Agenda item

The PCC has provided a report informing the Panel of his review of annual grant allocations to local authority Community Safety Partnerships.

The Panel was provided with a report of the PCC which informed Members of the changes to how Community Safety Funding would be allocated, which was based on a fairer “needs based” formula, which considered data around population and crime related factors.

The PCC reported that the formula had been reworked to incorporate three factors:- Population (50% weighted), Crime (25% weighted) and non-crime demand, such as Anti-Social Behaviour and fear for welfare (25% weighted).

The PCC commented that it was acknowledged that population had the most significant impact on community safety demand and his decision to include non-crime demand ahead of recorded crime was intentional. Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs) took a lead role in anti-social behaviour and were increasingly being asked to support preventative work, which they were well placed to deliver.

Members’ Questions

(1)  A Member referred to the last meeting of the Panel when the PCC’s Police and Criminal Justice Plan was presented. The perception had been that his priorities had favoured local authorities aligned to the PCC’s voter base. The proposals for the Community Safety Fund supported this view. Could the PCC explain what should Reading and Slough CSPs cut from their activities with this reduction in funding?

[The PCC rejected the accusation and said the decision on funding was not political. He referred to 2014/15 when the Office of the PCC had worked closely with the Panel to develop a fairer “needs based” formula, which considered data around population and crime related factors. This had never been fully implemented.

The changes would be implemented gradually to enable all local authorities the time to transition to the new arrangements. Both Reading Slough had benefited hugely in the last 10 years from this funding, and both would continue to receive significant funding as well as “in-kind support” and there would be other opportunities for these areas to get funding such as with Public Health. Slough also receives funding from the Home Office.

The PCC referred to both Milton Keynes and Oxfordshire, which were not Conservative-run local authorities who had received significant funding under the new formula.

The three-year allocation would give more certainty to local authorities and allow for more long-term projects and referred to there being no guarantee of this funding. The PCC said he was confident that he would be able to fund this for three years.]

(2)  The representative of Slough referred to the unique characteristics of the Borough and asked that consideration be given to having a rethink on this funding.

[The PCC said that there was a Community Safety Fund of £7.72m over three years which had to be shared amongst CSPs in Thames Valley. This new funding formula was a fairer system for allocation based on the criteria earlier described. There may be opportunities for further external funding for other initiatives and referred to the Choices programme in Slough where this could be the case.]

(3)  There was concern from CSP officers that the PCC may be more prescriptive on what the funding could be used for and this allied to local authorities having to make savings, would impact of community safety initiatives. 

[The PCC replied that funding would be approved on the basis of spend proposals being in line with the objectives of the Police and Criminal Justice Plan and released on a quarterly basis subject to satisfactory reported progress. Local authority plans would be looked at on this basis and around discussions with the Office of the PCC.]

(4)  There was a welcome to the continued multiyear support of the PCC with this Community Safety funding. The use of the non-crime demand element of the formula, how will the impact of that focus be tracked?

[The PCC replied that each CSP would have different priorities and through discussions with the Office of the PCC there would be a look at outcomes. Some areas have different anti-social behavioural problems.]

RESOLVED – That the report of the PCC on the new funding formula and the allocations to CSPs for the next three years be noted.