Overview of the Community Renewal Forum – 6th September 2021
CEDOS hosted a further Community Renewal Fund (CRF) Forum on the 6th September 2021. Below are some of the key headlines from the discussion.
- From a range of different sources, partner Authorities were not confident of any decisions on the Community Renewal Fund before October 2021.
- Without an extension to the completion date, it would be very tight for many projects to deliver within the shortened timescales. Spend and outputs would suffer as many costs are fixed each month (such as salaries).
- Whilst feedback from applicants had been engaging and committed, there is still a risk that some viable and quality projects will withdraw from the process, even if a grant is awarded.
- Local Authorities overall, whilst disappointed by the delays, are still keen to operate in the ‘place making’ space and still act as accountable body for the Community Renewal Fund.
- The level of risk associated with delivery is increasing as delays continue – the larger Local Authorities are prepared to shoulder this risk. It is likely some grant payments would be made with limited management information or monitoring available and made increasingly in good faith.
- Authorities were worried about the reputational damage with local partners and MHCLG if the CRF programme became even more exacting to deliver and manage.
- Some Authorities had been out to market to recruit staff or procure resources to support the management process – but could not make appointment decisions or commit resources. Some were covering staff time at risk. Authorities were still waiting for Capacity Building payments, which was causing tension with internal budget management.
- Some applicant, especially in the VCS sector, were hoping to use CRF to develop previous projects and support continuity of staff resources. Delays mean that capacity may disappear as employment contracts are ending. This capacity cannot be replaced if lost and many were now looking to Local Authorities to gap fund these posts until a decision is made.
- A lack of wider guidance, contracting documents and monitoring forms meant Authorities could not undertake any preparatory work for CRF and were effectively in limbo.
- Delays would cause significant issues for skills and employment projects that needed time to deliver learning outcomes to participants.
- Some Local Authority and partner projects are aligned to other activity including Towns Fund and Levelling Up projects – and delays are having an impact on these projects also.
- Timeframes for completing evaluations to provide insight and input into the UK Shared Prosperity Fund are quickly becoming unviable.
- Participants wished to see CEDOS contact MHCLG to obtain clarity on a decision date if possible, explain the implications of the delays, reaffirm their commitment to the CRF process and to request an extension to the completion date for the fund and the release of some guidance so some preparatory work could commence post haste.