Agenda item

The Committee will receive a report in respect of activities associated with identifying and pursuing partnership and funding opportunities that support Council priorities.

Contact:

Stephen Bonnell – Head of Policy Partnerships and Corporate Planning

Paul Mitchell, External Funding & Resources Officer

A presentation was given by Stephen Bonnell, Head of Policy Partnerships and Corporate Planning and Paul Mitchell, External Funding and Resource Officer. in respect of activities associated with identifying and pursuing partnership and funding opportunities that supported the Council priorities.

The following key areas were outlined:

·       Constant monitoring took place in respect of opportunities for funding, collaborative working or associated with wider social or economic changes such as new technologies.

·       Services worked closely with a wide range of partners, nationally, regionally and locally, including local community groups. The Council had a close working relationship with the West Yorkshire Combined Authority, for example on infrastructure projects.

·       The importance of information sharing and communication at an early stage,

·       The approach was shaped around the Council Plan priorities and those within the partnership strategies.

·       Monitoring of a range of other information including best practice and benchmarking.

·       An explanation of what constituted ‘external funding’ the various routes by which it was accessed and why it was needed

·       The External Funding Framework, which set out the guiding principles to encourage a consistent and strategic approach including; the need for early consideration of funding when designing projects and services.

·       The wide range of central support available to services, including support with identifying and assessing funding opportunities, bid development, communication, and the maintenance of comprehensive records including a tracking spreadsheet.

·       Ongoing external development work.

·       Successes and challenges.

Questions and comments were invited from Committee Members, with the following issues being covered:

·       Tools and resources were now in place to minimise the possibility of missed opportunities, including a comprehensive search and alert tool, ‘Grant Finder’.

·       The significant work going into sourcing funding via the appropriate channels was acknowledged. In respect of support to try and ensure the success of bids, such as training and development of staff and working with partner agencies to ensure  those involved had the necessary skills, training workshops were undertaken in respect of the ‘Grant Finder’ tool  so that it could be used to the maximum effect to identify funding opportunities . In terms of developing bids and applying for funding, this support was currently undertaken on an ad-hoc basis on request but there were plans to include such support more formally within the training suite in the future.

·       Third party and community groups often found submitting effective bids could be challenging. In response to a question about whether the Council would be able to work with such groups it was explained that the Third Sector Team provided support to Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) organisations in applying for funding and that support could also be accessed through partners such as Third Sector Leaders (TSL). It was also noted that the Third Sector Team was now part of the same service which would strengthen collaborative working.

·       In respect of engagement and collaborative working it was queried whether Kirklees worked with other local authorities on projects, particularly where a project might overlap boundaries, as this could be more effective. It was advised that, to date, this had been undertaken with West Yorkshire Combined Authority led bids where it was a collaborative effort to access funding from Central Government, however the need to do this was understood and it would be considered in the future where it was possible.

·       In a similar way to the Council’s Risk Register it was considered that an Opportunities Register could demonstrate the work to actively seek opportunities and measure how effectively opportunities were picked up within each directorate and perhaps the tracking spreadsheet might do this and assist with learning. There was an expectation upon all senior officers to understand good practice and have awareness of what other local authorities were doing on an ongoing basis and to be able to bring that evidence into cases for service development or savings opportunities.

·       It was suggested that consideration could be given to the use of Municipal Climate Bonds, which had been adopted by a number of other local authorities.

·       Enabling others to take advantage of opportunities was an important and positive role of the Council, such as assisting local organisations with seed funding and the use of crowdfunding platforms such as ‘Spacehive’. However, it should be noted that the proportion of fees for this platform was high in comparison to others.

·       Ward budgets could also be used to draw in additional funding from private organisations to support community projects and Community Plus also provided funds to support small groups in the community. It was important that such seed funding was available so that such groups could be continued to be supported in the future.

·       The Committee was advised that a piece of ‘mapping’ work was being undertaken to identify the different pots of money and the different teams across the Council that supported such community groups, to try and avoid duplication. The view was expressed that ward councillors were well placed to have the relevant background knowledge of the community groups in their area but the limited ward budget had affected their input.

·       In respect of issues with staff capacity and skills and assessing the cost benefit associated with missed opportunities, the tracking spreadsheet captured opportunities which the Council had applied for, or were considering but also why a particular funding opportunity had not been progressed The ‘Go/No Go’ process was an in-depth assessment used to decide if an opportunity was right for Kirklees and if the necessary resources were available to deliver a strong application and to deliver the project.

·       The Local Government Minister had committed to publishing the Devolution White Paper prior to Christmas and this would provide more information about future funding arrangements. Although it was at an early stage the indications had been of a more targeted approach to funding for areas of deprivation and those most in need.

·       In relation to the culture of the organisation, reference was made to a previous scheme that had encouraged Kirklees employees to put forward ideas. This could be considered, and it was noted that the team also looked at what other authorities were doing as well as ideas from ‘think tanks’ and arising from relevant research. The framework aimed to embed a ‘think funding’ mindset within the organisation and a communications initiative was planned in the near future to further promote this principle. Services were encouraged to be creative in this area and innovation was also a key element

·       In terms of Councils sharing services and staff and potential efficiencies, the possibility of shared services would be a consideration from a transformation perspective and would be discussed with services where appropriate.

RESOLVED -

(1)      That the Head of Policy Partnerships and Corporate Planning, Service Director, Strategy and Innovation and the External Funding Officer be thanked for attending the meeting and providing an update in relation to partnership and funding opportunities.

(2)      That, to support the ‘think funding’ mindset, Lead Members ensure that external funding possibilities are considered, where appropriate and relevant to the issues being considered by their respective Panels.