Grants Sub Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Wednesday 6 November 2024, 7:00pm - Wandsworth Council Webcasting

Grants Sub Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Wednesday, 6th November 2024 at 7:00pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point

So, welcome to the meeting.
My name is Councillor Jeremy Ambash, and I'm the chair of the grant subcommittee and scrutiny
committee.
Members of the committee, I will now call your names in alphabetical order.
Please switch on your microphones and confirm your attendance.
Councillor Angela Graham.
I'm here.
Thank you.
Councillor Lindsay Hedges of Ballin Ward here tonight.
Thank you, Chair.
Councillor Norman Marshall.
Present.
Councillor Joe Rigby.
Present.
And Councillor Stephen Worrall.
Present.
Apologies for absence have been received from Councillor Jack Mayocas and Councillor Daniel
Hamilton.
So we have a number of offices present and they'll introduce themselves as they address the committee.
Although I wanted just to say at the beginning, this is Bruce Murdoch's last committee.
He's worked for us for over ten years, but he'll be retiring shortly, Councilor Graham.
And wanted to thank him for all the work he's done for the committee, but also for the voluntary sector and the community groups that you've worked with.
It's been really appreciated.
Bruce.
Thank you.
Thank you.
May I say something?
I've worked with Mr. Murdoch through many chairs of the grants committee.
And I've always found that your words of wisdom, practicality,
and sensibility has been second to none.
And I thank you on behalf of our group for all the commitment
what you've done for the community and Wandsworth in your time here.
Thank you so much.
I really mean it.
Thank you, Councillor Graham, and I think actually you talked for the whole committee,
but I just want to say from the whole committee, thank you very much, Bruce, and good wishes
for the future.
Declarations of interest.
Are there any declarations of either pecuniary or other registrable or non -registrable interests?

1 Declaration of Interests

Yeah, Councillor Graham.
Not that I'm a pecuniary or non -precuniary, but I just want to raise your awareness that
I am a volunteer at the food bank at St. Andrews Church.
Okay, thank you.
but there's a agenda item for here tonight.
Good.
Mrs. Hickey, did you want me to say something
about the next meeting at this stage, yeah?
So I understand we were gonna have a meeting
on December the 16th.
I happen to remember the date,
because it coincides with some other activities in my life.
But I don't think we have any, we're going to have that meeting.
Yes, do remember it.
But I think we were going to consider applications in relation
to the refugee supporting organizations.
And the ones without fringe, which has gone elsewhere.
So that meeting is likely to be cancelled.
Yes.
Was there something else I was supposed to say? No.
So minutes of the 26th of September.

2 Minutes - 26th September 2024

Does the committee agree the minutes of the previous meeting held on 26th of September 2024
can be signed as a correct record?
Good.
And there was something arising in terms of what Councillor Hamilton recommended about the website.
Becky, would you like to say what you've done because you've followed that through, haven't
you?
It was just to confirm that the action's been kind of taken and noted and will be reflected
on the council's website going forward, so all of the summary recommendation forms will
be listed in one place.
Thank you.

3 VCS Cost of Living Grant Fund, Round 2 (Paper No. 24-301)

So we're now on to voluntary PCS cost of living grant fund, round two, paper 24301.
And Ms. Steele is going to introduce that paper.
Thank you.
Harriet Steele, the Voluntary Sector Partnership Manager.
So this is the second round of the cost of living grant fund.
We've had 350 ,000 pounds available across two rounds and groups have been able to put
in applications for between two and a half thousand and 15 ,000 pounds.
They could apply to both rounds but we would not fund more than 15 ,000 pounds across those
two rounds.
In the first round, the decision was made to award seven organizations a total of 66 ,941 ,000.
And in this round, two officers are recommending awarding six organizations a total of 80 ,962 pounds.
For this second round, the focus is on core program costs for organizations,
particularly those who are struggling with the cost of living due to a proven
increased demand on services with a focus on moving to a long -term
sustainability. So when officers have been looking at the applications we have
been looking to see that they're closely aligned with supporting those who are
directly affected by the cost of living and not just sort of business as usual
or general alleviation of poverty. It's got to be about building capacity for
organizations and also for the people that they're supporting.
Also just to note on the recommendation reports this time, we have included a section on the
funding previously received by organizations through the Wandsworth Grant Fund so that
you have all that information in one place on the recommendation sheets.
Thank you, Ms. Neal.
Any questions or comments on that report?
Yeah, Councillor Graham.
Thank you, Chair.
I think it's the basis of a very, very good grant.
I just feel that what you're doing is excellent,
but I just feel that there needs to be tightening up.
Just asking the questions, when you have, say, the average of 270 meals a week,
does that include the 40 on a Friday? That's one question.
Mon?
Is that to do with the specific...
I'm Chantal.
We're going to go through each application, Councillor Graham.
Are we not being Chantal?
No, no, no, we're just doing it with a committee report.
I'm Vic Keen.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, you're ahead.
Oh, no, as you can see, I'm on one.
Yeah.
Councilor Worrell.
Yeah, go on.
It's just a query in relation to page 7, paragraph 22.
The way this paragraph is written,
it sounds like that this is outside of the monitoring cycle
and that if there's an issue that you would require
the organization to provide the data within five working days.
If that's correct, then I think five working days is too short a time.
We give officers much longer time to actually collect information.
And for small organizations, five working days is probably quite a substantial pressure
on them.
I would like to suggest that that gets doubled to ten working days, just to be fair to smaller
organizations to provide the information that's being required here, if this is outside of
a normal monitoring cycle.
Yeah, I'm getting nods around the table too
that the five days is too short.
Yeah, we can increase that to 10.
Yeah.
Good.
Still am I right?
We've got these two rounds of the cost of living,
which are the rounds for this year.
We're taking them early before the winter
because of the cost of living pressures over the winter.
So this will be the last cost of living fund application group, is that right?
Yes, we've listened to feedback from groups in previous years and
they have said that it's helpful to have the decisions early,
particularly around creating sort of warm community spaces over the winter.
So we've had that first round in September and the second round now.
So this will be the final round from the cost -living fund this year.
So were the committee to be more generous than the officers in the recommendations,
there's a bit of extra capacity that we haven't allocated.
Yeah, definitely. We haven't allocated the full grant amounts that are in capacity
to amend the recommendations that officers have put forward if Councillor Seifert.
Councillor Raim.
Yeah.
Thank you, Chair. As I read these grants, there is an implication on staffing and
development and commitment and stability. It's welcome that we have the cost of
living. I'm just quite concerned as I am about this one I'm going to speak about.
I'd be very sad for what the hard work that communities have done and
volunteers have done and your support that this might be lost, but also I'm also concerned
that where would they go in the future for that golden handshake that you've been able
to give them as regards to the cost of living in staffing terms, because you need staff,
you need structure. If you're with me, I just want to touch on that.
Yeah, Councillor Graham, are you asking about what's going to happen next year for the cost
of living in the future because, yeah.
I mean, also.
I'm not sure that officers are going to be able
to answer that until.
I think what I'm saying from the ones I'm reading now.
We get closer.
What I'm reading now is there is a cost on staffing.
There's a need for staffing, mentioning like the food bank
and potentially what you're trying to do here.
It's just that the staffing is very important
and as they develop and get stronger,
I don't want them to fall off the tree.
Are you with me?
I'm not falling off the tree, but in real terms,
what they're developing is amazing for Roehampton.
You know, deprivation.
Sure, you're talking about sustainability.
Yeah, do you want to come back on that, Ms. Steele?
Yeah, so I think that's a good point you made, Councillor.
As you'll be aware, within the next year
we are bringing in the sort of infrastructure support services, the infrastructure support
services for voluntary sector groups.
So that will be an area where they'll be able to get additional support and advice around
sort of fundraising.
We've also got the ones with grant funds, so some of these projects may be suitable
or they might have projects that are appropriate to put to that.
and we do try and work with groups where possible
to sign posts into other areas of funding
that they could benefit from to broaden
and develop their projects.
I noticed with Chantelle, you're wanting them,
if that's how you say the name,
that you want them to sort of be encouraged
to go to charities because what they're developing
is very good.
So how does one help them to widen the scope, even small businesses supporting them?
Yeah, no, we're not dealing with Chantelle.
You're using the general point.
I'm using a general point for the going forward with structure and sensitivity and practicality.
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, Mr Myerdahl.
Hi.
Asking the question, Councillor Riddick, for my own information.
I'm not really sure what to do.
What is this referring to?
I think this is to do with priority two,
par of four on page four,
about organizations becoming more sustainable
in the long term.
I worry that.
That's my understanding of what you.
You're doing such a good job.
Can we let Mr. Murdoch answer it?
Yes, Bruce Mordat, the Senior Grants Development Officer.
One of the things we were asked in designing this particular fund was to build in a level
of capacity and particularly to, and we're quite clear with the groups, to say we've
done a variety of cost of living over the last three years, it's the third year, that
there's a risk that for some groups
they become dependent on council funding.
And there's no guarantee that the funding
that we have available will continue.
So part of what we were saying to them
in making their application was to start to think,
regardless of the size of them,
even the very, very small ones,
to try to think further ahead.
Not where else could you look for funding,
particularly in this priority, which is core funding.
as they were seeing the increase of their services going up about other places.
That might involve some of the trustees or some of the volunteers doing some fundraising training
or buying extra equipment. It could be done a whole host of ways.
But to say to them, don't just rely on this funding, actually look elsewhere.
And there are other funds out there, although the funding market is always very fluid, some
of the trust funds in London have closed over the last year, but there are other places
to look.
And you see in some of the applications that people are looking at doing some training
and fundraising training and other things.
So that was part of the purpose.
It wasn't just about building the capacity to deliver locally, but also as an organization
or how could you develop, hence some of the crossings are for staff, but sometimes the
structure of staff.
And certainly some of the projects that we've spoken to have learnt things over the last
couple of years as people have left and have been, oh, we don't know what to do, or actually
we've been reliant on that funding, we've lost that to move on.
So it's a bit of, and as Ms Steele was saying, alongside the new infrastructure project,
which will be supporting the voluntary sector in tandem with the current provider that wants care lines,
not to use those services as well so they can actually learn and build the services as well.
So that's what we're trying to do within this particular fund.
Thank you.
Each of the applications, one at a time.
Mr. Murdoch is going to introduce each application briefly.
Thank you, Chair.
So number one is that Chantelle's communication
down in Roehampton, which is recommended
for a grant of 14 ,430 pound
with some conditions attached to that.
So this is a continuation of an existing service
which they started last year.
It is a very small organization
and actually some members who were here last year,
Last year, women's networks supported the South West 15 women's network.
They have progressed in their own governance and have their own bank account constitution.
They recognise that there are still some ways to go in that.
They have been working alongside colleagues.
and even some discussions we've been having with them recently,
they know they've got more to do and they've recognized that
because that was an area of risk that we saw with the organization.
However, in that aside, they have grown their offer
from just their Tuesday lunchtime kitchen,
they've added on some of a Friday brunch club,
and they're seeing more people coming along to that.
And so one of the things is, because it's a self -referral system, they just talk about a number of people and they've got an idea of the types of people who come to them.
But that's one of the areas we would like to tighten up with them.
So we know that they're providing a good service.
They are bringing in some other services to talk to people there.
And again, that's something we could help them to build with it.
Just looking at the provision and the need down in Roehampton, it's a project we would
discuss this quite a long, although it is the service that they're providing against
the risks for the organisation.
One of the things that we noted was that over the last year, actually all the funding that
they've received is from the council, for example.
So that again, that's one of the things that we need to get them to look sort of a bit
further ahead and where else can they go as they grow. So the
recommendation is that yes we do provide them with the grant as requested and we
can marry that along with some support and colleagues or other services.
Councillor Hedges. Thank you chair and thank you Mr Murdoch and very sorry to
hear the sad news about your retirement you will be greatly missed. Just a quick
sure that this particular organisation isn't just asking this for this grant to balance
the books? Although do you fully support what it does by the way?
I've actually seen their books because they sent me them so I've seen that and we're talking
to so part of the support that they receive is from the housing teams with the ultimate
regeneration team and they work very closely with those colleagues so that
gives us a very easily inroad to them and we've had
myself and Mr. O 'Neill have had conversations with those officers and so
we're sure that actually we know having that close tie with the housing team we
can we can walk alongside them and get in and help them progress.
It's trying to move them on to find other sources of funding as well as the
council funding as well and not to just be reliant on this funding as it is.
The other thing Mr. Murdoch said, this is a very new organization that's come out of
the cost of living crisis from nowhere, from people coming to get together and saying we
must do something.
So supporting them on their governance arrangements, whether they might become a charity or a CIC,
is part of the work.
So it's a little bit hard to judge them against organizations that have been around for five or ten ten years, but
Yeah, council
My my my support is for this
Good job in supporting them. I
Strongly feel and I hope it would be supported by the committee that they come back. We
Sit in six months time
so that we feel that they're on the right track, not that we're pointing fingers,
but we're making sure that it is tight and they are being directed in the right direction.
I mean, we're on their side. We want them to succeed.
And the second thing is, can they have training in how do you do a start to charity?
That's two things, but I support the people.
Can you take the second one? But I do want to take the first one.
So I really don't think the committee should micromanage the grants.
We should ask...
No, you did.
You asked it to come back to this committee in six months.
I think we need to ask officers to follow it up appropriately.
And I'm sure they will.
They won't just leave it for a year.
Do you want to come back on the second one?
So I'll come back on the first one.
So you've seen the recommendation that we've recommended that we'll split the funding.
But also we're doing quarterly reports, so they have to report everything.
So we can pick that up and if we would be and part of that is from previous experience,
you know, if we identify issues earlier, and then we can intervene and support and delay.
So and that was one particular on the second element.
You know, yes, it's something that we're working, what we can work with colleagues, you know,
if you've got that experience, and knowledge because it's getting through charity laws
can be a bit of a nightmare.
So it's just getting them,
we'll find people with the right knowledge to advise them.
Councilor Marshall, did you have your finger up?
Committee in support with close follow up
and support for this organization.
Earlsfield Food Bank, yeah, Mr. Murdoch.
Yes, so this is a, again, this is a,
Seeding Funding course, the course staff
cost to support the continuation of the and extension of their core service and
from March to September so this is an existing project which is happening. They
did have some issues last year when they started and reached of got over and
actually the long conversation with the trustees and which they've taken on
board and and part of the difference you'll see with this certainly the
funding that they're requesting is have actually they had a full -time role which
have split into two. So that actually when somebody leaves they don't lose the
intelligence that they've gained. That was an issue. So this is
basically a job share and part of that also you see that one I think is a
strategic manager they've called it is about looking at that sort of forward
planning, the fundraising, looking ahead. But also what they've been
additional is adding on the extra services that they provide and also
they work very closely with the home community cafe as well which runs at the
same building so actually we get in some ways you actually get more more bang for
your bucks you know in this project and so they have they've learnt an awful lot
over the last year and because there was a little bit of trouble and we've had
discussions around and that no they're certainly going in the right direction
and certainly down that part of the borough know there's the de fila
provision, there's not much else.
Thanks, Mr. Marder.
Councilor Worrell.
Yes, thank you.
I'm a bit confused about this application.
And my confusion rests with the actual project budget
because what you're funding here is two part -time posts,
which I understand, but it's only for six months.
So going back to what Councilor Graham said earlier,
is part of this is about sustainability,
investing in the future, et cetera,
yet you're giving money for a post that only lasts,
two posts that only lasts six months.
So my question is what happens after that six month period
in terms of taking this forward?
I have no, I think they do wonderful work
and everything else, but in relation to what we try
to do with organizations, I don't see the next step
in relation to this application.
Murdoch, can you help us?
Yeah, so my understanding is that obviously the Food Bank's been around for a number of
years and they have been developing their fundraising ability within that.
I think with the loss of their previous manager, they lost some of that knowledge and so having
what they call the strategic managers to build that aspect up along with their existing fundraising
that they've got.
As I said, I have looked around at what they have been doing in addition to what they are
doing.
Given the length of peer they have been around, I think they are ready for the next step.
I know the National Lottery has a couple of different funding options which I think they
could opt for, particularly because of the partnerships they have worked for.
That is a discussion I can easily have with them.
And the National Lottery do have officers who help
organizations in that area as well. So I think
With just a little six months they've got time at the moment not to take to look at that and go the next step
Councillor Warrall
Sorry, I'm still confused then are we then saying that at the end of the six months period they're going to recruit to new posts
Are they going to carry on with this or are they using the six month period to actually find the money to continue those posts?
moving forward. That's my concern around this. It's really woolly.
I think without knowing that detail of actually what the trustees are thinking about, and
they haven't explained it in that sort of level of detail, my presumption was that they
would be looking to continue these relatively new posts over the post -disfunding, not to
continue that. That seems to be the direction that certainly the
discussion had with the trustees is where they're trying to head. But I can't
confirm exactly what they're planning to do.
They've got some of their own funding to keep it going until they're
successful with their funding applications.
Certainly looking at their current reserves, they've got
about six months reserves currently.
This was at the end of their financial year.
Just this is March last year,
was the last set of accounts.
Haven't seen their most recent accounts.
It's certainly not my discussions with the trustees
saying that their plan would be to carry this forward
after this six month funding period.
Go on, Councillor Warren.
Could I then suggest that we agree this,
but one of the conditions would be
that they actually give a further update as to what their plans are post six months so that we can just be assured that there is some long -term planning within this.
The rest of the committee in agreement with. Yeah. Yeah.
Okay.
So we read item two,
Halsfield Food Bank with that condition.
We have an update of the plan after six months
in the next three months.
Okay, we're on to item three,
which is not recommended, a state arts CIC, yes.
Yes, so this is a contingent provision
of their warm space and food offer on the Altene estate, which would be running from
the beginning of December to the end of June.
They are currently funded almost entirely by funding from the NHS through the ICB, which
they had a grant of, and that's coming to an end.
We did have a similar application from them,
priority one, which wasn't recommended either.
The project, in terms of the way that they've written it
to us, and we did follow up, is very much health focused.
And I was quite surprised knowing the organization
and seeing the previous annual reports that,
I think they mentioned cost of living once
in their application, which was,
which was, and I did go back to the directors,
and ask them about it.
And certainly the program is very,
a lot of it does contain the provision of food in some way,
and a very sort of health related activity.
And one of the other things that they added
into this particular application
was that they wanted to develop new activity
without explaining what that was.
So the tie in with actually the cost of living,
as Ms. Steele was talking about at the beginning,
And it just wasn't there, unfortunately.
And even when I was going back and asking them quite directly, how does this meet up,
it didn't quite match up.
Yes, we recognize the issues that people have in terms of general public health and low
incomes on the Altene estate.
But on balance, and it was, we did long discussions with it and tried to find more information
we felt that in terms of meeting the cost of living crisis,
it didn't quite meet that grade.
In agreement.
I'm a little bit sorry,
because this is a fledgling organization
that's been going two, three, or four years.
I think we need to make sure they have really good feedback
because they might want to come back
and argue under the Wandsworth Grant Fund,
the health and wellbeing stream.
but the application is rather weak in terms of the way they presented need in relation
to the cost of living funds. So, yeah, we've agreed not to recommend that one.
Good. Item 4, recommended living truth CIC. Mr. Murdoch.
Thanks, Chair. So, the application is recommended for 8 ,640. It's a continuation of the advocacy
and support drop -in service, which they've been running
some four days a week.
And from what they've learned from the current activity
is that they've identified particularly older disabled
people at home who are unable to come to the drop -in service.
So they want to reshape that a little bit.
So they're using the same time, but just moving around
a little bit.
They can provide a home visit service as well.
So they begin to reach out to new people as well.
and of course it's about providing people advice about housing,
housing benefits, just benefits in general,
and trying to build people's capacity within themselves.
So it's an organization which is growing,
it's part of a social enterprise which they have,
which they've been developing as well.
So some in terms of their services have been growing,
they're meeting a growing demand,
it's one we would like to support.
Great.
Committee has agreed.
Item 4, item 5, Power to Connect, again, which is recommended by our officers.
Mr Murdoch.
Thank you.
So this is recommended for a grant of £15 ,000.
Members might be aware that Power to Connect, they refurbish laptops and phones and things
and give them out to people.
and I've been doing this for a number of years.
But certainly through the funding
which we've provided them before,
they've learned a great deal.
They've actually gone to the next step.
And just a few of the bottom bullet points in page 23,
how they're really developing the services.
They're doing much more than that
in terms of helping people to learn how to use the devices,
to make applications, manage their universal credit,
et cetera, on these things.
and opening up different avenues to people for essential services.
So in that respect, it's developing their service
and helping them reach more people in need
and directly related to the cost of living.
Can I ask a question?
We've been very supportive of what Power to Connect have done
and they've offered a lot to those who've been digitally excluded.
I wonder if there is any follow up.
So in terms of the outcomes, not the number of people
bums on seats at training programs
and people give them computers,
but is there any follow up in terms of how those computers
have been used or iPads have been used
and whether they've been used in areas
that have supported the cost of living?
Do we know if they've done any of that kind of follow up with people two or three months
after they've been to their workshops?
It's not something that we've asked them before, but certainly through the feedback we get
currently in terms of their case studies, because when the reports are doing just now
provide a little bit of case studies, certainly we've seen some direct benefit for, but we
don't have that longitudinal.
Okay, well that's a suggestion from me.
Councillor Rigby.
Yeah, so this is a request.
So at Nightingale Square in Ballum, where we have the families living in temporary accommodation,
there is no Wi -Fi and I know that a massive burden on their financial situation is having
to pay for data, especially for the children who need data for their homework.
So asking if Power to Connect can do some outreach work to that space in
Ballym to make sure that the people there are aware that they can access
free data. Yes, was it Nightingale Square?
Nightingale Square is the Council's temporary accommodation. Thank you.
Right. Yeah, we can certainly pass that on because I know the provision of data is one of the things that they do.
Yeah
Yeah council Graham
Thank You chair
Following on from your question about value -added
It's in Teuting and Roehampton Battersea
And we all know that these areas do have deprivation be very interesting as you say to get follow -up
In the future or you do your own follow -ups to make sure you
They are you know
Of course they're giving value for money, but it's making sure that it's the question really on media.
How are they doing their media to make people aware as well that the facilities are there, especially as they are deprivation areas?
Thanks, Councillor Graham. I see we're in agreement.
Yes, yes, yes.
To support.
Are we agreed power to connect?
Yes.
Okay.
So number six, regenerate, again recommended by officers.
Mr. Murdoch.
Thank you.
So this is a continuation for the Youth and Community Program, which is providing a safe
space for young people aged 11 to 18.
And principally one of the aspects which we've supported on this project is the cooking workshops that provide for young people after school.
And one of the things that we discovered is just the general pressures that families were having with the cost of living.
that this becomes, it's not just cooking
at the youth club themselves,
but actually we discovered that young people
and families are coming to the project
and actually take food home as well.
So although there is a small food bank
down in the Ashburton area,
it's one of the things that's actually developed,
or just because I think it started round about
sort of the end of COVID,
that the cooking classes, which are an integral part,
because young people weren't getting a hot meal necessarily
every day, but actually that's developed
into not just the young people cooking and learning,
not to be a bit more self -sufficient themselves,
but actually they're cooking hot meals
and taking them back home for their families as well,
not really identifying the need.
And you'll see that, I think, on the text on page 28,
the way I was able to provide evidence to is
the number of families that a club made up
a considerable portion of the weekly food for them.
And it was something I pushed them on because they weren't quite clear at the start, but
coming back with that sort of level evidence, I think it was a good indicator that how this
apparent youth club is actually providing that much wider service to the families that
they serve in the area.
Council Warrell.
Sorry, yeah.
Just as a matter of interest, it would be interesting to know the gender breakdown of
of who's actually attending here,
because I think often in these cases,
it falls mainly upon the girls
who are attending cooking classes, et cetera.
I think it's a skill area that boys need to develop
in terms of self -sufficiency and other areas.
So as I said, it's not linked to this per se,
but I would be interested to see
the gender breakdown of those attending.
Okay, yep, fine, agreed?
That's number six, agreed.
We are now on to number 7, Samuel's charity, which is not recommended.
Mr Murdoch.
Yes, this is a new charity for us.
It is based up in Milton Keynes, but it has been working down in St George's Hospital
for a few years now.
It is seeking support for part -funding for a one -year salary for a community care coordinator.
This is someone who would visit families at home, particularly young people who are seriously
they are seizures of terminally ill children and families, and so they receive some treatment at home.
They're going to say that although the post is primarily a nurse,
and actually provides some wider care and support for people, but
to help them at a time when not having a child at home
is this ill, not generally not involves extra costs.
We felt that intrinsically although we could see the benefits of the project,
and obviously the officer has the support of St. George's Hospital in quite some way.
It didn't really sort of tie it in the cost of living.
It was much more a sort of a general ask, or general issue for
families experiencing this sadly for them.
And it wasn't directly related to cost of living, I'm afraid.
In that regard, we didn't recommend it.
We agreed it's not recommended because it's not focused on cost of living.
Single homeless project number 8, again not recommended by officers. Mr Murdoch?
Yes, this is a London -wide charity. We worked for some considerable time in the borough.
And this was to seek in front to deliver training to accommodation staff and
has three accommodation blocks in the borough in order to provide
more in -house psychotherapy case discussions for other accommodations.
Talking to the mental health commissioners and adult support,
actually the council commissions the service of some 600 ,000 pounds.
in a per annum and has done for a number of years.
And whilst this additional service would be nice,
they didn't see it as a core part
of what the council supports currently.
It's noteworthy that actually,
because the main delivery of training
would actually take up at Kings Cross rather than Borough,
and although the staff would come back
and work with the residents in the borough.
It's much more of a long -term project.
Now, given the timeline of what we were trying to provide
in terms of cost of living,
by the time the staff get trained
and started to deliver the service with clients in the borough,
it's a much more sort of longer -term type project,
and we didn't feel that it felt the cost of living fund.
Yeah, it's the committee agreement.
We don't recommend we're agreeing with the officers.
Thank you, Mr. Murdoch.
So we're on to number nine, Tooting -Graveney Daycare Center.
Again, not recommended by officers, Mr. Murdoch.
Yes, so this is a decenter down in Tooting.
It was recommending some of the core funding for a year long to provide free daycare.
Currently, the provider service to six people, they said,
and they had aspirations not to increase that number to 30 or 40.
This is an organization that I've known for quite considerable time who've struggled in terms of their applications and their funding.
And just, I think, some of their general governance.
We have concerns about their governance in a number of areas.
We have met with colleagues from adult care who work in this area over recent years as well.
But again, we didn't feel that this particular application was tied closely to the cost of living.
And there was a bit of a gap even in the budget,
because I know that they use community transport to bring the vast majority of people to the service.
but actually hadn't budgeted for that at all, which is quite a large part of the budget
for themselves. It wasn't clear where they were getting any other monies for. I have
chased them a number of times and got nothing back from them, unfortunately, which seems
to be quite common in my dealings with them. So, unfortunately, although it's one we would
dearly like to support, we would find it quite difficult and we think it's not one we wish
to recommend at this time.
Committee's in agreement with officers,
we don't recommend yet.
Okay.
So we're on to number 10, Tooting Community Kitchen,
not recommended by officers.
Yes, Mr. Murdoch.
So again, this is seeking continuation funding
for an existing cost of living funded project.
We run a weekly, they call it a lounge and soup kitchen
in a warm space in a local scout hall which they hire.
And yes, whilst the project provides a warm space
and hot food and some activity for guests,
again, it wasn't one which even the project itself
when it went back to them,
it themselves connected tightly to the cost of living.
Their reply was actually the majority of people,
which tends to be elderly and homeless people and others with disabilities.
Actually, it's more about providing provision to reduce isolation and
provide some sort of a hot meal together.
I think the capacity in terms of the volunteers at the moment,
it's sort of holding them back in terms of that additionality which they can provide.
Although it's something they would want to do, and
it's not either through the support service
which we're looking to commission
or other ways it's something that we could help
and develop in the long term.
But right at the moment we didn't feel that
it was sort of tied closely enough
to the cost of living unfortunately.
Mr. Marshall.
Yeah, there seemed to be a sort of slight disconnect
between different parts of the briefing here,
detailed and insightful that it was.
So the project summary paragraph notes that all of the 30
to 60 people are impacted by the cost of again,
experiencing of financial hardship.
So obviously in the sort of group of people we're trying
to reach with this fund, but I noticed in the summary
that you'd observed that the project is not clearly related
to support it.
sorry, the recommendation summary on page 41,
not clearly related to supporting those directly impacted
by the cost of living crisis.
So there's a little bit of an inconsistency there.
I wonder if you could clarify that.
But just as a sort of general point,
it seemed like this was very much a project.
Although it may be reducing isolation
as one of its side effects, and perhaps the main effect,
but nevertheless, it's certainly providing food and warmth
to people who can't afford it and need it.
Mr. Murdoch, do you want to comment on the different focuses,
those different sentences in the application?
It was one of the projects we discussed long and hard about,
and I think that, and it wasn't just this one,
I think a number of projects,
not recognizing that the levels of low incomes,
the level of poverty are higher than they were before,
and that seems to be sort of the new norm for many people.
Splitting the difference between that
and where projects are working to actually try to alleviate
and move people on to the next stage.
So rather than just providing service
which just keeps people where they are,
are they able to in some ways to help people to move on
so they're a bit more resilient in themselves
in the longer term, given the early conversations
we have about the sustainability of the funding that we might have.
So it was difficult and I did go back to them and speak with them during the application
process and ask them where was the, as they saw it, where was the priority and the activity
they provided.
And their view was actually supporting people through the cost of living was there, but
actually the vast majority, the main priority in what they're providing was supporting the
reduction of isolation.
That's how they saw it.
I think they would like to do more, but they just don't currently have the capacity to
do it, although they're providing other services as well.
Just as a follow -up, I just wonder in that case whether, you know, although their main
priority might be something slightly different, then nevertheless if we feel that what they're
providing in terms of meeting cost of living objectives clears a hurdle, then given that
we've got some money on hand and perhaps some opportunity to help them strengthen that particular
offer as they go on, that we might actually consider this as something that we could make
an exception for, but we could ask you to review your decision on that one.
Councilor Worrall.
Yes.
I'd like to support Councilor Marshall in relation to this.
I think looking at the groups that this project is working with, the idea of the homeless
moving people on is actually really aspirational considering who they contact working with.
In terms of this, they identify working with the people with mental health issues, and
it's about working with them about helping them actually manage some basic things.
I think part of this is the way this is actually written, reading between the lines.
I think if you change the language slightly,
it would articulate in a different way.
And I think this is one I think that we should maybe just,
we should go back and reconsider
and actually give them the grants.
Because by tackling some of the,
by tackling the isolation issues,
their primary focus, actually indirectly,
they're dealing with some of the other issues
that this particular very vulnerable group of people
is actually, sorry, I'm falling out of my words here,
is actually trying to find very, very challenging.
Okay. Other members of the committee? Because I think Councillor Marshall and Councillor Warrell
are suggesting we do support this application. Yeah. Councillor Rigby? Yeah. You agree?
It seems to me what we need to do is to kind of pin down with them
the further help that's going to help people become more resilient in the future,
as well as dealing with the immediate need.
And I think they haven't really articulated the social support, the financial support,
the mental health support, or other peer support that they may offer within this project.
Yeah, and signposting, yes.
Is the committee in agreement with the recommendations that we support this project with?
I'm just concerned.
I respect the council officer's view and if there is a need for more work to be done,
there's no use giving money until that has been actually proved.
and you want more evidence, that's why I know where you're coming from,
and I like us all, but, you know, it's just if you actually have said
that there's more evidence needed, only raising that,
there's more evidence needed, as you would have agreed it.
And so that's my question.
Perhaps I don't know whether we could get them to come
up with more information for going forward and then give the money because it's like
giving money. I mean, I know where you're coming from, but I want more evidence, really,
like you do.
Councillor Graham, you're not in agreement with supporting this?
I don't like saying not in agreement. I'm in agreement with where you want to go. I
think from our side, if Councillor Hedges is…
Okay.
and what the council officers are saying, they need to prove more so that we can give them the
money. That's all. I'm not against it. No, no, but at this stage, we can go to a vote, but in
sharing it, I've just tried to get a consensus. Sorry, where was Councillor Hedges? You jumped in
just a second. I'll come back to you, but Councillor Warrell's had his hand up.
Maybe as a halfway point is that we would agree in principle to grant them this.
We give the authorization to the officers through that further investigation to find
the evidence.
And if they feel that what the Tooting Communications are able to provide, as we are suggesting
from the side of the table, that actually the council officers can then proceed and
actually give them the money.
That is one proposal.
If you're not happy with that, then I'm very happy for us to go to a vote
Yeah, okay, Councillor hedges. I
See your point and I absolutely get that councilor Worrell
It's just because my concern is that we've we've said no to other
Organizations this evening that are much newer and in need of the money much more
And I know that this organization is really good. I know people that go down and offer and help with the with the soup
the suit handing out, et cetera.
But I do feel that Councillor Graham and I are in agreeance with officers on this one.
Thank you.
Yeah. Take it rather than the compromise that Councillor Warrell first suggested.
we need to go to a vote whether we agree the grant funding of 15K.
Yeah. So all those in favour?
Okay. All those against?
I'd like to provide a chairman as regards to what Councillor Hedges has said,
that, you know, we can't just give one lot of money without, you know,
when the council officers have said zero.
Sure, but we've had that debate, Councillor Graham.
I just want to say that is where we're coming from.
Because not against is against.
We're abstaining.
You're going to abstain.
OK.
Three, four, two abstentions, and the chair hasn't voted.
OK?
I think the officers have got the drift
of working with the organisation on their further work.
work in terms of broader support and resilience development.
Number 10 has been agreed.
Application 11, Bioneard 61 church which is recommended by officers.
Yes, Mr. Modock.
Thank you.
This is a continuation of funding for community hub which is currently funded by the cost
living grant until February 25, so this is an extension of the hub and from March 25
to another year, alongside building the capacity for the services during this period.
I think they've been able to demonstrate the need in the local area, the number of people
that are getting through, and the breadth of people.
Also I've had quite a lot of discussions with them about how they can develop their service
and learn from that and adding on some workshops so they're building to help them to build
people resilience.
Also sort of growing as an organization as well which they want to do.
They have explained that they feel a little bit disconnected and not sure about that with
other organizations and with some of the other networks.
But again that's something I think officers can help to build with them so they actually
get more connected not as a group of volunteers.
And so we'd recommend this project
You know council Rigby. Yeah, I mean I I felt like there was massive similarities between this one and the last one
That's just gone to a vote. It seems to be the same
Types of visitors that are going and it actually says here for the majority
Employment would be difficult or impossible. So whilst they are talking about helping with CVS and undertaking a job search that also
acknowledging that it's hugely aspirational.
So I feel like they've got quite a lot in common.
I don't know if their guests are quite similar
in demographic or age or situation,
but maybe they could support each other in some way.
I don't know if they're in contact.
I think one of the issues with this particular group
is they're not in contact with other people locally.
But I think that's one of the things
that we could help them with
and so that they know they're not,
because it's not just organizations
which have applied for funding here
who we know are operating in different areas,
and particularly in the faith communities network,
there's lots of organizations there,
and through the wider work,
which the Cost of Living team is doing,
we can help to build those networks
and connections with them,
particularly where they're working with similar communities.
Any other comments on number 11?
Banyard 61 Church.
The committee is in agreement.
Good.
Thank you very much.
I think we've dealt with all the applications.
Nothing else?
I'm sorry.
One just later.
I'm sorry.
Just looking at this particular one where they've bid 12 ,892 pounds, I just wonder if
a slightly more savvy organization might have thrown in a contingency of 1 ,100 pounds or
2 ,100 pounds and rounded it up.
I don't know whether we had the option to suggest that to them.
I'm sure they could use the money.
They were the organization.
but I think that I noticed they've they were going to charge down to the penny
for DBS checks so they're obviously very careful about these things I wonder if
you could any scope for us being nudging them in a more sort of generous
direction and possibly approving today that were they to come up with a an
additional contingency or something like that that we'd be happy to see that
rounded up to the full fifteen thousand I'm not sure if I can that counts
Marshall, anyway, have we ever suggested to people to round up by the odd thousands?
We generally don't encourage people to build contingencies in, you know, as much as we've got,
and actually within the ones, within some other funds we specifically say not to,
not to do that, because it's a bit of what you're going to spend that on,
because what people will do is, whether they need it or not, they will spend it.
That's what we see.
Can I just check if we're not awarding this one?
No, no, it's recommended to be awarded.
It is for the full 12.
Yes.
Yes.
Are you in agreement, Councillor Hedges?
I don't think we are.
Not much choice.
I think we are.
Yeah, yeah.
OK.
I think we've agreed number 11.
Good.
I think we've covered everything.
and I just wanted to make sure that this is a really minor point and not actually
a big deal but it says here the primary ward of activity is Wandsworth Common on
one of the sheets and then I've seen it's Trinity can I just double check is
definitely Trinity it's not Wandsworth Common yeah Trinity but it goes over
into Balaam I think yeah I saw some marks church have I got that right yes
Yes, yes, I did try to check to be sure I was getting it right, because I know boundaries have changed and I haven't quite got the new boundaries in my head, actually.
Yeah, yeah.
It's just like the...
Yeah, I know where it is. I'm very familiar.
But it's just, it says on one sheet, on page 10 of the document, you've got Wandsworth Common.
And then on the actual sheet, page...
Page 42, it says Trinity.
Just like I said, it's a minor point, but I think just for clarity, I think we should
just align on the wards to make sure it's, you know, it's just all accurate and correct.
Thank you.
Okay.
So we've agreed number 11.
Mr. Murdoch wanted a word before we conclude.
For your early comments, thank you very much.
Mr Diamond and the EDO dragged me into this ten years ago, so I've got him to thank.
But yeah, Councilor Graham has been there from the start as well.
So we've seen the last ten years together.
So thank you very much and I wish you well for, you've got one more round to go for the ones on grant fund this year, remember?
So there's more money to spend.
But no, thank you very much.
It's been lovely working with you.
You know, there's not been too many arguments or too many votes.
And we've got there and I think we beat your time.
So we have a little sweepstake about when we're going to finish the meeting with the chair.
I think Mr Murdoch, I got that right.
So that concludes the business of the meeting.
Thank you for your attendance.
And it's 8 .01.