grants committee by lindash



Grants Committee
Open Bidding Refunding Assessment
Sector: Womens Sector                        Team: Education & Young

Richmond upon Thames Council                            Item
for Voluntary Service (RCVS)                            no:14.2
Contact        Marsha Smith

Date:          28 January 2004

Telephone:     020 7934 9520      Email:

Principal            RCVS is a second tier organisation which
Activities of        represents and advocates on behalf of the
Organisation:        voluntary sector in Richmond.   The ALG funded
                     project comprises a consortium between Kingston
                     Voluntary Action, Merton Voluntary Services
                     Council and Richmond Council for Voluntary
                     Service, which is the lead partner in the

ALG Open Bidding     A recurrent revenue grant of £248,000 over four
Grant in             years subject to annual review of service
principal            achievement   and   continued   availability of
approval             funding. Full year effect £64,377.

Grant                Continued funding, as agreed in Otober 2002,
Recommendation:      providing considerable progress is demonstrated
                     in establishing the project during the first
                     three months of 2004. A further report will be
                     presented to the April Committee.
 Purpose of grant      A contribution towards the salary costs of a
 and        agreed     project manager, project development worker,
 outputs/outcomes      project   promotions  worker,   ICT development
 :                     worker and general running costs.

                       The project aims to give socially excluded women
                       in the boroughs of Kingston, Merton and Richmond
                       the abilities and skills needed to enable them
                       to participate in public life and decision
                       making   processes  within   their   communities,
                       through provision of the following services:
                           Citizenship skills courses in the boroughs
                            of Merton, Kingston and Richmond;
                           Establishing an active women’s citizenship
                            forum in each of the three boroughs;
                           Publication and distribution of an interim
                            report in the second to third year and
                            final report in the fourth year of the
                            project.   These will cover all aspects of
                            this project and its effectiveness in
                            enhancing the role of disadvantaged women
                            in    public   life   and    decision-making
                           Provision of an opportunity for women
                            affected   by  social  exclusion    to  take
                            greater control of ther own futures and to
                            influence     matters     affectng     their

Borough base Richmond-upon-Thames
Total numbers of Londoners served as a percentage from each Borough: 0
                      %                          %                       %
Barking and               Hackney                     Lewisham
Barnet                    Hammersmith and             Merton
Bexley                    Haringey                    Newham
Brent                     Harrow                      Redbridge
Bromley                   Havering                    Richmond upon
Camden                    Hillingdon                  Southwark
City of London            Hounslow                    Sutton
Croydon                   Islington                   Tower Hamlets
Ealing                    Kensington and              Waltham Forest
Enfield                   Kingston upon               Wandsworth
Greenwich                 Lambeth                     Westminster

Comments on the Borough base table
The project has not yet commenced and therefore has no users at
present. See comments below under ‘Monitoring/specific conditions’
and ‘Basis of recommendation’.

                               2003/2004             2002/2003
Income – ALG                                      £62,000
Income – other grants                          £1,039,017
Income – other income                            £189,367

Income – Total                                 £1,290,384

Expenditure                                    £1,221,173

Surplus                                          £69,211

Net current assets                               £320,049

Monitoring/Specific Considerations:
 Richmond Council for Voluntary Service has provided written
information upon which this assessment is based. According to the
information provided, the first eight months of the project period
involved turning the ALG funding agreement into a work plan, whilst
the actual project has not started. To date, a website has been
established, providing initial information on the project’s aims
and objectives, as well as a feedback facility for potential
applicants, local organisations and other stakeholders to register
an interest in the project and contribute suggestions.           In
addition, it has also developed training materials and session
plans for the ICT elements of the training course, which will soon
be piloted. It has also agreed a work plan for the period 1 October
2003 – 31 March 2004. As the project will only be launched in
January 2004, it has not yet made any progress against the agreed
outputs and outcomes.     The organisation has advised that the
project has not started because two of their payments were delayed.
Officers are concerned by this as initial payments were only being
released on request towards recruitment costs.

 Basis of Recommendation:
 As outlined above, the project has made little progress towards
 achieving the target outcomes and outputs agreed with the
 Association of London Government. Their monitoring information
 notes that the first eight months of the funding period was taken
 up in developing the work plan. This seems to be an excessively
 long period and it is reasonable to expect that an outline work
 plan would have been developed at the time the grant application
 was drafted. Also, Richmond CVS did not contact the ALG at an
 early stage in the funding period to discuss the problems created
by the payment delays. However, Richmond CVS states that it should
achieve the outputs and outcomes within the timescale of the
project as it has now appointed to all three posts. In light of
these considerations, officers are recommending continuation of
funding up to 30 June 2004. This will be conditional upon the
organisation demonstrating clear progress with this project during
the first three months of 2004.

To top