London Borough of Richmond upon Thames Voluntary Sector Grants Review
DRAFT
All funding of community and voluntary sector groups allocated for 2011/12 from the
corporate grants budget, carers budget or Departmental budgets will be reviewed as part
of the Council’s zero based budgeting review.
1.
Objectives
The review is being undertaken against the backdrop of reduced local government
funding. The objectives of the review are
1.
2.
3.
2.
To ensure that funded activity reflects Council priorities
To identify whether different or new services should be commissioned or recommissioned
To identify budget savings within allocations for 2011/12
Review Criteria
It is proposed to review the grants in two stages, firstly considering whether the funding
matches Council priorities and secondly carrying out a risk/ benefit analysis of changes
to the funding arrangements for individual organisations. The review is not intended to
consider allocations against organisational performance.
Stage 1 - Does the funded area of work reflect Council priorities?
The following criteria for reviewing funded services is proposed:
a) Priority by sector - the existing priorities to be ranked as high, medium or low,
(H/M/L) bearing in mind that level of client vulnerability is a defining factor.
Current grant funding sectors are as follows:
 Advice
 Carers
 Children and Families
 Community Development
 Environment and Sustainability
 Equalities and Diversity
 Homelessness
 Infrastructure and Capacity Building
 Learning Disability
 Mental Health
 Older People
 Physical Disability
 Sport and Culture
 Young People
08/03/2016
1 of 4
And the extent to which the service contributes to
b) Volunteering (H/M/L)
c) Socially enterprising sector development opportunities (H/M/L)
d) Community engagement (H/M/L)
Stage 2 - Risk analysis of disinvestment by sector and individual organisations
The following criteria for analysing risk is proposed:
1) Provider risk
a) Impact on financial sustainability
i) Level of reserves – as % of turnover
ii) Proportion of grant to turnover
iii) Level of other statutory funding – as % of turnover
iv) Fundraising capacity (H/M/L)
2) Demand risk
a) Does disinvestment create a new or renewed demand for Council services and
therefore create a new cost pressure (H/M/L)
b) Does disinvestment create any other pressures on the Council’s resources
(H/M/L)?
c) Does disinvestment have a longer term impact e.g. the prevention agenda?
(H/M/L)
3) Supply Risk
a) Are there risks to the marketplace? Both commissioners and individuals in
receipt of a personal budget need a healthy marketplace (H/M/L)
b) Are there other providers providing the same service to the same client group?
The review will be subject to an EINA.
Question 1: Does the criteria consider the right areas for review?
3.
Review Process
The review process is outlined in the table below and includes a two month period for
consulting with the voluntary sector. The review of grant awards will only involve
affected organisations. The process and timetable for the review is as follows:
08/03/2016
2 of 4
Voluntary Sector invited to comment
against Review Criteria and Review
Process (this document)
30 July 2010
Review Criteria and Review Process
finalised
13 August 2010
Consultation with affected organisations on
identifying priorities and options for making
savings to the grants budget within each
sector and continuing to support vulnerable
people
16 August – 18 October 2010
Voluntary organisations invited to carry out
an impact assessment on vulnerable
people including service user views.
Officers complete scoring matrix against
each grant award
18 October 2010 – 19 November
Grants Matrix (link to document)
Matrix is reviewed by Panel of
Commissioning Officers who then make
recommendations on funding levels
Notification of Decisions
15 December 2010
Question 2: Does the Grant Review Assessment Criteria Matrix address the right
areas for the review?
Question 3: How would your organisation prefer to engage with the Council
during the consultation period?
Question 4:
08/03/2016
Please include here any other comments
3 of 4
08/03/2016
4 of 4