Agenda item

The Executive Member for Health and Wellbeing submitted a report updating Members on a review of grants allocated between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2016.  The report also sought the approval of the Executive to changes in the grants policy to support new corporate priorities as detailed in the Essential Reference Paper. 

The Engagements and Partnerships Officer (Grants) provided a summary of the report as now submitted.  She drew Members’ attention to the fact that, as the changes to the policy were minor in nature, the Executive Member for Health and Wellbeing via his delegated powers could approve the revised grants policy as a non-key decision.  Additionally, recommendation (B) needed to be amended to reflect the figures from “£500 to £1000”.  She also referred to funding priorities and said that one of the changes to the policy had been to add the priority of funding “projects that tackle inactivity and result in residents leading active and healthy lives.”

The Chairman referred to correspondence she had received which stated that in relation to discretionary grants and the need to obtain endorsement from local Members, some applicants found Councillors hard to reach.  She said it was best practice for Members to meet with applicants or at least have a telephone conversation before endorsing individual bids.

In response to a query from Councillor M Pope, assurances were provided that the Council was doing all it could to support the vulnerable and elderly, but that there was a role to be played by Councillors in terms of community involvement.  The Engagements and Partnerships Team Leader noted that “pop up” themed grants, such as the recent Queen’s 90^th birthday, funded community events that brought people together and enhanced friendships/support networks. 

Councillor P Ruffles referred to the policy that grants could not be provided to promote an individual faith, but that the Council would support a Church Hall application.  Councillor Ruffles felt that this was discriminatory. 

The Executive Member of Health and Wellbeing clarified that there was a difference between  promoting a particular faith (which the Council would not support) and supporting wider community usage of the church hall and activities organised by a faith based group to benefit all the community.  The Engagements and Partnerships Team Leader reiterated that this was Council policy.  She went on to explain  that she represented the Council on the county-wide Interfaith Forum and works alongside community faith groups to promote and build  community cohesion.

Members asked that they be kept informed regarding which grants in their wards that they had endorsed had been successful.  Councillor J Jones referred to the fact that Members used to have a personal “pot”  which could be allocated at their discretion to support local voluntary groups.  It was clarified that these funds had not been lost, but had been pooled and were now available through the central application process.  The “mini-grant” and “pop up” grant schemes achieved the same outcome, with local Members promoting and endorsing applications from groups in their ward.

Councillors J Jones and C Snowdon referred to the complexity of the grant application process which hindered some applicants.  Officers explained that minimum eligibility criteria required applications to have a bank account in their own name and be able to demonstrate good governance.  Groups applying for larger grants needed to  have a formal constitution.

The Engagements and Partnerships Team Leader referred to the consultation with village hall volunteers, where it was noted that, compared to other local authority grant schemes, East Herts Council’s was relatively straight forward.  She added that Officers provided ongoing support and worked with applicants during the process, but that it was important the minimum criteria was met which was for their protection as well as ensuring proper use of Council funds.  The Officer referred to the “mini grant” process which was designed to be simpler. 

Councillor M Pope referred to the Community Health and Wellbeing Fund and asked for an update on why a substantial amount of money remained unspent.  This was provided.

Members received the report and the recommendations as now amended.

RESOLVED – that the Executive Member for Health and Wellbeing, via the non-key decision process, be advised that the Committee supports (A) the changes to the Grants Policy as set out in Essential Reference Paper ‘B’ which supported new corporate priorities ; and

(B)   the maximum amount for a Community Activities grant being immediately increased from £500 to £1000, as detailed in paragraph 2.19 of the report submitted.