Use of the MPA Partnership Fund 2005/06

Report: 8
Date: 6 July 2006
By: Commissioner

Summary

The report provides an overview of the distribution of the MPA Partnership Fund for the 2005/06 financial year. The breakdown of allocations contained within this report is in accordance with the commissioning brief and therefore shows allocations to set categories, thus providing an account of the use of this fund in the areas of most interest to members.

A. Recommendations

That the Authority

1. notes the content of this report as the distribution of the MPA Partnership Fund across the 32 London boroughs.
2. notes the allocation of Partnership Fund in certain categories of activities, together with figures for intended carry forward.

B. Supporting information

1. The MPA Partnership Fund continues to be a valued source of funding from which BOCUs are able to contribute to a wide range of partnership activities. Furthermore, the manner in which the fund is used and the ways in which allocations are recorded have improved over the years in which the fund has been available. As a result, it has been possible to provide an accurate breakdown of the spending across the BOCUs in the categories required by the Authority in commissioning this report.

2. The following list identifies the allocation against the specific areas requested:

3. This list accounts for £1,864,000, a total that includes carry forward from the last financial year. While it is clear that in reality many of the initiatives will be crosscutting, each allocation has only been recorded under one category; this being the category which best reflects the initiative’s primary focus according to the returns submitted by boroughs. In addition to the eight categories identified in the commissioning brief two further categories have been included to reflect the substantial allocations made to these areas.

4. One borough (Westminster) pooled its MPA fund together with its BCU fund and has added this sum to monies from the local authority to support two specific partnership projects. In another case, boroughs have allocated a combined total of £161,000 to the provision of CCTV vans and related expenses. There is a further example of partnership working funded by MPA Fund, whereby several boroughs in the North East of London pooled funding to carry out cross border work between themselves and an adjoining county force. This work related to the provision of an analyst for cross border activity.

5. The figures given in the breakdown include elements of the underspend from the 2004/5 year, which totalled £264,000. In addition, the breakdown includes allocations to defined projects which are being delivered during the year 2006/07. The total underspend to be carried forward from 2005/06 is £276,637. It should be noted that only £7,988 remains unallocated from the carry forward across all thirty-two boroughs. This is a significant improvement on previous years.

6. The category referred to as miscellaneous comprises contributions to the running costs of partnership teams, including Youth Offending Teams; also the purchase of equipment other than CCTV, supporting Neighbourhood Watch (£30,000 across the boroughs) training courses and other minor expenses that do not fall within other categories while still having a partnership application. This last element incorporates a number of small one-off grants to local community based activities and projects.

C. Race and equality impact

1. The returns indicate that approximately £74,000 has been allocated to projects which seek explicitly to address diversity related issues. Some boroughs – Haringey being a prime example – continue to use the Partnership Fund to support a broad range of projects with relatively small individual grants; a significant number of these grants are aimed at the needs of minority communities. It should also be noted that boroughs are using the Partnership Fund to lever in other funding, for example Tower Hamlets was able to use a £10,000 allocation to the Council of Mosques as part of wider funding package to support the work of this group which brings together the representatives from 32 Mosques and the local partnership.

2. Furthermore, allocations recorded in other categories in the breakdown also impact of equality and diversity issues. Perhaps the most significant is that relating to young people and diversion. This category received the largest share of the Fund.

3. There is no indication of any negative impact on minority groups arising out of the allocation of any of the MPA Partnership Fund. Furthermore it should be noted that all aspects of diversity have been addressed through this funding, with projects based on race, faith, gender, sexual orientation and ability differences.

D. Financial implications

1. For the year 2004/05 a total of £264,000 was carried forward into the following financial year. The proposed carry forward from 2005/06/ to 2006/07 totals £276,637. However it must be emphasised that only £7,988 remains unallocated. The ability for boroughs to carry forward these sums allows them flexibility in respect of the projects they support and helps to ensure that appropriate initiatives are funded.

2. The spending criteria for the Fund remain flexible reflecting the view of the Authority that this Fund should be used to support a wide range of local partnership activities. Boroughs continue to submit spend plans and updates to the MPS (TP) Business Support Partnership team. In addition the TP Partnership Team within Safer Neighbourhoods provides further monitoring.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report author: Chief Superintendent Stephen Bloomfield, MPS

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback