Issue - meetings
Grants Register - Moving to Commissioning (review outcomes)
Meeting: 27/09/2016 - Commissioners' Decision Making Meeting (Item 6.5)
6.5 Grants Register - Moving to Commissioning (review outcomes) PDF 131 KB
Decision:
Zena Cooke, Corporate Director Resources presented the report which sought to identify which grants were likely to be commissioned in future. It was noted that the outcome of the review indicated that a large number of grants were likely to remain in a grants format rather than transferred to a commissioning arrangement.
The Chair invited Councillor Mukit to comment on the report of behalf of GSSC and he indicated that he had no specific comments it wished to make although GSSC was awaiting officer responses to questions relating to some schemes in the register.
Commissioners and Co-opted Members considered to the report and noted:
- the information at appendix A should clearly outline which services/projects would transfer to commissioning arrangements and which would not.
- The following projects had not detailed their budget 2016-17, Local Community Ward Forums, Crisis and Support Grants, and Discretionary Housing payments. They were informed that it was impossible to report this figure because it was subject to policy considerations which were to be made in the coming months.
RESOLVED
1. That it be noted that the four grants below are likely to be commissioned in future as detailed in the report
- MSG programme (2015 -- 16) VCS organisations
- Positive activities are young people, VCS organisations
- Ben Jonson Road improvement Works, Community
- Local Community Initiatives S106 Funding, Community
Meeting: 20/09/2016 - Grants Scrutiny Sub-Committee (Item 5)
5 Grants Register - Moving to Commissioning (review outcomes) PDF 131 KB
Minutes:
The Sub-Committee received a report that outlined which grants were likely to be commissioned in future. It was noted that the outcome of the review had indicated that a large number of grants were likely to remain in a grants format rather than transferred to a commissioning arrangement. As a result of discussions on the report the Sub-Committee:
· Asked for an explanation about why it was appropriate to move the Ben Jonson Road Improvement Works to the commissioning model but not the Whitechapel High Street Fund works. The Corporate Director of Resource’s indicated that she would ask the relevant service to provide further details to members on this; and
· Suggested that the table as set out in paragraph 3.5 of the report should be amended to clarify that it represented the number of grant schemes as opposed to the number of grants.
RESOLVED
To endorse the proposed recommendations.