Members considered a report outlining the results of a review of the Council’s Big Community Fund.  The Fund was set up in 2011 to help Members to work with their communities to improve the local area.  A summary of the grants made to February 2012 was appended to the report.  The review included an analysis of the monitoring information received from Members who had completed projects.  Members who sat on the Appraisal Panel and Members who had applied to the Scheme had also been consulted by survey.

The Head of Community Development introduced the report and provided an updated concerning the unspent balance of the Fund which was currently £69,796.

The Head of Community Development also reported that more than half of the Councillors consulted had thought that it should be mandatory to have support from all Members in multi-Member wards.  However, many had commented that this would disadvantage some wards where Members may not be able to agree.  It was therefore being recommended that the applicants should continue to seek support from fellow-Members.  However, where this was not forthcoming, Officers should ensure that any Member in a Ward who has not signed the application form is made aware of the application and given an opportunity to comment.

The changes suggested by Members through the consultation process had been incorporated into the Guidelines at Appendix A to the report.

A visiting Member suggested that it would be helpful to emphasise on the application form that the supporting statement should be from the Local Ward Member.

Members noted that no additional monies would be added to the Big

Community Fund and therefore the Scheme would end when the Fund was exhausted.  It was agreed that a further review should be undertaken in a year, or when the remaining funds in the scheme had been allocated.

Resolved: That

(a)   The guidelines be amended to include specific mention that the work involved is additional to the usual maintenance and responsibilities of the landowner or delivery organisation.

(b)   The appraisal score sheet be revised to place most importance on physical improvements and even more than the current emphasis on whether an application should more appropriately be funded elsewhere; and

(c)    The application form be revised to ask applicants specifically to address how a proposed application is additional to usual maintenance arrangements and responsibilities to help Members during the appraisal process; and

(d)   Applicants should continue to seek support from fellow-Members.  However, where this was not forthcoming, Officers should ensure that any Member in a Ward who has not signed the application form is made aware of the application and given an opportunity to comment.