Minutes:
This
item was scrutinised in conjunction with item 7 on the Cabinet agenda –
Building Safe and Resilient Communities Grant Funding report.
Following
scrutiny of the Public Services Board Annual Report 2018/19 on 10 July 2019,
Cabinet Scrutiny Committee exercised their powers as set out in Section 35 of
the Wellbeing of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 (being the designated
overview and scrutiny committee for this purpose, as approved at Council in May
2015), and invited the lead officers on Objective 2 – Building Safe and
Resilient Communities to provide more in depth information to the committee.
The
Director of Social Services, Health and Housing and the Director of NPTCVS gave
members a presentation on the Building Safe and Resilient Communities programme,
including the areas of the County Borough chosen to pilot the project, the
basic strategic plan framework and the governance structure.
Members
drew officer’s attention to the report and explained that Cwmllynfell
was in the upper Swansea Valley not the upper Amman Valley.
Members
noted that the starting point, outcomes, objectives and key performance
indicators (KPIs) for the Building Safe and Resilient Communities project, or
the precise purpose of funding had not yet been identified, and would depend on
suggestions and involvement from local community groups.
Members
were concerned that the operation of the grant pot of funding provided for the
Briton Ferry and Melin areas of the programme had
been started prematurely. Officers explained that this funding would be
administered by NPTCVS by means of the ‘innovate and create’ grant scheme as
part of the Regional Partnership Board Transformation Fund arrangements. The
proposed allocation of funding from Council resources to support similar work
in the other pilot area would follow similar criteria but the governance of
that fund would need to reflect the fact that it is Council and not Welsh
Government funding. The criteria for applications to both funds was discussed,
in particular the need for sustainability going forward.
Members
were pleased that both urban and rural areas had been chosen for the pilot, and
felt this would be useful for comparison purposes. Members queried how officers
would be able to tell whether a difference had been made or not. Officers
explained that in addition to first-hand accounts from local residents, there
would be a formal evaluation structure drawn up by Swansea University and its
partners.
Members
requested further clarity on the evaluation structure/framework, as well as the
KPIs which would be used. Officers assured Members that as soon as the
evaluation structure had been written it would be brought back before the
Committee.
Officers
explained that people were strengths within communities, as well as services
and buildings in those areas. The Committee emphasised the need for elected Members to be viewed as
key community assets.
It
was noted that timescales for the project were difficult to anticipate, but
officers envisioned the pilot schemes taking a couple of years to establish and
to ensure the programme was working, before any sort of roll out would begin.
Other
areas of discussion included:
·
Listening to people, not telling them what they need,
·
Community drivers,
·
The language used in the presentation,
·
Safeguarding concerns – i.e. the need to have a proportionate approach
to encouraging community activism balanced against the need for adequate
safeguarding of children and vulnerable adults.
Notwithstanding
the request for the evaluation structure and KPIs to be brought back before
Committee for further scrutiny, the Committee noted the presentation and
report.
Supporting documents: