Issue - meetings

The Cabinet Member for Communities introduced the report.

 

The purpose of the report was to approve grant funding decisions where the award was over £5,000 and information on the multi-year funding scheme.

 

In response to questions from Cabinet Members and those Councillors present, the Cabinet Member for Communities and Strategic Community Investment Lead said the following:

      i.         An inflation uplift would be included to ensure consistency across all multi‑year grants. The overall cost was modest, around £40,000 spread over the full three years. This provided organisations the ability to plan for the uplift. Believed it represented good value for money.

    ii.         The inflation uplift was seen as a managed level of risk. The Council would honour the inflation uplift set at the start of the multiyear grant scheme.

   iii.         Grant funding was a significant level of funding for the Council. It was not possible to provide examples of district councils with a grants pot of this size.

  iv.         This section of grant funding was only a part of the picture. The Council provided just over £2 million in grants overall, not all of which sat within the community grants programme.

    v.         Alongside these grants, work was undertaken to support communities through the Community Development team, there was also work with council tenants and estates, and the activities delivered through the Estates and Facilities teams. As example, the Junction operated on a peppercorn rent from the Council, another way in which the Council supported local organisations.

  vi.         The grants were only one element of a much wider programme of community support. It was important to recognise the substantial work that took place across the teams that was not often seen or attributed directly.

 vii.         These services were discretionary, not statutory duties, nor were the Council required or instructed to provide them. While a small amount of funding came from government for specific purposes, the vast majority of what the Council delivered was entirely the Council’s choice.

viii.         Noted the comments made by the Chair of the Services, Climate and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee, the Committee unanimously supported the introduction of multi‑year settlements, with cross‑party agreement. Members also recognised that several charities receiving annual council funding were included in this move. While not suggesting that Council support should stop, the Committee felt these organisations should be encouraged to diversify their income and strengthen their resilience rather than becoming overly reliant on the grant funding.

  ix.         Stressed that reliance on grants was a natural and unavoidable aspect of the voluntary sector, particularly given current pressures.

    x.         Highlighted the valuable role of Cambridge Council for Voluntary Service (CCVS) which the Council supported through grants, in helping voluntary and community groups build sustainability. While emphasising the shared commitment to strengthening the sector, many organisations would continue to need ongoing support through the grants system.

CCVS (Cambridge Council for Voluntary Service) | VolunteerCambs!

  xi.         The Communities Investment Team fully supported helping groups diversify their income and this was encouraged through the grants process.

 xii.         Applicants were asked to list other funding sources, almost seen as match funding, though decisions were not changed, if those other external applications were unsuccessful

xiii.         Larger, well‑established organisations were expected to demonstrate efforts to secure additional income.

xiv.         Officers provided support where needed.

xv.         The Resettlement Grant Fund required match funding, set at 5% for grants over £30,000, and this had not proved a barrier.

xvi.         The key message was that while the Council remained committed to providing financial support, it also aimed to help groups build their capacity and resilience.

xvii.         Had expressed disappointment at the lower number of sports and active‑lifestyle grant applications. There had been some organisations who had gone through different routes: one opted for the under £5,000 scheme, and another decided to revisit its business plan before submitting a stronger application in a future round.

xviii.         For those sports and active applications that were not successful, two main issues emerged. First, none of the organisations had discussed their proposals with the Active Lifestyles team, resulting in bids that were not always aligned with areas of greatest need. Second, some groups did not meet the Council’s eligibility criteria. To address this, the Council has strengthened guidance on partnership working, encouraging groups that did not meet the criteria to collaborate with eligible organisations, for example, local sports clubs partnering with a community group in their area.

xix.         The Active Lifestyles team run its own small and organisational grant schemes, which were expected to be integrated into the main grant’s portal, giving a clearer overall picture.

xx.         Regarding Shared Prosperity Fund (SPF) allocations, the Council often received in‑year funding at short notice from the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority, which the grants team then administered for other departments. Last year funding was focused in Abbey Ward, with learning now applied in North Cambridge. Current allocations supported capacity‑building in the voluntary sector, including family and youth services and the food bank.

xxi.         Thanked the Finance Team for their support on the grant funding work.

xxii.         The grants recommended by Officers were awarded strictly on evidence, data, and the quality of the applications. It was a robust and thorough assessment process.

 

Post Meeting Note:

The UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) is managed by the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority (CPCA) as the accountable body to MHCLG for the funding. Following a three year UKSPF funding round in 2022-25, the programme was extended by the new Labour government for a further transitional year in 2025-26 to bridge to new arrangements under the Pride in Place fund and the Local Growth Fund (which replace UKSPF).

 

This year UKSPF grant is enabling the City Council to fund:

 

·      work to extend the community wealth building approach taken in Abbey to North Cambridge (£143,000).

·      a new strand of work on Inclusive Innovation, enabling the development of our Included project to improve outcomes for young people in the city (£60,000).

·      continued work to support markets and market traders in the city, working in partnership with South Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire District Councils (£110,00 across three districts). 

 

The CPCA is also using the UKSPF funds allocated to the region to:

 

·      funding for the Region of Learning team, working as part of the CPCA skills team, to extend digital badge delivery across the region.

·      support the visitor economy, including progressing work to establish a Local Visitor Economy Partnership, a Destination Management Plan and place brand development for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough and funding for Baits Bite Lock repairs.

 

The bidding and reporting to the CPCA is managed in the Economy and Place Group but the projects are developed and delivered with teams from across the council e.g. the work in North Cambridge is led by the Communities Group and the work to support markets is managed by the Inclusive Economy and the Markets team in City Services.

Head of Economy, Energy and Climate

 

Cabinet unanimously resolved to:

      i.         Approve the Community Grants to voluntary and community organisations for 2026-27, as set out in Appendix 1 of the Officer’s report, subject to the budget approval in February 2026 and any further satisfactory information required of applicant organisations.

    ii.         Approve the expanded direction of travel for the Community Grants Programme, using a 3-Tier approach starting 1 April 2027 as set out at 4.6 and at Appendix 2 of the Officer’s report.

   iii.         Approve an additional multi-year grant for Food Poverty Infrastructure starting 1 April 2026, as set out at 4.5 of the Officer’s report.

</AI5>

<AI6>