(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Clifford)
Report of Chief Officer (Regeneration & Planning)
Minutes:
(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Clifford)
Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer (Regeneration & Planning) which provided an up to date position regarding Arts commissioning and options for consideration in terms of support for Arts in the district.
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:
|
Option 1: Arts commissioning is not undertaken at the present time - current arts investment arrangements continue |
Option 2: Arts commissioning is undertaken and initial work begins as soon as possible |
Advantages |
Current arrangements deliver a good return and value for money for the Council
Current arrangements are robust and well managed
Current arrangements are consistent with criteria agreed as part of the Arts Commissioning Framework
Less uncertainty created for Arts organisations with current SLA’s
No additional costs are incurred to meet resource requirements
Allows time for funding and sectoral issues to stabilise
No statutory requirement for the Council to introduce commissioning
|
Provides a refresh of current investments
Additional information may be obtained from consultation/ engagement with Arts sector and audiences
Potentially new initiatives can be supported within the overall budget
Provides longer term planning opportunities for successful delivery partners
Provides a robust framework in which to secure continuous improvement and VFM, in accordance with statutory requirements |
Disadvantages |
Flexibility to invest in new initiatives is limited to any other budgets that may be available from time to time.
Does not address potential gaps in service provision
|
Insufficient internal capacity at present, therefore additional costs will be needed to provide the resources required to develop and deliver Arts commissioning (subject to redirection away from other council priorities)
The Council’s investment may (or may not) be distributed differently creating uncertainty and risks for organisations with existing SLA’s
|
Risks |
Risk of underperformance – very low and managed as part of the monitoring and evaluation process |
Other priority areas of work may be affected as impact on managerial time is inevitable
Risk of underperformance – would be managed as part of the monitoring and evaluation process
|
The Officer preferred Option was Option 1, which provides a good return on the Council’s investment in the Arts, avoids creating further instability in the Arts sector at a time when many changes are taking place and is manageable within existing staff resources.
The Council’s financial position is however under review as are the positions of other public sector funders to the arts, and it is difficult to justify investing in a commissioning strategy at this time until the future of these arrangements is determined.
Councillor Clifford proposed, seconded by Councillor Hanson:-
“That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved.”
Councillors then voted:-
Resolved unanimously:
(1) That the City Council’s existing Arts investment framework continues, subject to annual budget processes, until such a time as Cabinet determines that it wishes to take an alternative approach.
(2) That, to ensure value for money and provide consistency, the commissioning criteria outlined in the Commissioning Framework and agreed by Cabinet in December 2012, as well as any relevant performance measures, be used as the basis of evaluation for the City Council’s investment in the Arts.
Officer responsible for effecting the decision:
Chief Officer (Regeneration & Planning)
Chief Officer (Resources)
Reasons for making the decision:
Investment in the Arts supports the City Council’s Corporate Priority of Sustainable Economic Growth, contributing to the delivery of the corporate outcome “The attractiveness and offer of the district, as a place to visit or invest in, will be improved.”
SLA’s were working well and it would be remiss to go down a route which would take away the City Council’s commitment to that process.
Supporting documents: