Decision details

On the 31^st January 2020 the Grants Advisory Committee (GAC) met to decide how to allocate full funding for an initial 2 years for new Mobile Warden Schemes (MWS) across the District.

There are currently 14 mobile warden schemes covering a total of 31 parishes developed locally in recognition of the need to provide support for more vulnerable members of the community. 

To date, these schemes have been “home grown” by parishes resulting in disparate cover across the District.   To address this and to provide improved access particularly in areas recognised for having greater than average numbers of older residents, the District Council has explored several approaches to fund and grow more schemes.   

A budget of £200,000.00 per annum has been set aside for the financial period 2020/2021 and 2021/2022, and a number of strategic sites have been identified as benefitting from a scheme. 

The GAC met on 31^st January 2020 and recommended the following to the Lead Member for Finance:

To divide the funding allocation into two streams 30% grant funding and 70% procurement, this is equal to £60,000 for grant funding (or approximately 3 home grown schemes) and £140,000 for procurement by an external provider (or approximately 7 schemes). This approach results in:

a)    the need for the initiation of a procurement process (internal policy dictates procurement of services with a value greater than £5,000);

b)    choice to the Parishes as to whether they choose to set up their own scheme or opt to engage an external provider;

c)    minimal resource implications regarding officer time in liaising with parishes and administering the application process; 

d)    minimal risk to the Council as might have been associated with the alternative options to either fully grant fund or fully procure additional MWS.

Parishes which sign up for the full-funding offer will do so with the caveat that following the initial 2-year funding period they would need to apply for grant funding in the usual manner.  Any successful external provider would be expected to work with the Parishes to achieve this and look to ensuring the financial sustainability of the new schemes.

To accept the recommendations of the Grants Advisory Committee.

These decisions were considered in detail and recommended unanimously.

The other options were discussed and rejected were:

To create a separate grant fund for new schemes only.

Reason for rejection: there would be no guarantee that the parishes identified as ‘strategic’ would apply for funding and it could potentially be resource intensive administering the application process and;

To fully fund new schemes through procurement.

Reason for rejection: the approach would involve the EU procurement process and could potentially delay the implementation of desired coverage within two years.