Steve Hill (Head of Benefits) and Robert Mee (Programme Analysis and Review Officer) presented the report regarding the European Social Fund, Community Employment Scheme (ESF), which was co – financed through the European Union, match funded by the Council and administered by London Council’s.

This was a three year programme and the report provided an update of projects funded through round one, and an update on round two in respect of the nine organisations that had provisionally secured funded. It was noted that the release of payment was dependant on results and that the London Councils and LBTH had carried out due diligence checks of the organisations and that that Officers and the Head of Audit would carry out further checks. Officers expressed disappointment at the number of applications for round two funding and London Councils were aware of these concerns. Officers also reported that they were working with the GLA and London Councils to review the threshold and to increase take up. 

The Mayor invited the Chair of GSSC to comment on the report. He indicated that the GSSC expressed some concern about the number of round two organisations with a track record in providing employment and skills training. The GSSC were however mindful of the projects engagement with the Work Path initiative. The GSSC also sought assurances about the effectiveness of the performance monitoring arrangements. A summary of the GSSC questions were circulated at the meeting. The GSSC noted the responses and endorsed the report.

The Mayor then invited GDSC Members to comment on the report. Members noted the issues around the track record of the applicants and it was noted that assurances were sought, at the assessment stage, regarding their ability to deliver employment related training. Members also welcomed the due diligence checks and requested that this be reported to the London Councils. It was felt that these checks were very important.

Members also expressed disappointment at the outcome of the round two application process and the lack of interest from groups with a stronger track record in providing education and funding training. Members sought clarity on the reasons for this and how this would be addressed.  In response, Officers expressed the view that a possible reason for this could be the low income threshold. It might deter a more broader range of groups from applying. It was confirmed that Officers would be carrying out further work with London Councils to look at increasing the threshold and ways of encouraging more groups to apply. However it should be noted that raising the threshold significantly could change the nature of the initiative - moving it away from providing small grants to small organisations to build capacity. It was also important to note the information in the attachments that provided a summary of the projects achievements.

Members welcomed the plans to encourage more groups to apply and considered that the verification checks were vital. The GDSC supported the recommendations.

DECISION

1.         That the organisations and projects provisionally funded through  ...  view the full decision text for item 6

Steve Hill (Head of Benefits) and Robert Mee (Programme Analysis and Review Officer) presented the report regarding the European Social Fund, Community Employment Scheme (ESF), which was co – financed through the European Union, match funded by the Council and administered by London Council’s.

This was a three year programme and the report provided an update of projects funded through round one, and an update on round two in respect of the nine organisations that had provisionally secured funded. It was noted that the release of payment was dependant on results and that the London Councils and LBTH had carried out due diligence checks of the organisations and that that Officers and the Head of Audit would carry out further checks. Officers expressed disappointment at the number of applications for round two funding and London Councils were aware of these concerns. Officers also reported that they were working with the GLA and London Councils to review the threshold and to increase take up. 

The Mayor invited the Chair of GSSC to comment on the report. He indicated that the GSSC expressed some concern about the number of round two organisations with a track record in providing employment and skills training. The GSSC were however mindful of the projects engagement with the Work Path initiative. The GSSC also sought assurances about the effectiveness of the performance monitoring arrangements. A summary of the GSSC questions were circulated at the meeting. The GSSC noted the responses and endorsed the report.

The Mayor then invited GDSC Members to comment on the report. Members noted the issues around the track record of the applicants and it was noted that assurances were sought, at the assessment stage, regarding their ability to deliver employment related training. Members also welcomed the due diligence checks and requested that this be reported to the London Councils. It was felt that these checks were very important.

Members also expressed disappointment at the outcome of the round two application process and the lack of interest from groups with a stronger track record in providing education and funding training. Members sought clarity on the reasons for this and how this would be addressed.  In response, Officers expressed the view that a possible reason for this could be the low income threshold. It might deter a more broader range of groups from applying. It was confirmed that Officers would be carrying out further work with London Councils to look at increasing the threshold and ways of encouraging more groups to apply. However it should be noted that raising the threshold significantly could change the nature of the initiative - moving it away from providing small grants to small organisations to build capacity. It was also important to note the information in the attachments that provided a summary of the projects achievements.

Members welcomed the plans to encourage more groups to apply and considered that the verification checks were vital. The GDSC supported the recommendations.

RESOLVED:

1.         That the organisations and projects provisionally funded through  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6

Mr Steve Hill, Head of Benefits Service presented his report in relation to the European Social Fund (ESF) Community Employment Programme. Mr Hill stated the programme was co-financed through the European Union and administered by London Councils.

Mr Hill said of the three rounds of funding, the first round totalled £302,088 and was awarded to 17 organisations. The second round totalled £180,000 and had been provisionally awarded to 9 organisations, dependant on successful pre-agreement meetings. Mr Hill said that whilst the number of applicants applying for ESF funding in the second round was disappointing, suggestions on how to maximise the number of applications had been considered and this was detailed at paragraph 3.9 of the report.

In response to questions asked by Members the following was noted:

·         Of the nine organisations who had applied for funding in the second round, rigorous monitoring would take place to ensure they were performing to the expected standard and were providing value for money. Funding is provided on a ‘payment by results’ basis and as such each organisation from round one and two must demonstrate they have achieved the targets expected of them.

·         Mr Hill confirmed for round three, both existing and new organisations would be targeted. He reminded Members round one was still ongoing and his team was determined to ensure a bigger impact was made in round three, which is due to be launched in February/ March 2019 by attracting further organisations.

·         Mr Mee, Programme Analysis and Review Officer, confirmed unused money from round one and round two would be added to round three of the programme. Unspent funding at the end of the programme which ends in 2020 would be returned to the Council.

·         In relation to why traditional organisations who undertake employability programmes, had not applied for funding, Mr Mee stated that the ESF programme was very specific on the types of organisations who could apply. He said unless the threshold is changed the focus was on small organisations so they could get a taste of how European funding worked.

·         Members made suggestions that other advertising platforms should be used to attract organisations for round three of the programme.

·         In response to why Table 3, page 51 showed a big gap between enrolment (starts) and the number of participants who had sustained employment, Mr Mee stated that it was extremely hard to ensure participants in these programmes took up full time employment. The idea is to signpost people to the ‘Workpath’ programme once they have completed the programmes offered by these organisations.

Members of the Sub-Committee RESOLVED to AGREE and ENDORSE the recommendations to the Grants Determination Sub-Committee to:

1.    Note the organisations and projects provisionally funded through Round 2 of the ESF Community Grants Programme as detailed in paragraphs 3.6 and 3.7.

2.    Note the progress of projects funded in Round 1 as detailed in paragraphs 3.4 and 3.5 and Appendix 1 of the report.