gypsey or traveller.
Persons with dependants and caring responsibilities - A disabled tenant or partner who needs a non-resident overnight carer will be allowed an extra
room.
Persons with an offending past - there is no differential impact due having an offending past
Version 1 – March 2013
26
EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM
Appendix 2
Impact on children and vulnerable adults – The size criteria changes affect ; Children under 10 are expected to share regardless of gender. Children
under 16 of the same gender are expected to share
Across equality strands - there is no differential impact identified that cut across equality strands
Section 3 – Evidence and data used for assessment DWP have already completed the following impact assessments when considering welfare reform changes.
www.dwp.gov.uk
Housing Benefit- Under occupation of social housing
Housing Benefit – uprating local housing allowance rates by CPI from April 2103
Benefit Cap (Housing Benefit) regulations 2012; Impact Assessment for the benefit cap.
Section 4 – Conclusions drawn from the consultation process The policy will be circulated to private sector landlord, social landlords and will be available on the web.
The policy will be reviewed following comments received, changes to government legislation and to allocation of funding.
Section 5 – How will the assessment, consultation and outcomes be published and communicated? The EIA will be available on the web.
Completed by/date: 20/3/13 Signed off by/date: Louise Wolsey Version 1 – March 2013
27
EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM
Appendix 2
Version 1 – March 2013
28
Agenda Item No_____11_______
BIG SOCIETY FUND REVIEW AND PROPOSALS
Summary:
This report provides an appraisal and review of the Big
Society Fund, which has successfully operated for a
year, administered by Norfolk Community Foundation.
The fund has helped many community projects get off
the ground and has hence achieved some very positive
results for local communities in the District. Having
considered a range of issues relating to the
administration process and the outcome of the funding
scheme, it is recommended that the Fund is continued
in 2013/14 but that changes be made to the way in
which it is administered.
Options considered:
There are various options in relation to the future of the
Big Society Fund, ranging from not operating the fund to
increasing its value. The success of the fund in its first
year suggests that the scheme should be continued for
a further year, with a similar (but slightly increased
value), discontinuing it would not be a reasonable
option; however it is considered that the administration
of the fund can be improved by undertaking this inhouse; as opposed to an external organisation. The
implications of these alternatives are discussed in the
report, together with other recommendations on how the
effectiveness of the Fund in achieving its objectives can
be improved.
Conclusions:
The review of the Big Society Fund has concluded that
the scheme was successful in facilitating the delivery of
many beneficial community projects. The outcomes of
the funding scheme, however, could be better achieved
by changing the way in which the fund is administered
and by setting up a different process of support and
funding for larger or more complex projects.
Recommendations:
Cabinet should make the following
recommendations to Full Council:
1. The SLA with NCF be delivered for the
remaining period (i.e. administration of
outstanding (conditional) grant awards,
monitoring of projects awarded funded in the
first year and providing reports as
appropriate).
2. Set up a Big Society Fund for 2013/14 of
£225,000 for applications for grant aid of not
more than £15,000 per project, in accordance
with the draft prospectus included as
29
Appendix A.
3. Set up an ‘Enabling Fund’ of £225,000 in
order to support initiatives developed in
partnership with local communities (to help
realise opportunities arising from the
provisions of the Localism Act and to
respond to local needs) or for community
projects above £15,000 in value which
otherwise meet the provisions set out in the
Big Society Fund Prospectus.
4. Establish a ‘Localism Board’ to provide a
steer for officers on the development of
initiatives supported by the enabling fund
noting that decisions on funding for them
would be brought back to Cabinet or Council
for decision as appropriate (with appropriate
local member involvement).
5. The Big Society Fund should be
administered’ in-house’ by NNDC officers.
6. To approve the terms-of-reference for the
‘Big Society Fund Grants Panel’ set out in
Appendix B and delegate any subsequent
minor amendments of those to that Panel.
7. To appoint five members (plus two
substitutes), in accordance with the
proposed terms of reference, to the new Big
Society Fund Grants Panel.
8. To note that minutes of the Big Society Fund
Grants Panel will be reported to Cabinet and
that an annual report will be produced
summarising how resources have been
applied and the outcomes achieved.
Reasons for
Recommendations:
These recommendations are made in the light of the
appraisal of the scheme’s operation in the first year,
taking account of the views of the review group set up
by Overview and Scrutiny Committee. It represents the
most effective means of operating community grant
funding for the next financial year.
LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS AS REQUIRED BY LAW
(Papers relied on the write the report and which do not contain exempt information)
Cabinet Report and minutes 31 January 2012
Overview and Scrutiny 6 February 2012
Council 13 February 2012
Big Society Fund Prospectus 2012
Service Level Agreement with Norfolk Community Foundation (2012)
30
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
Cllr T Ivory
All
Contact Officer, telephone number and email:
Robert Young; 01263 516162; robert.young@north-norfolk.gov.uk
1.
1.1
Introduction
The provisions of the Corporate Plan and Annual Action Plan are included in
the text box below. Resources to develop the activities necessary to achieve
these objectives are available via the income to the Council from the
discretionary element of the second homes Council Tax, supported by staff in
the Coast and Community Partnerships Team.
Encourage communities to develop their own vision for their future and help
them to deliver it
1. We will commission work to support community planning and for community
and voluntary sector capacity building
2. We will utilise our resources, statutory powers and influence to encourage
communities to realise opportunities for their own future
Encourage the growth of The Big Society within communities
1. We will continue to monitor the community investment fund, known as The Big
Society Fund, to invest in local communities, strengthen civic society, and
establish the process for determining priorities for expenditure
1.2
The current operational framework for funding and support for community and
voluntary sector initiatives was adopted by Council on 22 February 2012. This
resulted in the Big Society Fund being established in April 2012 and an
agreement to provide support to the Voluntary Sector in July 2012. At the time
of the Big Society Fund’s inception it had been anticipated that the Council
would set up a similar SLA with a suitable organisation to provide ‘capacity
building’ support to community organisations; however, no suitable proposals
came forward for the provision of this service and so this has been provided
in-house (at a level commensurate with the resources that exist).
1.3
The Big Society Fund has had a full year of operation (administered under a
SLA (Service Level Agreement) with The Norfolk Community Foundation
(NCF)) and it is thus timely to evaluate its effectiveness in achieving its aims
and to determine the most suitable method of meeting the corporate
objectives in the coming year. The SLA (with Voluntary Norfolk) for the
provision of support to the voluntary sector will be separately reviewed and
reported to Cabinet at the appropriate time. This report deals specifically with
the Big Society Fund and includes recommendations for its future operation.
2.
The effectiveness of the Fund in achieving the aims and objectives
originally set, in the first year of its operation
2.1
The fund was set up with the purpose (as set out in the BSF Prospectus) of
helping to build strong communities in North Norfolk. It aims to help
communities to develop new and innovative projects which will improve their
social and economic wellbeing. The prospectus identifies the outcomes (i.e.
benefits or impacts that can be recorded now and/or in the future) that the
31
Council would expect to evidence as a result of investment from this fund as
including:
• People working together to achieve benefits that can be both appreciated
by and have real positive impacts for the whole community, or sections of
it that have particular needs
• People who feel part of their community and have a sense of belonging
and responsibility for the good and long-term benefit of the wider
community
• Communities and/or local groups who feel empowered to make a
difference and make improvements to the lives of those who they support
in the locality
• An increased number of people volunteering and getting involved in their
local community to achieve greater levels of activity aimed at improving
and sustaining opportunities for the wider community
• Local economic benefits that can create employment and training
opportunities for those most in need.
2.2
2.3
The Nature of applications to the Fund
Ninety-four applications were made in the first year for a very wide range of
projects and from diverse applicants, as illustrated in the following chart. The
size of grant sought is illustrated in the charts in Appendix C (for both grants
over and under £10,000 in the first year).
2.4
2.5
Projects awarded funding
Approximately fifty per cent of all applications received were awarded funding
in the first year, amounting to forty-seven projects and £397,537. Many
projects (8.5%) received the full amount requested, whilst others were
awarded partial funding. The reason some applications were unsuccessful
related either to the projects not having sufficient supporting information or
that they did not sufficiently match the provisions of the prospectus and the
purpose of the Fund. The fund was hugely oversubscribed.
32
2.6
A breakdown of successful applications by organisation and type of project is
shown in the following charts and the geographical spread of successful
applications is illustrated in Appendix D.
33
2.7
Projects that were unsuccessful, or received only a partial award were
frequently put forward for funding from other grant schemes operated by NCF
(because the application process was common to all the funds administered
by them). An example of such outcomes is illustrated in the table below,
which shows the unsuccessful applications for the second round of BSF
grants which were redirected and subsequently funded by the Victory
Housing grant scheme.
Applicant
Bodham Playing
Field
Fakenham And
District Light
Operatic Society
Norfolk Federation
of Young Farmers
Clubs
Raynham Parish
Council
Stibbard Village Hall
Management
Committee
Location
Project Note
Awarded
Bodham
To provide a basic skate ramp on
the playing field.
£2,000.00
Fakenham
To
purchase
new
stage
equipment for the society.
£3,170.00
To open a ‘Countrysider’ Club for
the 10 -16 age range in
£4,000.00
Fakenham
Raynham
To purchase a roundabout to
enhance the play area.
£5,000.00
Stibbard
To install double glazing
improve heat efficiency.
Fakenham
to
£5,000.00
2.8
2.9
Projects implemented
The latest project monitoring information is attached as Appendix E. This
shows the applications approved for the first two rounds of applications and
demonstrates the degree to which the fund has achieved successful
outcomes. The full extent of implementation will not be known until one year
after the last round of grants were awarded.
2.10
2.11
Total funding drawn down
For some projects the BSF was the only source of external funding; whether
these projects would have been successful in attaining alternative sources of
support we cannot tell. For many projects, however, the BSF was but one
funding source (ranging from 1.9% to 97% of total project value) and in total
£2,867,735 worth of projects have been able to proceed. It cannot be claimed
that the BSF was the sole means by which this additional funding was levered
in but it is reasonable to assume that it has been a significant catalyst and is
likely to have demonstrated the confidence for other funders to provide
additional support; as well as giving the applicant organisations the impetus to
proceed.
2.12
2.13
Measurement of ‘Social Impact’ of the Fund
Whilst it is not possible to say definitively (after the first year of operation) that
the Fund has achieved its overall purpose and objectives, the above figures
suggest the extent to which this is likely. Spending money (either ours or that
of other funders) is not, however, an indication of success; empowering
communities and enabling them to implement worthwhile projects is. What we
have been unable to determine is the level of involvement of local
communities in the delivery of projects, or their ultimate, on-going
sustainability. Nor are we generally aware of the fate of projects which were
34
not funded; or of any ‘latent’ demand or need for projects that have not
manifested in applications for this fund. It will therefore be important to
establish procedures and provide adequate resources to focus on monitoring
the achievement of these outcomes in the future.
2.14
This existing funding scheme has been largely reactive, that is it has offered
the opportunity of funding (in accordance with the provisions set out in the
prospectus) and we have waited for projects to come forward. In utilising
Norfolk Community Foundation to administer the fund, we have been able to
take advantage of their knowledge of the wider funding context and of their
links to other funding schemes that have either been able to match BSF
grants or provide funding for some of those projects unsuccessful in their
application to the BSF. This set-up, however, has ‘insulated’ NNDC from the
project and the applicant. We have not therefore been as aware as we might
have been of the need for additional support, which could have increased the
chances of unsuccessful applications, or of how greater benefit might have
been achieved from those that were successful. Nor have we been in a
position to provide support during project implementation to help secure (and
monitor) the outcomes the Council has sought.
2.15
Issues identified prior to establishing the Fund and how these have
been addressed
The report to Cabinet and Overview and Scrutiny Committee in January/
February 2012 identified that the risks to the Council relating to reputation
were twofold.
2.16
•
“Firstly, funds are derived from the County Council’s decision to return
50% of their share of discretionary second homes council tax to the
district in which it is raised. This arrangement sits within NCC’s current
budget regime and therefore the Fund is vulnerable to any future changes
made by the County Council. However, it is a rolling resource and will be
launched with a carry-forward from the North Norfolk Community
Partnership, effectively creating a financial buffer and giving significant
management flexibility in the future should income vary. “
•
“The second reputational risk is around delivering on expectations given
the size of the Fund and the range of proposed resource applications.
This can be mitigated through endorsing the various scheme criteria and
particularly through tracking the use of grant monies to demonstrate their
effectiveness in supporting community wellbeing, and by communicating
regularly on locality projects being developed with town and parish
councils.”
2.17
In relation to the former, funding for the forthcoming financial year (2013/14)
from the District element of the ‘second homes Council Tax’ has been
secured and is expected to amount to £968,386 (compared with £656,812 in
2012/13). Any residual of second homes Council Tax has been rolled forward
at the end of each financial year, and the slight underspend from the first
year’s BSF grant is available for the following year, thus ensuring sufficient
funds for next year and an adequate ‘buffer’ for the following year.
2.18
The second risk identified relates to the effectiveness of the prospectus (and
its application) in exercising ‘quality control’ in decision-making and the
monitoring and feedback mechanisms that are in place. This essentially
relates to the effectiveness of the operational framework (addressed below).
The Overview and Scrutiny Committee received an update report in
35
December 2012 and this report covers the principal concerns in relation to
this risk. It has been generally considered (by NCF, relevant NNDC officers
and the review group) that the prospectus has proven to be appropriate and
has assisted with the determination of both large and smaller grant
applications.
3.
3.1
The effectiveness of the operational framework and administrative
arrangements for the Fund (including the SLA with NCF)
The report to Cabinet of February 2012 set out the proposed operational
framework. This included the heads of terms for the Service Level Agreement
that was subsequently developed, which set up NCF as the administering
body for the Fund. Any publicity around the Fund continued to credit NNDC.
3.2
The SLA has cost £27,000 for the first year of the Fund’s operation (this was
calculated as six per cent of £450,000). In practice Staff in the Coast &
Community Partnerships team have also been actively involved in the
delivery of the Fund, overseeing the administration, reporting large grant
applications to Cabinet, managing the SLA, monitoring the overall
performance of the scheme and handling promotion and public relations
issues.
3.3
3.4
Appraisal and Review
The group appointed by Overview and Scrutiny to review the Fund
considered the following issues alongside the advice of the Chairman of the
Big Society Board (Cllr Ivory) and Council officers responsible for it.
• Whether the fund should operate next year or whether alternatives to
a grant making process would be more effective use of the budget
• The size of the fund in total and the amount to ring fence for external
applications
• The ceiling for any grant awards scheme
• Alternatives to the external grant scheme
• The future administrative arrangements for the fund (and the role of
NCF)
• Any changes to the prospectus
• The role of the Big Society Board
3.5
The group’s deliberations gave rise to the following issues and conclusions.
3.6
The Fund has had many successful outcomes and should continue in the
next financial year. It has been effective overall in achieving its purpose, has
delivered many worthwhile projects and has been consistent with the
expectations of the ‘second homes income’. Changes, however, should be
made to maximise the value of the Funding scheme in achieving the
outcomes set out in the prospectus – improving the opportunity for
communities to benefit from the Fund. An ‘external’ grant fund should
continue to achieve the same benefits as in the past year but the
effectiveness of the support for larger projects would be further improved by
establishing a separate ‘enabling fund’. This would mean that projects can
benefit from bespoke advice and support in the early stages in their
development, ensuring that they are suitably equipped and fit for purpose to
increase their opportunity of success; not only of funding from the enabling
fund but also from other external funders. Together, both the Big Society
Fund and the Enabling Fund will, if supported by resources for
36
implementation, increase the value of the investment and more effectively
deliver the desired outcomes.
3.7
The Fund should total £450k (excluding administration costs), divided equally
into an external competitive grant fund and an ‘enabling’ fund. This amounts
to an overall increase of £27,000 in the grant funding available.
3.8
On reviewing the demand for grants in the first year of the Big Society Fund
(illustrated in Appendix C) together with consideration of the administration
and governance procedures, it was considered that the ceiling for any
external grant awards scheme should be changed to £15k. Applications
above that threshold will be supported and developed via the enabling fund
(for which no ceiling should be set).
3.9
The administrative arrangements for the fund (and the role of NCF) should
change, with the Council undertaking the total administration of the Fund inhouse, therefore adding greater value by taking schemes from inception to
implementation and beyond. This requires additional resource, which could
also be used to support the administration of the external grants scheme; in
doing so many of the issues that have arisen with the SLA could be ironed
out. Administering the grants scheme internally would enable projects to be
better understood and supported from start to finish. That way issues arising
early in the application process can be addressed and hands-on support can
be provided to assist in implementation following grant approval (e.g.
matching applicants to mentors from similar projects).
3.10
Amendments to the prospectus should be made to reflect above changes but
the purpose/ objectives should remain the same. The levels of evidence and
supporting information etc. needed for different grant levels should be made
clear in the prospectus.
3.11
Big Society Board has served well in the process of determining grant
applications for the Big Society Fund and the same arrangement should
continue next year (under slightly revised terms of reference (reflecting the
increased grant threshold).Officers will need a steer on the development of
projects to be assisted by the enabling fund and it is suggested that this be
undertaken alongside the support given to communities in the development of
Localism initiatives (see report on Item 12 on this Cabinet’s agenda). A
‘Localism Board’ is therefore proposed to fulfil this role.
4.
Implications and Risks
This report reviews the effectiveness of a fund which has been both high
profile for the Council and has involved the distribution of large sums of
money. Considerations relating to the way in which the fund has been used in
its first year, and decisions relating to whether and how it will operate in the
coming year, are crucial for the Council’s reputation. The proper and effective
use of this fund is also likely to be a key consideration by Norfolk County
Council in determining the return of the agreed element of the discretionary
‘second homes Council Tax’ to NNDC in the future. The conclusions and
recommendations set out in this report are felt to optimise the potential to
achieve the outcomes sought for the Big Society Fund and reduce the risk of
the funding being lost in the future.
37
5.
Financial Implications and Risks
The recommendations within this report can be supported within the approved
budget. Both the Big Society Fund and the enabling fund will be supported by
the discretionary element of the second homes council tax charge (2013/14)
which is being returned to the District Council by the County Council. This is
£867,563, in addition to the 2012/13 adjustment of £100,823.
The following provides a summary of the allocation within the 2013/14 budget.
£2013/14
Community Grant Fund
Community Transport Schemes
Discretionary rate relief
Voluntary Sector Support
Community Capacity Building
Internal Support
450,000
15,000
68,000
37,500
50,000
64,328
684,828
The overall fund available for external grant aid will be increased next year
(by approximately £27,000) if the recommendation to administer the fund inhouse is supported.
6.
Sustainability
There are no sustainability implications resulting from the recommendations
or options considered in this report.
7.
Equality and Diversity
The proposed changes to the community grant fund scheme provide greater
opportunity to address identified issues and inequalities, therefore the
recommendations in this report are likely to bring improvements to the current
position with respect to equality and diversity.
8.
Section 17 Crime and Disorder considerations
There are no crime and disorder implications resulting from the
recommendations or options considered in this report.
38
Appendix A
Forward
Trevor Ivory
North Norfolk District Council Cabinet Member for Localism
In just one year the Big Society Fund has invested almost £400,000 in 47
community projects across our District. These projects were all ideas that
came from local communities where people were already working hard to try
and achieve something for their town or village and I am delighted that the Big
Society Fund has been able to help those people to achieve their vision.
As well as providing grant funding, the Big Society Fund has also enabled
local organisations and community groups to get access to advice and
support to help them develop their ideas into sustainable projects that will last
long after the grant has been spent.
Despite the tough economic times and North Norfolk District Council’s
commitment to freezing Council Tax, I am very pleased that we have been
able to continue the Fund for a second year and this prospectus provides
information about how to get support from the Fund for your project.
Learning from the experience of the last year we are making some changes to
the way that the Fund works in order to make it as easy as possible for people
to access the funding and advice that they need. Probably the most
significant change is that the Fund will this year be administered by the
Council directly, which means that we are able to increase the amount
available in the fund to £450,000. We are very lucky to have hardworking
people in our towns and villages who give up their time to serve their local
community in many different ways and I look forward to the Big Society Fund
continuing to support them in their efforts.
Trevor Ivory
Summary
The Big Society Fund will assist communities in meeting their needs. The
Fund is provided by North Norfolk District Council and is available to support
community projects throughout the District. The total funding available will be
£450,000. This will be divided equally between a grant fund for projects under
£15,000 and an enabling fund for larger projects.
Both the Big Society Fund grant and enabling funds will be administered by
North Norfolk District Council. The Big Society Fund Grants Panel will meet
four times a year to award grants up to £15,000 while officers and Cabinet
Members will work with larger projects to develop and implement them.
39
Appendix A
The Big Society Fund: Purpose
The purpose of this fund is to help build strong communities in North Norfolk.
It aims to help communities to develop new and innovative projects which will
improve their social and economic wellbeing.
What type of projects would the fund support?
The fund will be available for projects that will improve or support the
wellbeing of our communities and/or deliver improvements to the local
economy. It is expected that projects would be complementary to the priorities
of the Council as detailed within the Corporate Plan and Annual Action Plans.
http://www.northnorfolk.org/council/9047.asp
Outcomes (i.e. benefits or impacts that can be recorded now and/or in the
future) that we would expect to evidence as a result of investment from this
fund are:
•
People working together to achieve benefits that can be both
appreciated by and have real positive impacts for the whole
community, or sections of it that have particular needs related to the
outcomes that will be delivered
•
People who feel part of their community and have a sense of belonging
and responsibility for the good and long-term benefit of the wider
community
•
Communities and/or local groups who feel empowered to make a
difference and make improvements to the lives of those who they
support in the locality
•
An increased number of people volunteering and getting involved in
their local community to achieve greater levels of activity aimed at
improving and sustaining opportunities for the wider community
•
Local economic benefits that can create employment and training
opportunities for those most in need
The kind of activities or initiatives that could be supported, for example, might
include:
1. The provision of new or improved community facilities.
2. The establishment of new organisations or specific activities (for
existing organisations) that will meet identified local needs and can
evidence sustainable long-term outcomes.
3. Events which promote community involvement or innovative
approaches that bring people together, that can be sustained (where
appropriate) by the community in the longer term.
4. Projects that encourage specific (hard-to-reach) people or groups to
become more active in the community (e.g. delivering new training or
work related activities to generate economic benefits for the area).
40
Appendix A
5. Projects that generate and/or increase social enterprise activity,
creating more opportunities for local employment and/or training that
can create or sustain local jobs.
The following will not normally be supported by this Fund:
1. Core or on-going revenue costs for administering existing groups or
organisations, unless it can demonstrated that they are directly linked
to a new project with clear outputs and outcomes and a long-term
sustainability plan or exit strategy.
2. Core or on-going revenue to meet costs such as building maintenance,
cleaning, staffing and infrastructure.
3. Statutory responsibilities and regulatory functions of public bodies.
Who would be eligible to apply?
The Fund will be available for projects that support people and activities within
the North Norfolk District geographical area. The following categories of
organisation are likely to be eligible:
•
Local voluntary organisations, charities (whether registered or not) and
community groups
•
Parish and Town Councils within North Norfolk.
•
Larger regional or national charities/organisations if the funding is to
deliver a specific project in North Norfolk.
•
Community businesses, social enterprises and other not-for profit
organisations
Note: schools will be eligible if the project/ activity proposed relates to
community oriented or supported activities that are outside the school’s
normal core curriculum and/or main term-time educational role (usually
outside school hours).
Organisations that are routinely supported by grant funding from North Norfolk
District Council will not be eligible to apply unless the applicant can prove that
the funding request is for a specific additional project and that the outcomes
are over and above any existing funding agreement with the District Council.
Individuals or private businesses will not be eligible to apply.
How to apply
An application pack containing the guidance notes, application form and
evidence checklist can be downloaded from the North Norfolk District Council
website www.northnorfolk.org or by contacting 01263 516248 / 516173.
Applications will need to demonstrate:
41
Appendix A
•
the project outputs and outcomes and how these match the purpose of
the Big Society Fund
•
the needs or characteristics of the community which the project is
intended to support
•
demonstrable support from within the community that the proposed
project is expected to benefit
•
who the expected beneficiaries are, identifying their location and other
relevant characteristics
•
the governance and management arrangements of the group
responsible for administering or implementing the project
•
the total project budget, including ‘whole-life’ costing’s and the
proposed and alternative sources of funding
•
a programme for implementing the project (including key dates and
timescales)
•
a realistic cash flow forecast for any revenue implications relating to the
project (detailed as appropriate to the scale and scope of the activity
being funded)
•
A commitment to provide evidence of the project outcomes once it is
complete
Applications will only be processed once all the required supporting
documentation is received. The evidence checklist will identify the essential
documentation that will be required to support all applications.
Funding commitment
North Norfolk District Council will honour funding commitments and will expect
applicants to act reasonably with respect to the submission of funding
applications and to be realistic in respect of their ability to spend any
approved Big Society Fund monies; therefore:
•
there will be no limit on the number of times that an organisation can
apply but the expectation is that normally only one application will be
funded in any one year
•
grants will normally be expected to be spent within one year of the date
of the letter confirming the award. A two-year funding commitment
could be made to a project if more than fifty percent of the funding is
committed from other sources for the equivalent period and there is a
clear demonstration of project deliverables over that period, together
with a sustainable funding programme
•
any unspent grant at the end of the grant period shall be expected to
be returned, unless agreement otherwise has been confirmed in writing
by North Norfolk District Council
42
Appendix A
Award of Grants
There will be four funding rounds; the opening and closing dates as well as
when the application round will be determined will be advertised on the North
Norfolk District Council website www.northnorfolk.org and within each
application pack. Funding will be available for each round.
•
Grants of £15,000 or less will be determined by the Big Society Fund
Grants Panel. This Panel will meet four times a year.
•
Ideas or projects for the Enabling Fund will be developed by officers
and the relevant Cabinet Members working with the promoters of the
project.
•
District Council Ward Members will be notified of grants being
submitted which affect their locality.
Audit / Evaluation of Grant
A grant agreement, which will set out the standard or any special grant terms
and conditions, must be signed before the award is confirmed.
Branding
Grant funded projects will be expected to provide a suitable acknowledgement
of the Fund such that it can be viewed by the greatest number of people in the
community (commensurate with the scale and scope of the project as
determined by the funder on approval of the grant).
Any building or infrastructure (including play area and green space) projects
must display acknowledgement of the Fund in an open public area. Plaques
will be provided for this purpose.
It will be made clear in all publicity, correspondence etc. that the Grant is
provided by NNDC
The Big Society Fund Grants Panel
The Big Society Fund Grants Panel has been set up to consider grant
applications up to £15,000.
The terms of reference of the Panel will be available on NNDC’s website.
Administration for the Grant Fund will be provided by North Norfolk District
Council.
North Norfolk District Council will appoint five members and two substitute
members to comprise The Big Society Fund Grants Panel.
The current members of the Panel are:
Cllr Trevor Ivory - Cabinet member for Localism (Chairman)
Cllr Philip High - Member of the Council (Deputy Chairman)
43
Appendix A
Cllr John Wyatt - Member of the Council
Cllr Ben Jarvis - Member of the Council
Cllr Steven Ward – Member of the Council
Cllr Pauline Grove-Jones – Member of the Council (substitute)
Cllr Roy Reynolds – Member of the Council (substitute)
Enabling Fund
Through the Enabling Fund the Council will seek to support projects that help
deliver the Council’s priorities and meet identified community needs, bringing
outcomes that will make a real difference.
Communities or organisations that have an idea or project that they wish to
develop in partnership with North Norfolk District Council, via the Enabling
Fund, should contact Sonia Shuter 01263 516173, email sonia.shuter@northnorfolk.gov.uk
44
Appendix B
Terms of Reference
BIG SOCIETY FUND GRANTS PANEL
Purpose
The Big Society Fund Grants Panel is constituted by North Norfolk District
Council to determine grant applications for the North Norfolk Big Society Fund
up to £15,000 in line with the terms and conditions agreed by North Norfolk
District Council and set out in The Big Society Fund Prospectus.
Authority
1. The Panel has authority to make grant awards from the North Norfolk
Big Society Fund in accordance with the objectives of the Fund, up to a
maximum limit of £15,000.
2. The Big Society Fund will be administered by North Norfolk District
Council. Officers will support the Panel by providing sufficient
information for it to reach decisions on grant applications.
3. The Panel may determine the outcome of grant applications by
approving, refusing or deferring them. It may also grant partial funding
or impose conditions as appropriate on grant approvals.
Composition of the Panel and decision-making
1. The Panel will consist of five members of NNDC, will be politically
balanced and will be selected by NNDC’s Full Council. The Panel will
Comprise:
The Cabinet member for Localism and the Big Society
four other members of the Council (two from the ruling group
and two from the opposition group(s))
2. Two substitutes will be appointed (one from each main political group)
3. The Panel will elect its chair and vice chair annually by majority vote.
4. The quorum of the Panel shall be not less than four members, with
either the chair or vice chair being present.
5. All decisions will be made by a majority vote and in the instances of
there being no majority, the meeting’s chair will have the casting vote.
45
Appendix B
Conflict of Interest
Any member having an interest in an organisation whose application for grant
aid is before the Panel shall declare their connection, withdraw from meeting
for the consideration of that application and not vote. Appointed substitute
member(s) may be invited to attend in order for the Panel to remain quorate.
Support
Relevant officers will attend all meetings of the Panel to report on the
applications to be considered and other items on the agenda or matters of
interest to The Panel. Agendas will be prepared and circulated at least one
week prior to meetings along with all other documentation necessary for the
members to be able to make informed decisions. Minutes will be taken at
each meeting and circulated to the Panel and to the Chief Executive of NNDC,
within one week of the meeting taking place. Minutes will also be reported to
Cabinet.
Meetings
The Panel will meet four times a year, with the precise dates, times and
venues to be agreed by mutual consent at least one month in advance of
each meeting. The Panel may, however, choose to hold additional meetings
to deal with particular matters of urgent business.
46
Appendix C
Total number of applications up to £10,000 - 83
CHART 1
North Norfolk Big Society Fund
Frequency of Grants applied for up to £10,000
2012‐2013
30
25
A
p
p 20
l
N
i
u
m o c 15
b f a
t
e
i
r
o 10
n
s
5
7
7
7
8
8
12
2
0
Application Amount
£'s
47
4
4
24
Appendix C
CHART 2
Total number of applications received - 12
North Norfolk Big Society Fund
Frequency of Grants applied for over £10,000
2012‐2013
4
A 3
p
p
l
N
i
u
m o c 2
b f a
t
e
r
i
o
n
s 1
0
3
2
2
2
2
1
0
0
£10,001-£15,000 £15,001-£20,000 £20,001-£25,000 £25,001-£30,000 £30,001-£35,000 £35,001-£40,000 £40,001-£45,000
Application Amount
£'s
48
Over £45,000
Appendix D
Wells Skate Park ......... £10,000
Wells Malngs Trust ... £38,000
Binham Memorial Hall ..£10,000
High Kelling Village Hall ... £10,000
Holt Community Centre ... £4,000
Holt Parochial Church ...... £10,000
Holt Playing Field Assoc. .. £10,000
Holt Town Council ............ £10,000
Naonal Coastwatch Instuon
Sheringham Skate Park .......... £10,000
The Mo Museum .................... £6,415
Sheringham Sports Assoc. .... £15,000
The Patch—Community ........ £10,000
Small Holding Project
£12,000
Aylmerton Parish Council £2,000
Cromer and Sheringham ....... £2,050
Arts & Literary Fesval
Cromer Skate Park .................... £10,000
Cromer and District Foodbank.. £5,000
Northrepps Film Society ............ £750
Gimingham PC ........... £5,000
Mundesley Youth & Community .. £45,000
Southrepps Parish Council ....£5,176
North Walsham in Bloom .... £4,824
North Walsham Town ......... £7,525
Football Club
North Norfolk Community ... £2,930
Woodland Trust
Historic Society ................... £860
Barsham and
Houghton PC
£3,000
Happisburgh PC ..........£10,000
Sea Palling with
Waxham Community
Trust ............. £5,000
Hempton
PC
£2,500
I?eringham
Community ............ £5,000
Assoc.
Melton
Constable PC
£5,000
Wickmere Parish Council ..... £10,000
Ke?lestone Village Hall ... £6,800
Erpingham Parish Council .......£10,000
Fakenham Recreaon Ground . £10,000
Charity
The Garage Trust ..................... £5,000
(linked with Stalham)
Hindolveston Recreaon ...... £5,712
Ground Commi?ee
Aldborough Community Centre .. £1,000
Skeyton Village Hall Associaon £1,500
North Norfolk Big Society Fund
Tunstead PC ......... £10,000
Grants Awarded – April 2012 - March 2013
Total No. of Grants Awarded - 47
Total Amount Awarded - £397,537
Stalham Brass Band ... £5,000
Poppy Centre Trust .... £10,000
The Garage Trust ...... £5,000
(linked with Fakenham)
Higginbo?om Recreaonal ..... £7,645
Charity
Copeman Centre ..................... £22,000
49
Nancy Oldfield Trust ....... £5,000
Neashead Community... £1,300
Gym
District wide
Fit Together Programme
£9,550
Appendix E
NORTH NORFOLK BIG SOCIETY FUND
FOUR MONTH MONITORING REPORT
Fund Object:
The aim of the fund is to help build strong communities in North Norfolk. It aims to help
communities to develop new and innovative projects which will improve their social and
economic wellbeing.
Grants Awarded:
The Fund committee met in September 2012 and awarded the following grants totalling
£32,430.
Applicant
Aldborough Community Centre
Grant
£1000
North Norfolk : Aldborough
Summary
Aldborough Community Centre provides a venue
for a variety of locally based organisations.
This grant was awarded to replace stage curtains
and track.
Progress
Sue Metcalf reported “The new curtains have transformed the front of the stage from a faded, well worn,
shabby appearance to a brighter, luxurious effect. The hall is in daily use and most of the time the curtains
are closed so they become part of the décor. However, they will be working overtime in February as our
annual pantomine commences. We are sure the curtains will be admired by all those attending this event.”
“Thank you once again for awarding this grant and for the excellent help and user friendly process.”
The group have provided a photograph which was taken during rehearsals.
Applicant
Aylmerton Parish Council
Grant
£2000
North Norfolk : Aylmerton
Summary
Aylmerton Parish Council attends to the facilities
and community of Aylmerton.
This grant was awarded to install skateboard/
cycle/ scooter equipment on the playing field.
Progress
The skateboard ramp was installed in time for the Christmas Holidays. The youngsters were delighted and
made good use of the equipment over the holidays. The group have had feedback from one parent who
said that her child spent 5 hours there in just one day!
1
50
Appendix E
The biggest benefit is that the youngsters now have somewhere to practice their BMX and skateboard skills
in a safe environment. They are no longer playing in the road, thus ensuring their safety as well as that of
other road users and pedestrians. It is also giving the more proficient younsters a chance to showcase their
skills.
Applicant
Cromer and District Foodbank
Grant
£5000
North Norfolk : Cromer
Summary
Cromer and District Foodbank aims to relieve
poverty in the local community through the
collection, storage and distribution of nonperishable food for the benefit of those in need.
This grant was awarded to support the core costs
of establishing and operating the Cromer and
District Foodbank in its first year.
Progress
The demand for this service continues to increase and in response to this growth the group now serves the
Coastal Arc from Holt to Sea Palling, including North Walsham, Aylsham and the rural areas between.
They have distribution centres in Cromer, Sheringham, North Walsham, and from this month Aylsham, with
an intention of extending to Holt later in the year. They are also planning to incorpate an ‘out of hours’
service to their users.
Currently, including trustees, they have approximately seventy volunteers, and around thirty partner
agencies who assess need, issue vouchers, and seek to address the underlying need. Over fifty churches
and more than a dozen schools and community groups have supported the foodbank in various ways, as
well as many individuals.
To the end of January 2013 Cromer and District Foodbank have provided three-days-worth of food (2.8
tonnes) for 330 people, approximately one third of whom are children. The underlying needs include benefit
delays; bereavement; low pay; debt; domestic violence; redundancy; homelessness, among others.
Sometimes the need (both for food and for some sign of hope) is desperate, as evidenced by a client’s
remark: ‘The tunnel has been so long ... this is the first day we have seen any light’. Over recent months
the group have not only been feeding those in need, but have contributed to community cohesion; personal
development; family stability; child well-being and client self-worth.
The trustees were delighted and most grateful to receive this grant and saw it as both a practical financial
support and an encouragement.
Major expenditure of the grant to date has included: Warehouse racking, I.T equipment, tabards for
volunteers and it has also covered volunteer mileage, postage and stationary.
Applicant
Fakenham Recreation Ground
Charity
Grant
£10000
North Norfolk : Fakenham
Summary
Fakenham Recreation Ground Charity is the
trusted body with stewardship of the community
park in Fakenham.
This grant was awarded to upgrade social and
recreational facilities at Millennium Park.
Progress
After waiting until the worst of the winter weather has passed to start the project the group have now
decided to install a cantilever swing at the Millennium Park. They feel this should be a much more exciting
swing option for the 1000+ teenagers in the area, than the current traditional children's swing.
Subsequently, they have placed an order for the installation of a cantilever swing complete with grass mat
safety surrounds estimated at around £9,000. Installation is planned for the week commencing 11th March
2013 in good time for the Easter school holidays. The remainder will be used towards the pre-school play
equipment as indicated in the application.
Applicant
North Norfolk Community
Woodland Trust
Grant
£2930
North Norfolk : North Walsham
2
51
Summary
North Norfolk Community Woodland Trust
manages and enhances community owned
woodland in the parish of Knapton, North Norfolk.
Appendix E
This grant was awarded to develop aspects of the
Woodland.
Progress
After receiving the grant in October the group were unable to obtain the Heather seeding from the Norfolk
Wildlife Trust land at Buxton Heath as the standing heather which was destined for Pigneys Wood had
already started to shed seed and could not be viably cut and moved to their land.
The order has now been repeated for Autumn 2013. The group hope that it is ready to be cut, transported
and applied in September 2013 but if there is a late season, the date could stretch into October.
Applicant
Poppy Centre Trust
Grant
£10000
North Norfolk : Stalham
Summary
Poppy Centre Trust maintains the amenities of
Stalham for the benefit of the inhabitants of
Stalham and Happing area with the object of
improving their conditions of life.
This grant was awarded to complete flooring works
as part of the project to create a youth community
building for Stalham.
Progress
Colin reported in early February that the project of putting in a new floor is well under way and all going to
schedule. The plumbers are in at present with a view to laying the underfloor pipework within the next two
to three weeks. Further funding has since been secured which has brought this project yet closer to
completion, and it is proceeding extremely positively.
Applicant
Skeyton Village Hall Association
Grant
£1500
North Norfolk : Skeyton
Summary
Skeyton Village Hall Association exists for the
benefit of the residents of Skeyton and the
surrounding area. The village hall is used as a
venue for various activity groups, and the
committee seeks to arrange entertainment to foster
and develop community spirit.
This grant was awarded to update the toilet
facilities.
Progress
The work is complete and the updated toilets, washbasins and urinal are more efficient and easy to clean
and maintain.
Mollie Fearn the Chair of the committee stated: “The community and surrounding villages that hire the hall
have all benefitted from the work and on behalf of the committee I would like to thank you so much for the
financial help of your grant. We could not have achieved this without you.”
Grants Awarded:
The Fund committee met in September 2012 Large and awarded the following grants
totalling £22,000.
Applicant
Erpingham P.C.
Grant
£10000
North Norfolk : Erpingham
Summary
Erpingham Parish Council maintains the area of
Erpingham with Calthorpe.
This grant was awarded to construct a multi use
games area (MUGA) in the village of Erpingham.
Progress
This grant was released early January after the group successfully obtained a further £88,500 from the
Community Construction in December. This project is now in a position to go ahead, and works are
expected to start shortly.
3
52
Appendix E
Applicant
National Coastwatch Institution
Mundesley
Grant
£12000
North Norfolk : Cromer and
Mundesley
Summary
National Coastwatch Institution Mundesley assists
in the preservation of life at sea and of those using
the Mundesley foreshore.
This grant was awarded to establish a new NCI
affiliated coastwatch station in North Norfolk
serving Cromer and its immediate environs.
Progress
The group have placed a deposit of £4,000 on a Porta-cabin, and fencing around the site has been
arranged with a local fencing contractor for just under £2,000.
Volunteer watchkeepers have started to step forward for the Runton Coastwatch Lookout, and it seems
that many local residents are happy to volunteer their time as a safety ‘visual.’ The group expect that they
will require around 50 unpaid volunteers.
Update on Large Grants Awarded May 2012:
Applicant
Cromer Skatepark
Grant
£10000
North Norfolk : Cromer
Summary
Cromer Skatepark Cromer is currently fundraising
to build a new skate park at The Meadow in
Cromer.
This grant was awarded to install a skate park
facility.
Progress
Planning permission is now in place, however the group continues to work with North Norfolk District
Council and Norfolk County Council to secure a lease for the land.
Applicant
Sheringham Skate Club
Grant
£10000
North Norfolk : Sheringham
Summary
Sheringham Skate Club Sheringham aims to
promote community participation in healthy
recreation for the benefit of the inhabitants of
Sheringham by the provision of facilities for skate &
bike sports.
This grant was awarded to contribute to the costs
of building the skate park.
Progress
The Sheringham Skate Project started in October 2012 and the grant was used as part of the £150,000
capital costs for the entire project delivery. The facility was opened to the public as a soft-launch before
Christmas, with the major launch event and publicity planned for Spring 2013 (to maximise on good
weather.)
The main beneficiaries are the young people of Sheringham and the surrounding areas, predominantly
aged 14-25. They aim to cater for 1000 young people in year one, mainly repeat visitors.
Applicant
Wells Maltings Trust
Grant
£38000
North Norfolk : Wells next the Sea
Summary
Wells Maltings Trust plans to restore and repair the
historic Maltings building and create an exciting
landmark community facility and visitor destination
to the social and economic regeneration of the
local area.
This grant was awarded to restore and repair the
Sackhouse building.
4
53
Appendix E
Progress
The initial pre-work preparation has begun however the main body of the build work on the Sackhouse is
yet to start. The Sackhouse is currently being prepared with a local building firm, stripping out the
Sackhouse and completing remedial dampwork. No major problems have been experienced so far and the
main body of the work is expected to start in March.
The group continues to raise awareness of the project via their website and in the local press and this has
continued to generate positive interest including a waiting list of local businesses. The groups feels that the
project is benefitting the whole community of Wells and the surrounding villages but especially the local
small enterprises, start up businesses and teenagers, and ultimately offers huge positive benefits for the
regeneration of Wells which will impact on the whole community.
5
54
Agenda Item No___12_________
THE COUNCIL’S APPROACH TO INITIATIVES ARISING FROM COMMUNITY RIGHTS
UNDER LOCALISM
Summary:
This report sets out the Council’s procedures for
implementing actions in response to Community Right
to Challenge and Bid and what the Provisions mean for
communities and the Council.
Options considered:
The following options were considered as a Council
approach to processing Expressions of Interest and
Nominations that are required through Government
regulations relating to Community Right to challenge
and Community Right to bid.
Consider community expressions of interest and
Challenges through existing Council committees. This
approach however, may lack the focus required to
develop officer and member knowledge and awareness
of the particular regulations set out by Government, or
enhance the processes adopted and required for
considering aspects of legal and financial procedure.
Conclusions:
This report has reviewed the current provisions that
Government have provided to support the local
community interest in running local government services
as well as the procedures for listing assets of
community value. It sets out how the Council should
respond in respect of enabling communities develop
their ambitions under the Community Right to Challenge
and Right to Bid processes, and identifies the sort of
issues and requirements that may arise from an asset
and service management role. More specifically the
report has assessed the implications and actions that
members and officers may wish to consider when taking
forward actions that could support the Council’s
strategic decision-making and delivery of various
approaches under the Localism agenda.
Recommendations:
Cabinet is asked to resolve:
1. That a ‘Localism Board’ (comprising relevant
Cabinet members and officers) be set up to
provide a steer with respect to Localism
initiatives and community projects
(particularly in relation to expressions of
interest for local public services (under the
Community Right to Challenge) and
nominations for assets of Community Value
(under the Community Right to Bid)). Noting
that decisions resulting from the Board’s
recommendations (with appropriate local
member involvement) would be reported to
Cabinet/ Council as appropriate.
2. That the process identified in Appendix F be
adopted in respect of expressions of interest
for local public services (under the
Community Right to Challenge)
55
3. That the process identified in Appendix G be
adopted for the consideration of nominations
for assets of Community Value (under the
Community Right to Bid).
Reasons for
Recommendations:
The Council is required by law (Localism Act 2011) to
implement regulations under Community Rights to
Challenge and Bid. The recommendations provide the
most appropriate means by which the Localism Agenda
can support the wider community in North Norfolk. For
the Community Right to Challenge and Right to Bid to
be effective, the Council must ensure that sufficient
information is made available and that due processes
are established and followed within the regulation’s that
have been approved.
LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS AS REQUIRED BY LAW
(Papers relied on to write the report, which do not contain exempt information and which are not published
elsewhere)
Localism Act 2011
Public services (Social Value) Act 2012
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected - ALL
Cllr T Ivory
Contact Officer, telephone number and email:
John Mullen; 01263 516104; john.mullen@north-norfolk.gov.uk
1.
Introduction
1.1
This report identifies the need for the Council to consider its role in enabling
community interest in order that community organisations can access opportunities
to manage local public services and/or have assets of community value listed by the
Council. These two strands of localism require the Council to develop processes that
can identify and action key responses in order that it is both compliant with the main
regulations and offers sufficient information and action that will help meet community
aspirations under these provisions. The 2013/14 NNDC draft Annual Action Plan
supports the development of Community Rights to Challenge initiatives stating that:
“We will respond positively to a Community Right to Challenge to take over the
running of services within their area/communities if they can be run more efficiently”
1.2
The Localism Act sets out the Government’s intention to “meet the challenge to
deliver better for less”. Community Right to Challenge is one of the five key
measures that sit at the centre of the Localism Act that support local areas in driving
up community engagement and new efficiencies while seeking to deliver improved
public services. This report deals specifically with the Rights to Challenge and Bid,
however, by way of context, the main Localism measures are outlined on the
Council’s website at: http://www.northnorfolk.org/community/9992.asp and Members
will be updated on any specific implications of other provisions at a future meeting.
1.3
The Right to Challenge
Communities, through representative groups named as “relevant bodies,” are
provided with the opportunity to submit expressions of interest to compete in a
procurement exercise for the running of local services which they feel can improve
the “economic, social and environment well-being of the local area” (i.e. creating
jobs, improving skills, increasing volunteering, improving environmental
considerations,” reflecting the definition of “social value” embedded in the 2012
Public Service (Social Value) Act).
56
1.4
The Right to Bid
Communities have the capacity to nominate private and public assets that can be
proven to have social value (Assets of Community Value) for their local areas. The
Right provides the opportunity for the community to identify land and/or premises in
their areas that are considered to be important to the future well-being of those
communities. The nominations of assets of Community Value can create a window
of opportunity (moratorium on the sale for a period of up to six months) to generate
sufficient finance to secure private/public assets before being sold on the open
market.
2.
Community Right to Challenge – Processes and NNDC’s response
2.1
The main recommendation of this report that is to set up a Locality Board in respect
of developing the procedures that are required to receive and process Community
Rights to Challenge expressions of interest. The new Board would be expected to
provide both a strategic steer for the Council under the issues presented by the
Communities Rights approach and both agree and develop clear and timely actions
that will ensure compliance with the Government regulations.
As of 27 June 2012 the Community Right to Challenge (CRTC) came into force as a
measure of the Localism Act. CRTC enables communities to express an interest in
providing local authority* services (*county, district, unitary, fire and rescue
authorities, and London boroughs).
This measure provides the opportunity for “relevant bodies” (voluntary (i.e. nonprofit), community groups; charities; Parish Councils; or employees (two or more) of
the relevant local authority) to express an interest in providing or assisting in
providing a relevant service on behalf of the local authority ahead of that service
being part of a procurement exercise that will open up competition for the service to
all other interests.
The function of any service subject to such an expression of interest will remain with
the local authority; it is the provision of that service that will be subject to challenge.
2.2
Statutory processes for the LA to undertake are as follows
The administration of the Right to Challenge measure is subject to statutory
guidance (summarised in Appendix F, as issued by the Department for Communities
& Local Government (DCLG), Local authorities are expected to develop a response
to any expressions of interest in relation to the following:
1. the information that is required in the expression
2. the grounds whereby the expression may be rejected
3. the notification of decisions on expressions and the period for handling the
expression to the point of commencement for the commissioning of the particular
service
2.3
Information required by NNDC in an Expression of Interest (EOI)
•
Information about the financial resources of the relevant body submitting the EoI
(and that of any consortium members or sub-contractors that may be involved).
•
Evidence that demonstrates that by the time of any procurement exercise the
relevant body submitting the EoI (as well as any consortium members or subcontractors that may be involved) will be capable of providing or assisting in
providing the relevant service.
•
Information about the relevant service sufficient to identify it and the
geographical area to which the expression of interest relates.
57
•
Information about the outcomes to be achieved by the relevant body or, where
appropriate, the consortium of which it is a part, in providing or assisting in the
provision of the relevant service, in particular:
- How the provision or assistance will promote or improve the social, economic
or environmental well-being of the relevant authority’s area; and
- How it will meet the needs of the users of the relevant service.
•
Where the relevant body consists of employees of the relevant authority, details
of how that relevant body proposes to engage other employees of the relevant
authority who are affected by the expression of interest
2.4
When expressions of interest can be considered
NNDC is required only to accept written expressions of interest from the relevant
body specified in section 2.1. If the Council through the Locality Board has decided
and published the period for any particular service to be commissioned it is not duty
bound to consider an expression of interest outside of this period. The authority can
request further information from the relevant body but need not make this
information a basis on which to reject the challenge.
Providing a set period every year for receiving expressions of interest provides the
Council with an opportunity to develop a clear and defined process that can set the
parameters for ensuring services are prepared for any expressions of interest being
submitted and the Relevant Bodies making the Challenge are aware of the period
that those expressions can be received and therefore trigger the processes laid out
in the following paragraphs.
There may also be a requirement to give more time for the procurement process
given the scale and scope of particular services that are larger, more complex and
therefore may demand lengthier assessment. The Council also has the power to
refuse an expression outside any period that it has set for considerations of
expressions, although local authorities have not got exclusion rights to prevent
expressions being received outside set periods.
Providing a set period every year for receiving expressions of interest provides the
Council with an opportunity to develop a clear and defined process that can identify
a period by which Heads of Service can ensure that any challenges within their own
service procurement timescales are managed and assessed.
2.5
Grounds whereby an Expression of Interest may be rejected.
Local authorities, having published the specific period for consideration of
expressions of interest, must then provide either a positive request for the relevant
body to proceed to the commissioning phase, or reject the expression on one or
more of the particular grounds as detailed below:
1. The expression of interest does not comply with any of the requirements specified
in the Act or in regulations.
2. The relevant body provides information in the expression of interest which in the
opinion of the relevant authority, is in a material particular inadequate or inaccurate.
3. The relevant authority considers, based on the information in the expression of
interest, that the relevant body or, where applicable(a) Any member of the consortium of which it is a part, or
(b) Any sub-contractor referred to in the expression of interest
is not suitable to provide or assist in providing the relevant service.
58
4. The expression of interest relates to a relevant service where a decision,
evidenced in writing, has been taken by the relevant authority to stop providing that
service.
5. The expression of interest relates to a relevant service (a) provided, in whole or in part, by or on behalf of the relevant authority to persons
who are also in receipt of a service provided or arranged by an NHS body which is
integrated with the relevant service; and
(b) The continued integration of such services is, in the opinion of the relevant
authority, critical to the well-being of those persons.
6. The relevant service is already the subject of a procurement exercise.
7. The relevant authority and a third party have entered into negotiations for
provision of the service, which negotiations are at least in part conducted in writing.
8. The relevant authority has published its intention to consider the provision of the
relevant service by a body that 2 or more specified employees of that authority
propose to establish.
9. The relevant authority considers that the expression of interest is frivolous or
vexatious.
10. The relevant authority considers that acceptance of the expression of interest is
likely to lead to contravention of an enactment or other rule of law or a breach of
statutory duty.
2.6
National Support for Relevant Bodies considering Community Right to Challenge
The Government is currently providing finance for advice and funding that is being
delivered through national intermediary bodies including Locality, Social Investment
Business, ACEVO. The funding support for developing the Community Right to
Challenge is summarised as follows:
Pre-feasibility
Pre-feasibility grants (for amounts of up to £10,000) are available to help
organisations to build internal capacity to help them to compete to deliver public
services.
Feasibility
Feasibility grants may be made available to organisations that are able to
demonstrate that they have good potential to compete effectively to deliver public
services. These grants are for up to £100,000 and can be used to support
organisations in preparation for competing in procurement bids.
Service delivery grants
There will also be a small number of service delivery grants. These grants will not be
available by open application but Social Investment Business (SIB) will invite
applications from relevant bodies against a set of criteria which will be published on
both the Community Rights website and the Social Investment Business’s website. It
is expected that many of these service delivery grants will include a repayable
element; therefore they are a mix of loans and grant.
2.7
NNDC will provide help and advice to organisations seeking to develop appropriate
Challenge opportunities and, via the ‘Enabling Fund’ (recommended to Cabinet in
59
the report on the review of the Big Society Fund) may be able to provide some
match funding.
2.8
Procurement process
The Right to Challenge regulations provide opportunity for Relevant Bodies to
achieve a basis from which they have the capacity to develop a business case
ahead of the procurement for relevant Council services. The Council will provide
sufficient notice of the procurement deadlines that will provide a reasonable period
for the Relevant Body in which to develop their business case ahead of any
procurement process. The Procurement stage of the process for running or
managing a particular service (once the pre-procurement stage has been complete)
will then be open to competition under existing Council procurement rules.
3.
Community Right to Bid
3.1
The Community Right to Bid as it relates to local assets (land and property) provides
third sector organisations and local parish and town councils with the opportunity to
have assets that are deemed to be of “Community Value” listed for a period of 5
years. ”Assets of Community Value” are defined as - “buildings or land used to
further the social wellbeing in particular, though not exclusively, the cultural,
recreational or sporting interests of the local community.” The key aspect of the
Community Right to Bid process concerns the window of opportunity that the
successful listing of an asset provides to the relevant community body before a
property can be legitimately sold. Therefore from the point at which an asset may be
put on the market, the relevant community body (that has already managed to have
the asset successfully listed with the Council), has a six month period (from
notification of a sale by the owner) to then secure the finance to compete with other
potential bidders for the right to purchase the asset. Within the six month moratorium
period the asset cannot be sold on by the owner.
3.2
Community Rights to Bid (nominations and listing) process
The following process is proposed, specifically in relation to the role of the Locality
Board, as a key part of developing the Council’s approach to the Community Right to
Bid.
NNDC (under the guidance of the Locality Board) will determine the format of the
list, any modifications made to any of the entries on the list and any removal of an
entry from the list.
A community nomination must come from a parish council, a community council or a
locally connected voluntary or community body. The nomination has to be made for
land or buildings in the nominee’s local area.
If NNDC deems that the asset does have community value, and it is in the local
area, than it will add that asset to the ‘assets of community value’ list.
If the nomination is unsuccessful NNDC will notify the nominee in writing and provide
an explanation as to why the nomination was unsuccessful.
NNDC will notify the landowner, the occupier and the community nominee of any
inclusion or removal of an asset to the list.
60
A landowner can ask NNDC to review the inclusion of the asset from the list. The
Regulations state that the owner can ask for a review of the listing 8 weeks from the
date that the written notice has been given to the owner by the Council.
NNDC will also maintain a list of ‘land nominated by an unsuccessful
community nomination’.
If land is included in the list of assets of community value it will remain on that list for
five years.
Within the Regulations there are defined processes for compensation claims that
can be made by the owner against loss and expense incurred through the asset
being listed or previously listed. The grounds for compensation will be considered by
the Council and must relate solely to a period of delay while entering into binding
agreements to sell that may be caused by the interim or full moratorium periods. The
Government have made certain provision within the new “burdens funding” and state
that they will make compensation payments arising out of successful claims of over
£20,000 in one financial year, either from one single claim or several smaller claims.
3.3
Local Authority duties
The Council has to consider each nomination (in written form) made to list an asset
of “Community Value” that falls under the national regulations enacted in October
2012. The proposed process for nominations, decisions and listing an asset are
summarised in Appendix G. The Regulations have presented the need for there to
be a basic process in response both to service challenges and asset nominations
ensuring at the same time that the Council has one point of contact for the
nominator, asset owner and other officers/members to engage in the processes that
are required by law.
3.4
National support for Right to Bid
The Government has provided resources to various intermediary national bodies
(Locality/Social Investment Business and ACEVO) to provide a range of support
measures from advice through to capital grants that can enable local communities
develop their plans to bid for assets of Community Value, these are as follows:
3.4.1
Pre-feasibility grants
Pre-feasibility grants (for amounts up to £10,000) are available for organisations to
build their internal capacity to prepare to take receipt of an asset transfer or, else, a
bid to buy land and buildings of community value.
3.4.2
Feasibility grants
Feasibility grants may be made available to organisations that demonstrate they
have the potential to meet local needs through the acquisition and management of
land and buildings. These grants are mixed capital and revenue for amounts of up to
£100,000 and can be used by organisations to develop investment proposals and
carry out feasibility studies equipping them to take ownership of assets through
discounted transfer or, else, bid to buy land and buildings of community value.
3.4.3
Similarly to the Right to Challenge, NNDC will provide help and advice to
organisations seeking to develop appropriate bid opportunities and, via the ‘Enabling
Fund’ (recommended to Cabinet in the report on the review of the Big Society Fund)
may be able to provide some match funding.
61
3.4.4
Capital grants: Community Assets – Under the Hammer
The Social Investment Business was initially accepting expressions of interest under
a first cohort round of funding for the capital element of the Community Assets and
Services Grants (until 8 February 2013). These grants are available for the purchase
of assets identified either through Right to Bid or Community Asset Transfer.
Expressions of interest are encouraged from exemplar organisations that can
showcase pioneering community-led service delivery and can inspire similar
initiatives across the country.
4.
Conclusion
This report sets out the current provisions that Government has laid down to support
the local communities develop their interest in running local government services
and the processes for listing “assets of community value”. It sets out how the Council
should respond in respect of enabling communities develop their ambitions under
the Community Right to Challenge and Right to Bid processes, and the sort of
issues and requirements that may arise from an asset and service management
role. More specifically the report has assessed the implications and actions that
members and officers should consider when taking forward actions that could
support the Council’s strategic decision-making and delivery of various measures
under the Localism agenda.
5.
Implications and Risks
The implications and risks for the Council in relation to the recommendations of this
report are considered to be modest given that the report recommends that the
Council recognises the importance of developing an approach that has been
considered in the report and therefore recommended to be set within the context of a
new Locality Board.
6.
Financial Implications and Risks
The financial implications that can be highlighted under the Community Right to
Challenge and Right to Bid have been considered on the basis of developing the
Council’s approach to the measures under the context of setting up a Locality Board
as recommended in the report.
7.
Sustainability
It is not thought that there should be any major sustainability issues that may impact
on the role the Council has within the Community Rights provisions. However,
consideration on individual case by case basis would be appropriate on individual
nominations for assets of community value and expressions of interest by relevant
bodies to manage council services. Therefore, assessment will be required to be
made so that the Council will be satisfied that through any actions taken there will be
no detrimental or adverse impacts on the environment.
8.
Equality and Diversity
Equality and diversity issues, as with sustainability and crime and disorder
considerations, may not viewed as relevant through the policy and procedures that
are agreed under the Rights to Challenge and Bid, but nonetheless should be
considered on an individual basis through assessing nominations or challenges that
come forward under the measures that have been described within this report.
9.
Section 17 Crime and Disorder considerations
62
Crime and Disorder considerations should be viewed and action decided on an
individual basis through assessing nominations or challenges that come forward
under the measures that have been described within this report.
63
Appendix F – Community Right to Challenge process
Adapted from Chartered Institute for Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA)
64
Appendix G
Community Right to Bid Process for NNDC
“Asset of Community
Value” identified by the
Community
START OF PROCESS
Third Sector Org’
enquiries: Initial
Nomination form
submitted to NNDC
Appeal by
TSO?
Nomination of Asset
Recorded on internal
list – Held by Property
Services
Initial analysis
undertaken
Reject:
Community
group informed
Of decision
Moratorium
Period
Six weeks
Assessment
of community
interest. Owner
informed.
Successful
appeal
Asset listed for a period of five years.
Owner informed of 6 month
moratorium period if asset is put on
market at a future date
Owner’s
objection
successful
Owner has right of appeal once
notified of formal listing of Asset
within 8 weeks of Asset being listed.
Asset listed only on
unsuccessful community
nominations list
Owner’s
Objection
Unsuccessful
Asset remains listed
for 5 year period – List
maintained by NNDC
65