Community Engagement Innovations Fund 2008/10

Report: 5
Date: 29 April 2010
By: Chief Executive

Summary

This report informs members about the Community Engagement Innovations Fund (2008-2010), which was devised to enable the development and delivery of innovation in community engagement projects and to support the dissemination of good practice.

A. Recommendations

1. That a good practice compendium is collated and disseminated;
2. That a new fund of £50 000.00 be made available in 2010/12 to further support the development of innovative practice in community engagement.

B. Supporting information

1. Community engagement is an important element of the Authority’s work and is a key driver in developing and maintaining community confidence in policing. The Authority undertakes community consultation in the development of its work through general and specialist activities, including the MPA-funded borough level community and police engagement groups (CPEGs).

2. While the annual funding to the CPEGs supports core community engagement activities, the innovations fund was developed to provide additional opportunities to develop new and innovative approaches and to support the dissemination of good practice.

3. In total £100 000.00 was made available to fund innovative community engagement projects and was distributed in two rounds, the first taking place in 2008 and the second in 2009/10. All CPEGs were invited to submit bids of up to £5 000.00 in year one and £2 500.00 in year two to support and develop innovative and inspiring projects aiming to deliver new ways of working in community and police engagement.

4. The funding process was designed to minimise the amount of bureaucracy, so applicants were asked to submit a brief application form giving a description of the project, including details of the purpose of the project, the related timescales and costs and the measurable outputs. Submitted bids were scored against the criteria by a panel, which included the chair of the Community Engagement and Citizen Focus Operational Group and the Head of the Engagement and Partnerships Unit, to ensure a fair and unbiased assessment process.

5. 31 applications were received for the first round of funding in 2008/09 and 17 applications were agreed and supported at up to £5000.00 per project. The second round of funding supported a further Six projects at £2500.00 each (see appendix 1 for a summary). The successful projects were required to submit quarterly monitoring reports, which provided the Authority with detailed information on progress towards achievement of the project aims and objectives, any changes to the project timescales, and also participant feedback on the engagement activity. As part of the monitoring process project leads were also required to submit evidence that the MPA’s logo had been used in the project publicity and to provide statements of income and expenditure. The form also enabled project leas to provide feedback on the lessons learnt thus far.

6. The monitoring process provided an effective means of monitoring the funded projects, particularly in terms of financial management. Through this process it became clear that one of the projects could not be delivered and the Authority was able to recover the grant funding. Where perhaps the monitoring regime was not as effective was in terms of measuring outcomes. This is partly due to the difficulty of effectively linking community engagement activity to specific outcomes, but in future greater consideration would be given to (i) identifying the key outcomes for the Authority at the outset of any such funding programme and (ii) to ensuring supported projects and the associated monitoring processes were sufficiently outcome focussed.

7. The fund successfully encouraged the development of innovative practice particularly in relation to communities of identity rather than place (see appendix 2). In addition, learning from other engagement activities has identified that there is a great deal to be gained from delivering joint projects with other CPEGs or partner agencies, which provides an opportunity for CPEGs and others to learn new techniques and approaches that are transferrable to their core activities.

8. Given the learning points discussed above it is proposed that this work be taken forward in two ways. Firstly, there would be some continued benefit in establishing a further fund of £50 000.00 to support the development of additional cross-borough community engagement activities. This would enable the Authority to target the key engagement gaps as identified through recent and ongoing mapping exercises. Secondly, it is proposed that details of the funded projects be compiled and disseminated as a good practice compendium. Both these activities would support the delivery of the community engagement commitment and related action plan and would also respond to issues raised in the police authority inspection related to the continued need to ensure effective and broad-based community engagement informs the Authority’s work.

C. Race and equality impact

1. The range of projects supported through this funding targeted the faith, age, ethnicity and gender equality strands. It is clear from this assessment that no projects specifically focussing on disability or sexual orientation equality groups have directly benefited from this funding. Should further funds be agreed then officers would seek to target projects aimed at developing and improving engagement with those communities.

2. In addition, it is proposed that should a new fund be established, relevant information would be circulated along with the compendium to a wide range of organisations including CPEGs, which would help to raise awareness of the work of CPEGs to all communities and of the opportunity to bid for funds through those groups.

D. Financial implications

1. The total budget for the 2008-2010 Innovations Fund was £100,000. 17 projects were funded to a total of £81 590.00 in year one and in 2009/10 a further £15 000.00 was awarded to 6 additional projects (£2 500.00 per project).

2. In total the Authority originally funded 23 projects at a total of £96 590.00. However, one of the projects could not be completed so £4000.00 has been returned to the MPA’s core budget.

3. Should the recommendations be agreed, a further £50 000.00 will be made available to provide a cross-border innovations fund from within the 2010/11 community engagement budget.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report author(s): Sam Evans, Engagement & Partnerships Officer, MPA

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Appendix 2: Practical Examples from Community and Police Engagement Groups

March 2010

Richmond: Youth Police Liaison Groups (YPLGs)/ Youth Panels

Aim of the project:

The Community and Police Partnership and the Police Liaison Groups, as Safer Neighbourhood Panels are referred to in Richmond, developed youth panels to:

• enable young people to raise any issue with regard to safety and policing,
• meet at least once each term, (some take place on a monthly basis and not all meetings are held on school premises),
• listen to their views/concerns and where possible take those views/concerns forward,
• engage with disadvantaged young people, who don’t always have a voice (those from BME communities and those with learning difficulties),
• inform young people about current policing issues; and
• Make presentations on issues pertinent to them on which they have requested more information and to set up activities around specific issues such as alcohol and young people.

Method of delivery:

Twelve schemes have been set up throughout the borough during the past eighteen months. Meetings are informal and provide an opportunity for feedback, discussion and debate on issues affecting young people, which are fed back into the partnership for action.

Has it worked?

The issues raised have included places where there should be better lighting, where hedges should be cut back, where graffiti should be removed, antisocial behaviour on public transport and at bus stops and the effects of alcohol. The partnership has taken action on these issues based on young people’s feedback.

Contact details

Juliette Taylor, CPP Administrator, Third Floor, Civic Centre, Twickenham TWI3BZ.

Lewisham: Second Wave

Aim of the project:

Based in Deptford, the ‘Girls and Gangs’ project has engaged with young women from local BME and white working class communities to:

• provide opportunities for these young people to participate in a creative and participatory workshop process – exploring issues of identity, self esteem and risk taking behaviour;
• build more positive relations between the young people and local police officers; and
• identify and respond to the learning needs of these young women – through a structure of peer lead support, creative leadership and community engagement.

Method of delivery:

Thirty young people participated in the project. The programme is youth-led with professional support and facilitation of tutors and a community development worker, Six local police officers took part and officers from Territorial Support Group (TSG) also supported the project.

The programme has identified and explored some important hidden issues for local young women. In particular, the peer group pressures faced by young women when they seek acceptance as gang members or seek status/recognition in street groups. These pressures include intimidation and in some cases disturbing levels of sexual coercion

Has it worked?

“I’ve had bad experiences with the police. I just thought they were a negative group that abused their power. It wasn’t until I came to second wave that I realised there are good police”, (Sarah aged 19, quoted in Dying to Belong)

The Centre for Social Justice Working Group was particularly impressed by the partnership approach developed by Second Wave and TSG4: “We recommend that the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) develops a programme based on the excellent work being done by Second Wave in Lewisham and Territorial Support Group”. A similar model has been adapted in Croydon.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback