MINUTES BIG LOTTERY FUND MEETING OF BIG LOTTERY FUND ENGLAND COMMITTEE HELD ON WEDNESDAY 11 JUNE 2014 PRESENT: Nat Sloane England Committee Chair (in the Chair) Geeta Gopalan England Committee Member (Vice Chair) (Chair Item 7.3) Danny Silverstone England Committee Special Advisor Jane Robinson England Committee Member Nalini Varma England Committee Member Scott Greenhalgh England Committee Member IN ATTENDANCE: Dawn Austwick Chief Executive (Items 8-10) Dharmendra Kanani Director, England Lyn Cole Deputy Director, England Tim Davies-Pugh Deputy Director, England Andrew Morris Deputy Director, England Ambreen Shah Deputy Director, England Amanda Todd Corporate Manager (Governance) (Secretariat) Graeme Howe Head of Funding (Investment) (Items 6, 7 and 10) Louise Snelders Head of Funding (Early Contact) (Items 6, 7 and 10) Roger Winhall Head of Policy and Learning (Insight) (Items 8 and 9) Vicky Millward Head of Policy and Learning (Impact and Influence) (Items 8 and 9) Christine Cooper Policy and Learning Manager (Impact and Influence) (Items 8 and 9) Ramona Herdman Head of Policy and Learning, Insight (Item 10) Sue Ormiston Programme Manager (Item 10) Laura Furness Local Deals Manager (Item 10) Denise Jones Project Manager (Item 10) GUESTS: Richard Handover Chair, Power to Change Trust (Item 6) Caroline Macfarland Consultant, Power to Change Trust (Item 6) Vince Carroll Programme Manager, Bridge Northampton (Item 8) Terry Pearson Commissioning Manager (Theme Lead: Drugs and Alcohol), Northamptonshire County Council (Item 8) 1. INTRODUCTIONS AND APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE 1.1 The Chair welcomed members of the England Committee and Officers to the meeting. 1.2 Apologies were received from Steve Richards, Charlie Howard, Albert Tucker England Committee Members and Andrew Hudson, Senior Advisor, England. 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 2.1 LOCAL MEANS (10228022) Nat Sloane is the Independent Chair of Social and Sustainable Capital, a social investment intermediary. This was considered a disqualifying interest. 3. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS ENGLAND COMMITTEE MEETING 3.1 The minutes of the May 2014 England Committee were agreed. 4. MATTERS ARISING FROM ENGLAND COMMITTEE MEETINGS (NOT COVERED ELSEWHERE ON THE AGENDA) 4.1 Andrew Morris advised that the Business Connectors (BITC) review is with the Chair and England Committee lead for consideration and decision. Committee will receive a further update in July. Page 1 of 8
4.2 Dharmendra Kanani advised that the recommendations noted in the Triennial Review, published 11 June 2014, would be the subject of the Fund s Board Meeting on 17 June 2014. The Fund would then formulate a response to Cabinet Office. Members were invited to feedback comments to the Chair in advance of this meeting ACTION: England Committee. 4.3 Andrew Morris advised the Committee that Public Health England in collaboration with the Early Intervention Foundation (EIF) are offering support to the 10 unsuccessful A Better Start projects. Projects will be invited to join the network of EIF pilot sites. Richard Handover and Caroline Macfarland joined the meeting 5. POWER TO CHANGE TRUST 5.1 The Chair welcomed Richard Handover and Caroline Macfarland to the meeting and introductions to Members and Officers were made. 5.2 Richard Handover presented a brief update on the Centre. He outlined the work carried out to date, providing detail on the feedback received at the stakeholder consultations and practitioner visits; the Trust s structure, Vision and Mission and how the Trust would look to define a successful business. Further information was provided on the market analysis that has been completed and the key next steps which include the recruitment of two Directors and CEO and the development of the Trust s Impact and Evaluation work. 5.3 The challenge of balancing pace and practicality when setting up a new Fund was observed. The Trust s Chair recommended that the Fund develops a best practice model to support future similar initiatives ACTION: ESMT. 5.4 During the discussion the following key points were made: i) The progress and pace of work to date, with the associated challenges of this were recognised ii) Committee suggested that scaling would also include elements of replication iii) The challenge of balancing and measuring the social and economic benefit continuum was acknowledged. iv) The Trust s Chair confirmed that all economic profits would be directed back to the community. v) The Trust was encouraged to and confirmed they were looking to maximise learning from successful local clusters. The role of local people, often individuals, to drive success in these areas was also recognised. vi) Further information was provided on the Trust s impact strategy and evaluation. The Trust was encouraged to speak to the Big Local Trust specifically in relation to capturing learning in a local setting. vii) The need for Trust to consider its long-term sustainability and leverage other funds was acknowledged. viii) The Trust s Chair advised that the Trust would engage with local authorities to help inform their thinking once the Trust s parameters, to be outlined in the business plan, had been set. ix) The importance of setting down a clear gifting/transfer of assets policy early in the process was highlighted. Richard Handover and Caroline Macfarland left the meeting. 5.5 Members were advised that the Trust will return to the England Committee for decision making on the endowment proposal application in September 2014. Page 2 of 8
5.6 The England Committee agreed to: i) Acknowledge the progress made by the Centre to date ii) Note the Chair s presentation and subsequent discussion iii) Feedback any additional comments for the Trust via Lyn Cole Graeme Howe and Louise Snelders joined the meeting 6. DEMAND LED FUNDING 6.1 Tim Davies-Pugh set the context for the discussion. The aim of the session was to seek agreement on the Fund in England s vision and objectives for demand led funding. If agreed these would form the basis of a quarterly report, the first of which would be presented to the July Committee. This would allow discussions to focus on the strategic rather than operational approach for this element of the portfolio. Tim also confirmed that Officers anticipate seeing FMS stability at the end of July. 6.2 Louise Snelders updated Committee on the key action areas for the next six month period, with the following key points highlighted during the discussion: i) The Committee welcomed the paper which brought together all elements of demand led funding. ii) Further detail was provided on the review of Single Awards. Committee were advised that a proposal for this area of the portfolio will go the Fund s Senior Management Team in June. Members recommended that further consideration is given to the principles behind Single Awards, how Officers would evaluate an application and the proposal to incorporate an element of market testing ACTION: Louise Snelders. iii) Officers confirmed the patch planning work is due for completion in June 2014 and will enable the Fund to target resource. [Patch plans are the socio-economic profiles of individual local authority areas which will capture information to understand what has previously been funded and issues pertinent to the area. This will enable the Local Area Officers to identify local priorities. Patch lines will be live documents and enable the Fund to capture any emerging issues.] iv) Learning from demand led funding will be incorporated into the measures of success report; the current timing for this is January 2015. Officers will return to Committee should any specific milestones be reached before then. Committee considered the proposed framework and requested Officers to work with the England Committee Leads to clarify and simplify the approach to be taken for each element ACTION: Louise Snelders. v) Further information was provided on the ways in which Funding Officers are working together and using learning from the strategic initiatives and policy and watch list reviews during the delegated panel meetings. Committee and Officers acknowledged that this approach is a step change and meets the aspirations of the Fund as articulated when the Reaching Communities decision making was delegated. However it is recognised that there is a mismatch between the approach and the quality of information coming to Committee which Officers need to address ACTION: Louise Snelders. vi) Officers confirmed that the Fund s approach to capital funding was one of the points of discussion covered by the strategic framework consultation. Committee were updated on the work that has been undertaken to bring together the different funding elements to provide greater flexibility for applicants for capital funding. Officers were requested to discuss this in more detail with the England Committee Leads ACTION: Louise Snelders. vii) Jane Robinson reflected on her attendance at the delegations panel meeting on 2 June. It was suggested and agreed that attendance at the Reaching Communities delegated panels would be opened up to all Committee Members ACTION: Graeme Howe. Page 3 of 8
viii) The approach being taken to demand led funding communications, specifically in EC(14)M06 extending the Fund s reach to new audiences and showcasing projects rather than the funding stream was noted. 6.3 Committee discussed the proposal for Building Capabilities which recommended up to 15,000 of additional support to be offered to Stage 2 Reaching Communities applicants to help strengthen their application in terms of learning, evaluation or capability. The aim of this funding is to increase the impact and sustainability of projects funded through Reaching Communities. 6.4 During the discussion the following points were made: i) Further detail was provided on the approach being developed and the proposed evaluation diagnostic which would help applicants identify the support they required ii) There was no change to the grant management process for funding staff so the proposal was deliverable from an operational perspective iii) Distinct funding for this area of work would give the Fund greater scope to evaluate demand led funding. Currently funding for this type of activity is covered within an applicant s consultancy budget. iv) Committee were reminded of the purpose of the Supporting Change and Impact (SCI) investment and the differences between this and the Building Capabilities proposal were noted. Committee were advised that a final report on the SCI investment was due in June 2014. v) Given the links to the learning and evaluation work previously discussed, Committee requested Officers to discuss this further with the England Committee Leads ACTION: Louise Snelders. 6.5 The England Committee agreed: i) To the vision and objectives for Demand Led Funding as tested by the measures of success ii) To note the updated communications approach iii) To the England Committee Leads continuing discussions on learning from our funding; Reaching Communities Buildings and Building Capabilities. 7. DEMAND LED FUNDING DELEGATED DECISIONS 7.1 Graeme Howe provided an update on the recent delegated decisions panel meetings. He highlighted the impact on the budget of the slow-down in receipt of Stage 2 applications. It was agreed that the budget would be reviewed at the mid-year point ACTION: Graeme Howe. 7.2 An update on the budget setting and impact on the England grant budget as a result of the Single Awards review was provided. 7.3 The England Committee agreed to note: i) Awards made by the Reaching Communities panel in May 2014 ii) The Panel s briefing note 7.4 Graeme Howe updated Committee on the impact changes in the construction environment are having on grant holders costs and the increase in the number of variations that the Fund is being requested to consider as a result. The rationale for a revision to the current variation procedure within the current governance arrangements was proposed, examples were provided to illustrate how this would work in practice and the financial implications for the budget presented. Page 4 of 8
7.5 The England Committee agreed: i) Requests for grant increases within the 10% threshold where the new total amount awarded is still under 500,000 are decided by a Head of Funding (current arrangement) ii) Requests for grant increases over the 10% threshold where the new total amount awarded is less than 500,000 are decided by the Reaching Communities delegated decision panel iii) Requests for grant increases over the 10% threshold where the new total awarded amount is over 500,000 are decided by the England Chair by Chair s Action. Nat Sloane left the meeting. Matt Smith joined the meeting Single Awards 7.3 One award was brought to Committee for decision. The decision is annexed to this document. Nat Sloane re-joined the meeting. Graeme Howe, Louise Snelders and Matt Smith left the meeting. Dawn Austwick, Roger Winhall, Vicky Millward, Christine Cooper Vince Carroll, Programme Manager, Bridge Northampton and Terry Pearson, Commissioning Manager (Theme Lead: Drugs and Alcohol), Northamptonshire County Council joined the meeting. 8. MULTIPLE NEEDS 8.1 Lyn Cole introduced the discussion. The objective of the session was to update Committee on the ambition and early learning coming from the Multiple Needs investment and to provide an external context perspective on work already happening in this field. 8.2 Committee viewed a film which detailed the model of service user engagement in Blackpool, one of the investment s funded areas and which served to demonstrate the impact that the Multiple Needs investment was already having at the grant set up stage. 8.3 The work of Bridge Northampton was demonstrated through a range of case studies and anecdotal evidence. Through these the impact of peer support and working with commissioners to provide a more connected approach were illustrated. 8.4 During the discussion: i) Officers noted that although Bridge Northampton is not funded by the Big Lottery, the work they are doing was illustrative of the ambition that the Fund had for the Multiple Needs investment ii) Further detail was provided on the Peer Mentor project, which aims to empower people to get involved in their own recovery, and the benefits of a tailored recovery platform. iii) The ability of the Multiple Needs investment to influence a range of commissioners was discussed. While this is difficult to calculate it is recognised that commissioners need to be convinced of the benefits and identifying metrics to illustrate this, e.g. the cost of relapse, were considered. 8.5 Officers and Members thanked Vince and Terry for their input and contribution to the discussion. 8.6 The England Committee: i) Agreed to note the discussion Vince Carroll and Terry Pearson left the meeting 9. MULTIPLE NEEDS 9.1 Roger Winhall introduced the discussion, the aim of which was to provide an update on the early learning, challenges and opportunities arising from the Multiple Needs initiative. He Page 5 of 8
linked the conversation to the previous item, emphasising the work that Bridge EC(14)M06 Northampton are doing which matches the Fund s ambition for multiple needs; the role that individuals have in their recovery and an understanding of the complexity of individuals lives messages that run through the papers presented for discussion. 9.2 Roger Winhall gave a brief update on the status of the 12 Multiple Needs projects following the awards made in December 2013. He highlighted that each of the projects were very different organisations with different ambitions and thus provided significant opportunities for learning at a project level and overall for the Fund. Further detail was provided on the current status of the projects in the area of partnerships and partnership working, noting the range of approaches being taken which illustrate that there is no one right approach. 9.3 Vicky Millward and Christine Cooper provided further detail on emerging trends in homelessness and substance misuse and examples provided of interventions being taken to address these. Commonalities in trends and what works in terms of interventions being strongly linked to a personalised, multi-agency support backed up by peer support in the two areas were also highlighted 9.4 During the discussion the following key points were made: i) Committee requested a status update on each of the 12 Multiple Needs projects, to include detail of the strengths and weaknesses of each ACTION: Roger Winhall. ii) Officers confirmed the main areas of concern identified are around partnerships, the role of Expert Citizens within the partnership and how co-production develops locally. iii) The England Director confirmed the importance of reiterating the ambition of what the Fund wants to achieve through its Multiple Needs investment and how that is communicated. This will enable the partnerships to articulate the benefits of the approach to influence commissioners and support the desired system change. The Fund should therefore help projects to do that. iv) Further detail was provided on the Making Every Adult Matter (MEAM) coalition support contract which via individual diagnostics would help identify the project s strengths and where support was required. v) Officers confirmed each project is also running their own local evaluation alongside the Fund s national evaluation. As the local evaluations are already being carried out, this will enable early learning to be captured. 9.5 Committee were requested to consider the specific recommendations within the watch list reviews which would help identify areas for further research in the short-medium term through the early contact team and areas of interest for the portfolio post 2015. 9.6 Andrew Morris confirmed the portfolio development process throughout 2014 in advance of the strategy for the portfolio 2015-20 being discussed in February 2015. 9.7 While a number of areas where recognised as opportunities where the Fund could assess its convening factors and have impact, Officers were requested to re-scope future watch list discussions and clarify objectives ACTION: Andrew Morris. 9.8 The England Committee agreed to note: i) The Multiple Needs overview, the homelessness and substance misuse thematic overviews and subsequent discussion Dawn Austwick, Roger Winhall, Vicky Millward and Christine Cooper left the meeting Ramona Herdman, Sue Ormiston, Laura Furness, Denise Jones, Louise Snelders and Graeme Howe joined the meeting Page 6 of 8
10. EUROPEAN FUNDING (ESIF) 10.1 Dharmendra Kanani introduced the discussion noting the January 2014 England Committee and Board approval to proceed with the programme development, conditional on assurance about the Fund s project management capacity and capabilities during the design phase. Members of the core Project Team were introduced to Committee. 10.2 The Project Team presented an overview of progress to date, confirmed the roles and responsibilities of the Board, England Committee and SMT in the governance arrangements and summarised the proposed timetable for the investment, noting that the 2015 dates are dependent on the signing of the MOU with the Managing Authority (MA). The total match requested was confirmed and Committee were advised that while three local authorities have not yet opted in there is still potential interest from these areas. 10.3 The England Committee were updated on the proposal to allocate 620,000 of Partnership Development Funding (PDF) for European funding in England. This would be awarded through an open competitive process, to support the development of fewer, higher quality main funding applications. The England Committee was requested to delegate decisions on the recommendations in the PDF paper to the England Committee Leads. The rationale for this funding and approach in the context of the Fund s objectives for its involvement in ESIF and programme timing were summarised. As the PDF phase will be followed by a two stage grant application for main grant funding, a separate piece of governance would be developed for this. 10.4 Officers were requested and provided further information on how system, development and programme costs would be funded. Officers also highlighted the importance, given the Fund s capacity and resource implications of working in localities as part of our activity, to keep this investment simple in terms of its overall policy and match to other areas of funding. 10.5 The Project Team summarised the key risks being managed through the corporate risk register for the two stages 2014-15 and go live 2015 onwards. The actions that the Fund was taking to mitigate the financial and reputational risks, including an audit dry-run, and how the PDF phase would support this were highlighted. 10.6 Committee were advised that the annual review by the Managing Authority (MA) would also lessen the risks to future changes within this organisation in the go live phase. It was suggested and agreed that as the MA was changing Officers would arrange for representatives to join a future England Committee ACTION: Ramona Herdman. 10.7 The England Committee requested that a clear delineation of roles and responsibilities between the SMT, the UK Board and the England Committee is established and agreed in writing by the UK Board as soon as possible ACTION: Ramona Herdman. 10.8 The England Committee agreed: i) Decisions on the recommendations in the PDF paper would be delegated to the European Funding England Committee Leads ACTION: Ramona Herdman Ramona Herdman, Sue Ormiston, Laura Furness, Denise Jones, Louise Snelders and Graeme Howe left the meeting 11. ANY OTHER BUSINESS 11.1 Officers confirmed that an arrangement under the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) allows the Power to Change Trust to make the decision on media partnerships. Officers were requested to discuss this with the Corporate Communications team. ACTION: Lyn Cole. The MOU pertaining to the Silver Dreams investment and its relationship with the Page 7 of 8
Ageing Better: Social Isolation investment was also discussed in the context of this conversation. Committee were updated on discussions that Officers are having with the Ageing Better media partner to clarify the Fund s position. Officers were requested to note the importance of clear internal communications in these areas and consider future exclusive media deals in relation to the message the Fund wished to project ACTION: ESMT The meeting closed at 16.20 The England Chair held a closed session with the England Committee and the England Director. DATE, TIME AND VENUE OF NEXT MEETING The next England Committee meeting will be held on 9 July 2014 in Plough Place, London. MINUTES AGREED DATE NAT SLOANE ENGLAND COMMITTEE CHAIR GEETA GOPALAN ENGLAND COMMITTEE VICE CHAIR (Item 7.3) Page 8 of 8