The Corporate Director for Resources presented the report which informed the Sub-Committee:

·         of the closure of the stream of funding under Theme 5 of the MSG programme and an assessment of outcomes.

·         that future funding in this theme was intended to be commissioned via co-production on an interim basis until the conclusion of the extended MSG programme.

At the Chair’s invitation the comments of GSSC were received stating that the achievements and feedback were supported however Members considered that:

·         it was necessary to ensure that training and empowerment was continued

·         success messages needed to be neutrally worded to avoid political bias or misinterpretation

·         it was necessary to clarify if the programme/project was intended to support the immediate or wider community.

Members of the Sub Committee indicated that they had no comments they wished to make on this report.

DECISION

1.         That the achievements of the MSG Theme 5 programme be noted.

2.         That the above from GSSC as set out in the preceding paragraph be noted.

The Corporate Director for Resources presented the report which informed the Sub-Committee:

·         of the closure of the stream of funding under Theme 5 of the MSG programme and an assessment of outcomes.

·         that future funding in this theme was intended to be commissioned via co-production on an interim basis until the conclusion of the extended MSG programme.

Members noted the achievements and the lessons learned from projects delivered under this Theme.

At the Chair’s invitation the comments of GSSC were received stating that the achievements and feedback were supported however Members considered that:

·         it was necessary to ensure that training and empowerment was continued

·         success messages needed to be neutrally worded to avoid political bias or misinterpretation

·         it was necessary to clarify if the programme/project was intended to support the immediate or wider community.

Members of the Sub Committee indicated that they had no comments they wished to make on this report.

RESOLVED

1.         That the achievements of the MSG Theme 5 programme be noted.

2.         That the above from GSSC as set out in the preceding paragraph be noted.

Steve Hill, Head of Benefits Services presented his report on the outcomes from Theme 5 – Community Engagement Cohesion and Resilience Grant Programme.

He informed Members this funding stream was an 18 month programme which ended on the 31^st March 2017. The priority was to fund projects that had a cohesion and cross-cultural, intergenerational, engagement or capacity building focus.

In particular, theme five projects allowed community organisations to engage and support communities that are hard to reach – including women, migrants and the gypsy and traveller communities.

Steve Hill referred to the annual resident’s survey and said in 2017 92% of residents agreed that the local area is a place where people of different backgrounds get on well together compared to 81% in 2014/15.

Members of the Sub-Committee asked the following questions:

·         Page 33, point 3.3. refers to projects that did not go so well. What lessons have been learnt and how will commissioning be a better and how will small projects be supported?

·         In reference to the project referred to on Page 49, Grant’s should be mindful of supporting political activity.

·         In reference to page 42, this project focusses on one particular community rather than being cross-cutting. This needs to be made clear.

The Sub-Committee NOTED the report and recommendation that the achievements of Theme 5 be noted.

Members of the Grants Scrutiny Sub-Committee also recommend to the Grant’s Determination Sub-Committee that it must ensure the learning and training does not stop. The Council needs to ensure the programme of empowerment is built on.