The District Council – pleading that it’s suffering itself from a loss of government grant – has made cuts in the grants it makes to voluntary groups this year. The total grants figure has been cut from ?143,000 to ?90,000
The list of grants can be downloaded here (40k), with the rationale behind every grant decision.
The District Council looked at a number of factors before deciding on each application – including the balances each organisation has in reserves, and how many local people are helped.
The Echo has some reaction from the affected voluntary groups here. For example:
Among the big losers is the Rochford and Rayleigh Citizens? Advice Bureau, which will receive ?60,000 rather than ?90,000.
Its district manager Sue Murray said the cuts could mean struggling residents do not receive valuable advice.
She said: ?It is very disappointing we will be able to help fewer, not more people, especially at a time of so much uncertainty.
?This cut will mean a reduction in the hours we are open and a reduction in the number of people we are able to help.
The Citizens Advice Bureau is the biggest recipient (they do a lot of work to help residents, and councillors sometimes recommend to residents that they contact the CAB about a problem). Most of the organisations were asking for much smaller grants – for example Active Rochford, the
umbrella organisation for sport within the Rochford District, asked for ?4,100 but only received ?2,000.
But perhaps it’s worth bearing in mind that the council could save around ?42,000 per year by scrapping the cabinet system and going back to a committee system…. that would free up a bit more cash to help voluntary groups.
I have mixed emotions about the cuts imposed by RDC. The Hullbridge Day Centre did, as Michael Hoy has stated, request the same funding as they have done for the past years and have advised the RDC that these funds are to help the Centre meet some of the expenses they have before being able to open i.e, Insurance and Waste Disposal (£2500). They also had to sent them copies of this years accounts which showed that the kitchen had reduced its kitchen costs by approx., £1500.00, they also had put up the cost of the meals by £0.50 because they saw the financial issues likely to hit thems. Unfortunately, becuase of several factors their income (number of dinners eating with them) dropped significantly by £1200.oo One of the main factors was that many of the people dinning with them are living on state pensions and need to count their pennies, they were not happy to pay the increase. For RDC to suggest they increase thier price again ! makes me think they are not in touch with things in the village especially individuals financial predicaments.
The Centre has no income and can not, because of RDC lease restrictions,generate any. As Michael has already stated, the Centre has found a means, through Solar PV FITS, of generating some but has to find 10% of the final cost ie., £2,000 they also have to obtain planning approval from RDC which costs approx., £170.00. Money the Centre will be extremely hard pushed to find having just lost £1500.00 from the grant normally given by RDC.They could have given the centre the extra money knowing they would be giving it back to them for planning permission.
Having said all this the Centre is always grateful for any funding it can get and £1,000 is better than nothing, but it would have been nice if they had just halved our request like they did with most other voluntary orgs., or even better still do a proper evaluation of the needs.
What makes this even more galling is that RDC have spent money writing an “Ageing Population Strategy” that is in keeping with the quality of their documentation in the LDF (Local Development Framework) i.e, Very Poor.
They still do not use current statistics and documents many are dated 2008/2009.
They do not use effective communication, in this case they believe by contacting the orgs., working with the “older” people they will cover all the “older people”. In Hullbridge less than 10% of the older population (as identified byRDC) use these organizations. So how effective is this ?
If they really want to help the older population then RDC should work to protect the funding for the org’s and if this is not possible should devote time in helping / advising them with their financial matters and assist them in fund rasing.
The strategy does a lot of promoting and creating jobs in the Council but does little in supplying something tangible like, for Hullbridge residents, direct bus service to major local supermarkets. Why do they not talk to ASDA, Sainsbury’s, Tesco’s about one of them laying on a shopping bus. This was succesfully done by Waltham Abbey Council.
If RDC are really concerned about helping the older population why do they not give themselves in the strategy targets and dates that they can be monitored against. They are there to work to support our community, not just a repository of information that people can access, we have that at the library, oh sorry ! Essex County Council want to reduce the hours they are open so perhaps there is a job there for RDC