Agenda item

LDLSP Performance Reward Grant

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Blamire)

 

Report of the Head of Community Engagement

 

Minutes:


(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Blamire)

 

Cabinet received a report from the Head of Community Engagement to seek approval for the latest proposals from the Lancaster District Local Strategic Partnership (LDLSP) Management Group for the allocation of the one-off Performance Reward Grant (PRG).

 

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

 

 

Advantages

Disadvantages

Risks

Option 1: Approve the proposals

 

Key priorities for the LDLSP and the City Council will be addressed, including the Climate Change, Economic Regeneration and Partnership Working corporate plan  priorities

 

A significant amount of matched funding will be secured for the district

 

Delegation of authority to agree the specific domestic abuse activities will ensure no delay in decision-making

 

 

There will be no PRG revenue funding available to address any future issues that arise

 

Financial and reputational risks: The initiatives are complex and will require strong leadership and management to ensure they are successful. If this is not achieved then any delays or failures could result in a waste of public funds, and reputational risk to the LDLSP and its partners, including the City Council.

 

 

Option 2: Do nothing

The PRG funding would be available for other initiatives.

 

The proposed initiatives will not go ahead, leading to missed opportunities to deliver better services and outcomes for local people.

 

Matched funding via the CERT and FITs schemes will be lost.

 

Reputational risk: there is the potential for a loss of trust between the City Council and other LDLSP partners

 

 

 

The LDLSP has finalised proposals for the proposed PRG initiatives and approval from Cabinet was required to ensure that these benefits were now realised:

 

·          The focus on hydroelectricity would facilitate the development of long-term renewable energy initiatives that would leverage initial investment AND provide a long-term benefit for local communities.

·          The ‘Warm Homes’ initiative would insulate 2000 homes, many occupied by households at risk of fuel poverty, with matched funding maximising the LSP’s investment.

 

·          The social enterprise initiative would help to create self-sustaining service delivery and will enhance the potential of local organisations in supporting their local communities.

 

·          The fund finder initiative will not only bring at least £1 million of new strategic investment into the district, but would improve the ability of organisations to successfully bid for their own funds in future.

 

·          The domestic abuse initiative would provide direct and immediate support to some of the district’s most vulnerable families, as well as helping to ensure a sustainable future for domestic abuse services beyond 2012.

 

These initiatives were complex and amendments to the plans would certainly be required – by delegating authority to the Leader to approve those decisions Cabinet would ensure that approval was given in a timely manner.

 

PRG was a one-off opportunity and these initiatives would ensure that it would meet partner expectations and deliver a lasting legacy in the district. Further initiatives that would benefit from the unallocated capital PRG monies were currently being considered by the LSP.  Authorisation for any proposed use of this would be sought in a subsequent report to Cabinet - there was no deadline by which the PRG must be spent.

 

 

Councillor Barry proposed, seconded by Councillor Hamilton-Cox:-

 

(1)        “That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved with the following amendment to recommendation (3): ‘That the LDLSP be asked whether the figure of £35K for advice within the Social Enterprise Initiative would be better spent on direct funding to organisations and that the Leader of the Council be requested to make a decision based on their response.”

 

Councillors then voted on the amended proposition:-

 

Resolved unanimously:

 

(1)                    That Cabinet notes the requirements of the Performance Reward Grant protocol with Lancashire County Council that LSP’s shall make recommendations to the District Councils as to the allocation of the PRG and all funding decisions shall be made via this route” and that “councils have the responsibility for the proper use of the funds and therefore for formally approving the allocation of the funds.”

 

(2)                    That Cabinet notes the progress made with the Performance Reward Grant initiatives and the formation of an LDLSP Performance Management Sub-Group to ensure outputs and outcomes are delivered.

 

(3)        That, in line with Recommendation 1, that the LDLSP proposals for allocation of Performance Reward Grant are approved as follows, subject to the council’s accountable body requirements, including appropriate financial procedures and performance management and the LDLSP be asked whether the figure of £35K for advice within the Social Enterprise Initiative would be better spent on direct funding to organisations and that the Leader of the Council be requested to make a decision based on their response.

 

·         £15k revenue funding to support the development of further hydroelectricity initiatives, via an open, competitive bidding process

 

·         £100k capital and £5k revenue funding to support the Warm Homes scheme 

 

·         £120k revenue funding to support the Social Enterprise Initiative

 

·         £100k revenue to support the Cooperative Fund Finding Initiative

 

·         £70k revenue to support services for the victims of domestic abuse

 

(3)                    That approval for the specific allocations within the domestic abuse initiative, and any further amendments to any of the other initiatives, is delegated to the Leader of the Council to ensure that the council’s responsibilities for Performance Reward Grant are fully met.

 

(4)                    That the Council’s General Fund (GF) Capital Programme and GF Revenue Budget are updated as appropriate across 2010/11 and 2011/12 in line with expected spending profiles.

 

 

Officers responsible for effecting the decision:

 

Head of Community Engagement

Head of Financial Services

 

Reasons for making the decision:

 

The initiatives proposed would impact on the Corporate Plan priorities as follows:

 

·   Climate Change – the Hydroelectricity and Warm Homes schemes will reduce CO2 emissions in the district

 

·   Economic Regeneration - The Social Enterprise Initiative will increase the number of financially sustainable small businesses in the area

 

·   Partnership Working and Community Leadership: all the initiatives will be delivered in partnership, and the Cooperative Fund Finder initiative will help increase the resources available for key partnership projects

 

·   Protecting the most vulnerable in society: those at risk of fuel poverty will be supported through the Warm Homes scheme, and vulnerable individuals and families will be supported through the Domestic Abuse scheme

 

Supporting documents: