The Committee welcomed Alison Baxter (OCVA - Oxfordshire Council for Voluntary Action) to the meeting. The Chair explained that she had been invited to give the Committee an insight into how the voluntary sector was coping in the current financial climate, and how it was likely to cope in the next six months. Ms Baxter would also make some suggestions concerning help that the City Council and Councillors could offer to voluntary and community groups.

Introduction

Alison Baxter explained that she did not believe that the Government’s plan to introduce a minimal Best Value Statutory Guidance for community and voluntary groups, as explained in the agenda, would have a huge impact.  She felt that the maintenance of the current “Oxfordshire Compact” was of more importance. All local authorities wanted this to continue, however it may be reviewed and refreshed as it was important to remind people of the principles agreed between voluntary groups.

The impact of the Localism Bill was not known, since it was not in force yet. What the voluntary sector was currently experiencing was a big change in the way public services were delivered, including a move towards personal budgets for adult social care, and Locality Boards carrying out service commissioning from September 2011. Oxfordshire County Council now had an approved providers list, which was a help to voluntary organisations, but this was causing disquiet in some quarters. There were also issues around the provision of services to people with physical disabilities.  It was intended that there would be 8 Health and Wellbeing Centres, each to be given funding of £50,000 to begin with, and then expected to source additional income to fulfil needs beyond this. These Centres would be the core part of service delivery. Children’s’ Services would be provided through early intervention hubs.  The deadline for all of this was very tight, since the aim was to have everything up and running by September 2011.

Voluntary organisations would need to forge new relationships – schools and GP surgeries would have their own budgets, for example, and it would be difficult for the voluntary sector to decide where it should focus its relationship-building efforts.

Despite all the uncertainty, there was some good news. The Stronger Communities Alliance had awarded a large chunk of its funding to groups within the City. The County Council also had some “Big Society” funding; however, it should be noted that this had received far more bids than there was money available.

In answer to the question “What can the City Council do?, Ms Baxter suggested that Councillors, as individuals, could offer their skills and expertise to voluntary groups, which would gladly receive any help and advice that was offered.  There was also a new initiative with the City council’s procurement team that allowed voluntary groups to access providers at favourable rates, and this had been welcomed. But if groups could not obtain funding, the fact remained that they would struggle to survive and have an impact.

Members of the Committee considered this issue and identified the following key concerns:-

Access to funding

There was concern that smaller groups might find it difficult, on their own, to access funding, and that they might be crowded out by larger groups. It would be helpful if a consortium of small groups with similar interests and aims could apply for funding together, in order to maximise their chance of success.  Alison Baxter confirmed that where funds could be accessed jointly, such a bid was submitted; but not every funding body allowed this.

Alison Baxter was not sure how many City groups had applied for “Big Society” funding, but she could find out. It was noted that more than £1.5 million had been requested in the first round of funding, for a total fund of £800,000. It was explained that the intention was to distribute this fund through four rounds of grant giving.

Capacity building

In answer to a question, Alison Baxter explained that OCVA had exceeded its own targets for capacity building, and that groups associated with OCVA had now raised over £1million in funding. OCVA was about to start an evaluation process as it wished to understand what impact this funding had.

Equalities issues

In answer to a question, Alison Baxter explained that there was no evidence that Oxfordshire County Council was abandoning the equalities aspects of voluntary funding. However, the Committee noted that the Government had made consideration of equalities issues “desirable” rather than “essential”, and that this allowed equalities issues to become less of a priority. The Committee felt that there was a need to monitor this, and asked OCVA to keep it informed of cases where “desirable” rather than “essential” was used.

Volunteering

The Committee noted that some organisations (for example Oxford Brookes University) encouraged staff to undertake volunteering in their community for up to 2 days a year, for which the staff member was allowed paid leave. It agreed that the City Council should be asked to investigate instituting a similar scheme for its own staff, if one was not already in existence.

(It was subsequently discovered that the Council operates a scheme for volunteers. Contact has been made with people and equalities to discover how effective this scheme is, and how, possibly, it might be improved.)

Timetable of changes

The proposed changes were currently out to consultation, and there was no timetable yet for their introduction.

It was noted that the Oxford Strategic Partnership (OSP) was likely to change to a forum that met annually.

Voluntary groups working with children and young people

It was noted that some voluntary groups carried out useful work with children and young people through schools. With significant cuts to education funding, there was concern about these groups viability. It could be assumed that some would survive but others would not, depending on their success at fundraising.  The Committee noted with interest that the Oxfordshire Community Foundation hoped to launch a “community bond”, with the aim of using investments to fund groups that worked with children and young people – but this was at a very early stage of development.

Councillor involvement

The Committee observed that Councillors would shortly have their own individual budget to spend within their ward. Councillors were well placed top know what the priorities for their area were, and this could be of assistance to voluntary and community groups.

Conclusion

The Committee identified the following issues arising from the discussion:-

• There was a need for more two-way information between OCVA and Councillors. OCVA produced a monthly newsletter which it would be useful for Councillors to receive;
• Councillors should be encouraged to be aware of OCVA and its work, and to promote it to voluntary and community groups within their ward. Councillors were also encouraged to attend the Voluntary Awards Ceremony in October ;
• The Committee would be interested to see how the proposed community bond developed;
• The Committee was pleased to note the scheme to encourage staff volunteering at Oxford Brookes University. It wished to encourage the same at Oxford University, if such a scheme did not exist, and Councillor Campbell was happy to write to the Vice Chancellor on this matter;
• It was felt that the City Council should encourage a higher level of volunteering from its staff, and to give support to those members of staff who wished to participate in it.

Resolved to:

(1)    Ask CEB to encourage volunteering amongst City Council staff, and to support staff members who wished to volunteer;

(2)    Ensure that the OCVA newsletter was made available to all Councillors.