Proposed 2001/02 allocation of funding for Police Consultative Groups and Lay (custody) visiting panels

Report: 12
Date: 17 April 2001
By: Clerk and Treasurer

Summary

Because of timing difficulties, the Consultation, Diversity and Outreach Committee was not able to consider the proposals contained in this report. The paper explains the process used for the evaluation and allocation of funding for Police Community Consultative Groups (PCCGs) and Lay (Independent Custody) Visiting Panels, and is presented to the Finance, Planning & Best Value Committee to recommend allocations to the full Authority.

A. Recommendations

For the Finance, Planning & Best Value Committee

1. That the Committee notes the process used for the evaluation of the bid proposals submitted by PCCGs and Custody Visiting Panels;
2. That the Committee recommends to the full Authority the proposed funding allocations in Appendices A and B and the proposed monitoring proforma in Appendix C (see Supporting material for appendices).

For the full Authority

1. That the Authority endorses the decisions of the Finance, Planning & Best Value Committee (these will be reported at the meeting).

B. Supporting information

Background

1. The report proposing the allocation of funding for PCCG and Custody Visiting Panels should have been considered by the Consultation, Diversity and Outreach Committee (CDO) on 27 March 2001. However, due to last minute difficulties in the preparation of the report, this had to be withdrawn from the agenda. This issue cannot be delayed until the next meeting of the CDO Committee as PCCGs and Custody Visiting Panels should be informed of their funding early in the new financial year.

2. The terms "lay visiting" and "independent custody visiting" are used interchangeably throughout this report. The CDO Committee will be considering a recommendation to the Home Office about nomenclature.

Process

3. The MPS previously administered the processing of allocating funding to PCCGs and Independent Custody Visiting Panels. The criteria used by the MPS to allocate this funding were ill defined. Responsibility for allocating the annual funding for groups and panels has passed to the MPA, as part of its overall functions in respect of consultation and lay visiting.

Funding criteria

4. Ideally, criteria for determining allocations would have been set and published before bids were submitted. Given the transitional nature, with responsibility moving across to the MPA, this was not possible this year. It was apparent, however, that there were wide variations between the bids. Basic assessment criteria were proposed by officers and approved by the CDO Meeting on 27/02/01. These are as follows:

• existing staffing and other commitments to be honoured;
• variances between bids and current costs;
• links between the resources required and plans;
• omission of funding for publicity and membership of the National Association of Lay Visiting (NALV).

Additionally, the following considerations were taken into account in assessing the custody visiting bids:

• that claims should not significantly exceed (by more than £3,000 for Panels and 3% for PCCGs) the previous year's budget;
• an underpinning acknowledgement of the MPA's wish to honour existing commitments, with specific reference to staff salaries and other fixed contractual costs;
• clear linkage between requested resources and planned activities;
• appropriate and reasonable costing for services; and
• an awareness of the varied levels of support in kind.

And for ICVPs:

• NALV membership fees and publicity costs will be met by the MPA centrally;
• The extent to which panel performance will be hindered if a proportion of funding is not approved.

5. Members and officers met to assess the bids and consider the funding allocation for panels and PCCGs. A ceiling was proposed to minimise the disparity between those groups that receive large amounts of funding and those seeking to develop. No upper limit was made for Custody Visiting Panels. No panel was allocated a higher budget than was requested, but officers and Members recognised that those panels with extremely low bids may need to receive additional financial support at a later date.

6. The proposed allocations are set out in Appendix A (PCCGs) and Appendix B (Independent Custody Visiting Panels). The FPBV Committee is asked to make recommendations on the allocations to the full Authority.

Appeal process

7. Should a group or panel disagree with the proposed allocation, they will be given the opportunity in the first instance to write to the MPA outlining the specific area of concern, with the reasons and justification for the appeal. This will be considered by members who were not involved in the initial process. Any adjustments to the proposed allocation will be ratified by the CDO Committee and brought to the full Authority, for information.

Information process

8. It was agreed by Members and officers that information of the provisional allocations of funding should be made available to each panel and consultative group. This was posted on the MPA website and subsequently each consultative group was informed of their proposed allocation.

9. The Custody Visiting Panels were dealt with differently. Where the proposed funding was £3,000 lower than was applied for, officers met with each panel chair or secretary to discuss this and to seek clarification on the application. As a result of these discussions, further adjustments have been made to the allocations and these are reflected in Appendix B.

10. MPA Members with responsibility for custody visiting will have the opportunity to comment on and make further revisions to these allocations.

Lessons learnt from analysis of PCCG bids.

11. Analysis was undertaken of the data provided and an attempt was made to look at approximate benchmarks. The following information demonstrates the range of local variations:

• PCCG internal meeting expenses range from £4.10 to £112.50. The average is £45.98 per meeting;
• Costs for external meetings were estimated on the basis of per attendee attending the public meetings. The range was from £0.28 to £8.48 per attendee;
• PCCG staffing expenses range from £10.59 to £22.39 per hour. The average for all PCCGs is £15.97. The average for independent groups is £15.03 per hour, and the average for local authority groups is £16.37 per hour;
• PCCG accommodation costs range from £2,040 to £7,655 per year, the average is £4,896 per year.

12. Officers will continue to assist, encourage and advise groups on ensuring value for money is achieved in all cost areas. MPA Members and officers will study the wide variations in funding applications and propose processes for addressing these in 2002/03.

Future monitoring

13. The principle of financial accountability was accepted at the full Authority. In order to move towards a monitoring system that provides timely qualitative information, it is proposed that the proforma at Appendix C should be completed by consultative group administrators on a quarterly basis. A similar pro-forma will be developed for custody visiting panels. The administration and financial monitoring system will be maintained by the MPS using the proposed budget heads.

14. PCCGs and panels will be required to provide independently audited accounts for the year ending 31/3/01. They will also be asked to produce a workplan outlining the work to be undertaken for the new financial year. This is a new requirement which many consultative groups and panels may require assistance with. Officers will be providing support and assistance to groups and panels and monitoring the way in which they progress with this requirement. It is proposed that progress is reviewed in the second quarter of the financial year.

15. The Authority will wish to identify and promote good practice. The ongoing support that groups and panels will be receiving from the MPA Consultation Unit will ensure that such information is shared across the groups and brought to Members' attention.

C. Financial implications

The proposed allocations amount to £869,416 for Consultative Groups and £232,512 for ICVPs. This is within the agreed budget for this work. If the proposals are accepted, there will be £7,584 unallocated for PCCGs and £37,488 for Independent Custody Visiting Panels. This funding could be allocated to support the pilot initiatives which the Authority is considering.

D. Background papers

• Report to Consultation, Diversity and Outreach Committee - Funding of Consultative Groups and Lay Visiting Panels - 27 February 2001

E. Contact details

The authors of this report are Julia Smith, Sultan Taylor and Colin Balkman.

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback