The report of the Strategic Director, Place, (Document “I”) presents the recommendations from the Grants Advisory Group for the Keighley Area in respect of the allocation of funding that has been amalgamated from funding received by Bradford Council from the United Kingdom Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF), the West Yorkshire Mayor’s Cost of Living fund (CoLF) and the Household Support Fund (HSF).

Recommended –

That the recommendations for the allocation of funding, as outlined in Appendix C to Document “I” be approved. 

(Jonathan Hayes – 01535 618008)

The report of the Strategic Director, Place, (Document “I”) presented the recommendations from the Grants Advisory Group for the Keighley Area in respect of the allocation of funding that had been amalgamated from funding received by Bradford Council from the United Kingdom Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF), the West Yorkshire Mayor’s Cost of Living fund (CoLF) and the Household Support Fund (HSF).

The report revealed that the City of Bradford Metropolitan Council (CBMDC), via its Constituency Area Co-ordinator had invited applications from eligible local organisations to apply for funding available from the West Yorkshire Mayor’s Cost of Living Fund (WYCA CoLF), Household Support Fund (HSF) and UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF).

Applications from eligible local organisations across the Keighley constituency were invited to apply from the total funding of £97,128. The funds from CoLF, HSF and UKPSF were combined to provide emergency local services and support during the cost-of-living crisis, specifically for food banks/parcels, warm places debt advice and support for mental health.

The decisions on the allocation of funding were devolved to Area Committee to distribute to the Voluntary and Community Sector.  The Grants Advisory Group (GAG) was made up of elected members nominated by the Area Committee at the beginning of each municipal year to help support the decision-making process in conjunction with the Area Co-ordinator.  Once all grant applications are appraised and before moving to contracting, the Area Co-ordinator will present the recommendations of the GAG to the full Area Committee to enable agreement to proceed contracting.

The GAG recommendations for the allocation of funding were appended to the report and a Member questioned if all groups which had applied were detailed in that appendix.  In response it was confirmed that all applicants were included and noted that one of the applications had not been supported.

It was acknowledged that the Area Co-ordinator’s officer was receiving increased levels of funding for its approval and that the GAG had been developed to consider only Community Chest applications.  The Community Chest funding was awarded from base budget with GAG assisting the Area Co-ordinator’s in his ultimate decisions.

Funding being discussed at the meeting, and to follow, was delegated to the Area Committee via the Executive and Members were the decision makers.  Members were asked if they wished to continue with the GAG, which was not a constituted body, providing recommendations for approval or if they wished for all Members to consider all applications. 

In response to questions, it was reported that the GAG had met three times in the previous two months and would meet another four times in the coming six weeks.

Members acknowledge that the GAG considered each application received in depth.  It was confirmed that the group’s judgement was trusted and made in the best interest of the whole district and against the relevant criteria. 

It was agreed that if GAG decisions were trusted that those decisions, made in private, should not be unpicked in public. 

In response to questions about how Members would be aware of funding available it was confirmed that all Members received confirmation to encourage groups to apply.  They would be notified, via meeting agendas, when GAG decisions were to be approved and it was agreed that they could be contacted with about the future GAG meeting dates at the appropriate time.

It was agreed that the GAG should consider making recommendations to the Committee for funding and that the decision to continue with that process be reviewed at the beginning of the next municipal year. 

Resolved –

1.    That the recommendations for the allocation of funding, as outlined in Appendix C to Document “I” be approved.

2.    That it be agreed that where decision making on future grant funding is devolved to the Area Committee the Grant Advisory Group be requested to bring recommendations for approval by the Area Committee and that decision is to be reviewed at the beginning of the municipal year.

To be actioned by: Strategic Director, Place

Overview and Scrutiny Area: Corporate