Grants Committee Agenda 27 November 2024 11:00am Thames Room, 12 Arthur Street, EC4R 9AB Pre-meets: Labour Group: Westbourne meeting room 10:00 am Conservative Group: Lea meeting room 10:00 am Liberal Democrat Ravensbourne meeting room 10:00 am Contact Officer: Ana Gradiska Ana.gradiska@londoncouncils.gov.uk Lunch will be available from 12pm in the reception area outside the Thames Room Agenda item 1. Apologies for Absence and announcement of deputies 2. *Declarations of Interest 3. Minutes of the Grants Committee AGM held on 18 July 2024 (for agreeing) 1-7 4. Minutes of the Grants Executive held on 21 October 2024 (for noting) 8-11 5. 2026-2030 programme: recommendations for developing the programme prospectus - Presentation from Rocket Science on consultation findings and recommendations - Report presenting recommendations for developing the programme prospectus Verbal 12-55 6. Performance of the grants programme 2022 - 26: (April 2022 – September 2024) 56-120 7. Month 6 Revenue Forecast 2024-25 121-126 8. London Councils Grants Scheme - Budget Proposals 2025-26 127-142 *Declarations of Interests If you are present at a meeting of London Councils’ or any of its associated joint committees or their sub-committees and you have a disclosable pecuniary interest* relating to any business that is or will be considered at the meeting you must not: • participate in any discussion of the business at the meeting, or if you become aware of your disclosable pecuniary interest during the meeting, participate further in any discussion of the business, or • participate in any vote taken on the matter at the meeting. These prohibitions apply to any form of participation, including speaking as a member of the public. It is a matter for each member to decide whether they should leave the room while an item that they have an interest in is being discussed. In arriving at a decision as to whether to leave the room they may wish to have regard to their home authority’s code of conduct and/or the Seven (Nolan) Principles of Public Life. *as defined by the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012 LONDON COUNCILS’ GRANTS COMMITTEE AGM 11am, 18 July 2024 Minutes of the meeting of the Grants Committee AGM held on 18 July 2024 London Borough & Royal Borough: Representative: Bexley Cllr David Leaf (Vice Chair) Brent Cllr Mili Patel Camden Cllr Nadia Shah (attending virtually) Bromley Cllr Kate Lymer (attending virtually) City of London Paul Martinelli Enfield Cllr Alev Cazimoglu Greenwich Cllr Ann-Marie Cousins Hammersmith and Fulham Cllr Rebecca Harvey Haringey Cllr Peray Ahmet (Chair) Harrow Cllr Janet Mote Kingston upon Thames Cllr Richard Thorpe (dep) Lambeth Cllr Donatus Anyanwu Lewisham Mayor Brenda Dacres (Vice Chair) Merton Cllr Eleanor Stringer Newham Cllr Charlene McLean Richmond upon Thames Cllr Julia Neden Watts (dep) Southwark Cllr Stephanie Cryan Waltham Forest Cllr Naheed Ashghar Wandsworth Cllr Kemi Akinola London Councils officers were in attendance. 1. Apologies for Absence and Announcement of Deputies 1.1 Apologies were received from Cllr Ola Kolade (LB Croydon), Cllr Christopher Kennedy (LB Hackney), Cllr Gillian Ford (LB Havering), Cllr Martin Goddard (LB Hillingdon), Cllr Sarah Addenbrooke (RB Kensington and Chelsea), Cllr Andreas Kirsch (RB Kingston – Cllr Richard Thorpe deputising), Cllr Nancy Baldwin (LB Richmond – Cllr Julia Neden-Watts deputising), Cllr Marian James (LB Sutton) and Cllr Simon Hogg (LB Wandsworth, Cllr Kemi Akinola deputising). 2. Declarations of Interest 2.1 There were no declarations of interest. 1 3. Acknowledgement of outgoing and new members 3.1 Yolande Burgess, Strategy Director, London Councils, welcomed the new and returning members of the Grants Committee. She also expressed her team’s appreciation to outgoing members for all their hard work on the Grants Committee. 4. Election of Chair of the Grants Committee for the 2024-25 Municipal Year 4.1 Cllr Peray Ahmet was nominated as the Chair of the Grants Committee by Cllr David Leaf (LB Bexley) and seconded by Cllr Julia Neden Watts (LB Richmond). 4.2 There being no other nominees for the Chair, the Strategy Director declared Cllr Peray Ahmet Chair of the Grants Committee and stepped down to allow the elected Chair to preside over the remainder of the meeting. 5. Election of Vice-Chairs for the Grants Committee for the 2024-25 Municipal Year 5.1 The Chair nominated three Vice Chairs for 2024-25, seconded by Cllr Julia Neden Watts (LB Richmond): • Mayor Brenda Dacres (LB Lewisham) as the Labour Vice Chair; • Cllr David Leaf (LB Bexley) as the Conservative Vice Chair; • Cllr Marian James (LB Sutton) as the Liberal Democrat Vice Chair. 5.2 There being no other nominees, the Chair declared Mayor Dacres, Cllr Leaf and Cllr James as the Vice Chairs of the Grants Committee. 6. Election of the Grants Executive for the 2024-25 Municipal Year 6.1 The following members were appointed • Cllr Peray Ahmet (LB Haringey) – Chair (Lab) • Mayor Brenda Dacres (LB Lewisham) (Lab) – Vice Chair • Cllr David Leaf (LB Bexley) – Vice Chair (Con) • Cllr Marian James (LB Sutton) – Vice Chair (LD) • Cllr Stephanie Cryan (LB Southwark) (Lab) • Cllr Eleanor Stringer (LB Merton) (Lab) • Cllr Chris Kennedy (LB Hackney) (Lab) • Cllr Sarah Addenbrooke (RB Kensington & Chelsea) (Con) • Cllr Janet Mote (LB Harrow) (Con) • Paul Martinelli (City of London) (Ind) 7. Minutes of the Grants Committee held on 27 March 2024 7.1 The minutes of the Grants Committee held on 27 March 2024 were agreed. 2 8. Minutes of the Grants Committee AGM held on 12 July 2023 – for noting 8.1 The minutes of the Grants Committee AGM held on 12 July 2023, which had been previously agreed, were noted. 9. Constitutional Matters: 9.1 The Chair introduced this report, which sets out amendments to London Councils’ Scheme of Delegation, which were approved at the Leaders’ Committee AGM on 17 July 2024. 9.2 The Grants Committee noted the proposed amendments to London Councils Scheme of Delegation as detailed in this report and Appendix 1. 10. Operation of Grants Committee 2024-2025 10.1 The Chair introduced this report, which informed Members of the Terms of Reference for the Grants Committee and the Grants Executive and set out dates for meetings for the municipal year 2024-25. 10.2 The Grants Committee: • Noted the Terms of Reference for the Grants Committee and Grants Executive; • Noted the programme of meetings. 11. Grants Programme 2026-2030: Planning and implementation 11.1 Yolande Burgess, Strategy Director, introduced this report (authored by Sam Armitt, UKSPF Development & Programmes Manager). She highlighted the findings from the stakeholder consultation on the new Grants programme which was launched in May 2024: • 41% of the respondents were from local government, 48% respondents were from voluntary or community organisations and 4% of responses were from funders. • While 96% of the respondents supported the idea of a new grants programme, a small number of respondents thought that the grants programme was unnecessary as they believed that local authorities already provided most of those services. • The grants team has summarised the narrative responses in the report; the full narrative is available for members to see on request. • The principles for the new grants programme were confirmed by London Councils’ Leaders Committee. There were no proposals for any new principles arising from the consultation. • Prevention was highlighted as one of the main areas of focus for a new programme; others were refuge provision, specialist advice services, ending harmful practices and support services for voluntary and community organisations. 3 11.2 The funding priorities - combatting homelessness and tackling sexual and domestic violence - were discussed at the Leaders’ Committee on 17 July 2024, and there was strong ongoing support for both of those priorities. 11.3 Additional focussed consultation work (round tables and workshops) will be undertaken between late July 2024 and the November 2024 meeting of the Grants Committee. In addition, there was a Grants Executive meeting scheduled for October 2024. An updated report on development of a Grants Programme for 2026-2030 will be brought back to the November meeting of the Grants Committee, with recommendations for funding for the new programme presented to Leaders’ Committee in December 2024. Phase two of Rocket Science’s evaluation (darft) will be shared at the October Grants Executive meeting. 11.4 Members made the following comments: • Members thanked the organisations that responded and London Councils officers who provided the analysis of the responses. • It may be helpful to focus on doing less but more effective work, considering resource limits and recent changes in government. The Domestic Violence agenda is currently prominent, so it was important not to duplicate the work of other agencies. • It was important to acknowledge the reasoning of the respondents who did not support the continuation of the programme and who felt the current priorities would not be beneficial in their communities. Many local areas already had grants programmes, which may lead them to question the added value of this programme, particularly considering the current financial constraints. It was important to show that this funding was not taking resources away from local services. • Building agility into the programme would be beneficial, so that it could consider emerging/changing government priorities and an evolving environment. London Councils officers replied that there was agility in the programme, however, implementing that flexibility, given the scale and size of the programme, needs further thought. A balance was needed between monitoring providers and allowing flexibility for impact. The organisations currently delivering services have demonstrated agility and can adapt to new priorities. The Committee could, for example, decide to invest 80% of the funding for defined projects and use the remaining 20% more flexibly. • Capacity-building for smaller community groups was essential. London Councils officers replied that capacity-building was factored into funding support, and discussions with other funders were ongoing. • Members expressed an interest in attending the upcoming roundtable discussions. 11.5 Members noted the report. 12. Performance of Grants Programme 2022-2026: April 2022 – March 2024 (End of Year Two) 12.1 Feria Henry , Priority Manager, London Councils, summarised the main points in the report, which provided members with an update on the two priorities of the 2022 -26 Grants 4 Programme, for the period April 2022 to March 2024, and the Annual Equalities report. The Programme so had so far worked with 68,000 individuals. 12.2 At the end of March 2024, Priority 1, Combatting Homelessness, was delivering two per cent above profile overall, and Priority 2, Tackling Sexual and Domestic Violence, was two per cent below profile overall. 12.3 As reported at the March Grants Committee, one project ceased to deliver in December 2023; the Healthy London, Healthy Relationships project which was led by AVA (Against Violence and Abuse). It was agreed to novate the grant agreement with AVA to Woman’s Resource Centre (WRC) for the period January to March 2024. At the March 2024 Grants Committee meeting, members agreed to fund a new project called The Ascent Prevention Project, led by WRC (due to be in grant agreement imminently). 12.4 Partners from both priorities were reporting issues with tenancy sustainment outcomes due to lack of affordable or suitable housing; placing people in long term arrangements and the struggle to meet 12-month tenancy sustainment outcomes. 12.5 Some groups were also struggling to evidence outcomes where participant feedback was needed, particularly from training events. In addition, the data collection project by Women’s Aid had been struggling to obtain feedback from borough officers to evidence outcomes. The Grants team has been providing support to the groups to catch up on the evidence gathering. 12.6 Some notable successes included New Horizon Youth Centre, which had overachieved on performance outcomes, largely due to increased numbers of young people being supported with managing debt, accessing benefits and budget advice. Further information on successes and challenges were detailed in the report. 12.7 On Performance Management, at the end of quarter eight, six Priority 2 projects were rated Green, one was rated Amber, and one had ceased delivery. The new prevention project led by WRC has not yet reported. 12.8 WRC received unspent funds from the Healthy London, Healthy Relationships project, and some sub partners were reallocated to work on other projects in Priority 2 to provide additional resources to respond to demand. There is a report on the work done in the novation period which is available on request. The new project has started to deliver some services. Members noted that WRC seem to have made a positive start already on the new prevention programme. 12.9 Over the past year, the Grants team has worked with partner organisation, Superhighways, to produce an online performance dashboard, so that members can more easily access borough level data. The dashboard will be updated quarterly before every Grants Committee meeting. There is also a public facing dashboard available on the London Councils’ website which shows highlights for each priority. 12.10 The London Funders annual report was available in Appendix 4. 5 12.11 In response to a member’s question about whether the problems associated with AVA could have been spotted earlier, the Priority Manager noted that whilst AVA had struggled with borough connections, the organisation had begun to make progress, and the project was RAG rated Green just before organisation went into liquidation. Additionally, conditions for extra monitoring had been introduced and the grants team had regular contact with the organisation; at the pint the team identified the organisation wide issues, payments were frozen. The grants team had reviewed lessons from this experience and is making some changes to the financial health assessments for organisations. 12.12 Members noted the report. 13. Grants Programme evaluation: Phase 1 Equalities - Report by Rocket Science 13.1 John Griffiths and Anna Johnson from Rocket Science gave a presentation on the evaluation they were commissioned to carry out on the 2022-2026 London Councils’ Grants programme. The evaluation will cover three areas, and this presentation was on Phase one of the evaluation which explored equalities. The research assessed the equalities data collected by the programme during its first two years, identified potential gaps in provision and made recommendations to strengthen the programme. 13.2 In response to a member’s question about domestic and sexual violence in the late teens group, and whether the evaluation also included child sexual exploitation and county lines, Rocket Science said they would send the additional information on this issue to the committee. 13.3 In response to a member’s question about the challenges for older (55 plus) people with mental health needs, housing challenges etc, the Strategy Director said that London Councils was in discussions with MOPAC to look at the needs of older residents in London in relation to domestic abuse, including adolescent and adult abuse of parents. The intention was to feed this data through to Rocket Science. 13.4 In response to a question about whether care leavers status could be assessed separately, as several local authorities now recognise care leaver status as a protected characteristic, Rocket Science said that this was incorporated into the children and young people data. The Priority Manager added that the Grants team had been recording care leavers across all the funded groups in the programme, and that this would possibly be included as a separate category in the next grants programme. 13.5 The evaluation carried out by Rocket Science could be used in the decision making for considering an innovation fund and would be shared with all the borough grants officers in the upcoming workshops and round table discussions. 13.6 Members noted the report. 14. London Councils Grants Committee Pre-Audited Financial results 2023-24 6 1 4.1 David Sanni, Director of Corporate Resources, introduced this report, which detailed the provisional pre-audited final accounts for London Councils Grants Committee for 2023/24: • The s urplus stood at £161,000. This was driven by two factors; additional income from the investment of the Committee’s cash balances carried out by the City of London’s treasury management team on the Committee’s behalf, and an underspend on c ommissioned services in relation to the Healthy London, Healthy Relationships project. • General reserves remained in a healthy position, due to the surplus, and the current reserves of £830,000 sat above the minimum agreed level of reserves. • Conformed figures would be audited by London Councils’ auditors PKF Littlejohn, and will be reported to the Audit Committee in September 2024. 1 4.2 In response to a member’s question on the underspend and reserves which were currently in excess of the agreed percentage and whether this money could be used for other projects, London Councils officers confirmed that underspend can be repurposed, for example, reserves have been spent on projects in the previous years to house vulnerable young people during the Covid and helping London residents with no recourse to public funds. Further conversations on the underspend would take place at the Grants Executive meeting in October 2024. 1 4.3 Members commented that the additional funding could also be used to help organisations whose overheads have increased substantially in the past two years and who were facing increased staffing costs. 14. 4 Grants Committee Members: • N oted the provisional pre-audited outturn position and the indicative surplus of £161,000 for 2023/24. • Noted the provisional level of reserves. 1 5. AO B: 1 5.1 The Strategy Director said that London Councils officers would shortly be organising a Grants Committee induction session which would be open to all members. The meeting finished at 1pm. 7 LONDON COUNCILS’ GRANTS COMMITTEE EXECUTIVE – INFORMAL MEETING Minutes of the Informal Grants Committee Executive meeting held via Microsoft Teams on Wednesday 21 October at 3pm Members: Cllr Peray Ahmet (LB Haringey) – Chair (Lab) Mayor Brenda Dacres (LB Lewisham) – Vice Chair (Lab) Cllr David Leaf (LB Bexley) – Vice Chair (Con) Cllr Marian James (LB Sutton) – Vice Chair (LD) Cllr Sarah Addenbrooke (RB Kensington & Chelsea) (Con) Cllr Janet Mote (LB Harrow) (Con) Paul Martinelli (City of London) (Ind) Anna Johnson and Dina Papamichael from Rocket Science were in attendance for item 5. London Councils officers were in attendance. The Chair welcomed Grants Executive members and London Councils officers to the meeting. 1 Apologies for Absence and Announcement of Deputies 1.1 Apologies were received from Cllr Eleanor Stringer (LB Merton) , Cllr Chris Kennedy (LB Hackney) and Cllr Stephanie Cryan (LB Southwark). There were no deputies. 2 Declarations of Interests 2.1 There were no declarations of interest. 3 Minutes of Grants Executive held on 28 February 2024 (for noting – to be agreed by the London Councils’ Urgency procedure) 3.1 The minutes were agreed. 4 Minutes of Grants Committee AGM held on 18 July 2024 (for noting) 4.1 The minutes were noted. 5 2026-30 programme – presentation from Rocket Science on initial findings and draft recommendations 5.1 The Chair and the Strategy Director introduced this item and said that: 8 • Anna Johnson and Dina Papamichael from Rocket Science had been invited to present early findings from the additional consultation work carried out since August, aimed at identifying key target groups and services that could be funded. • Findings from the workshops and focus groups highlighted several target groups and potential areas of focus for funding. These will be refined before the Grants Committee meeting in November. • Based on these initial findings, Members were asked to guide the team on where grants funding could best be invested at a pan-London level and where de-investment might need to be considered. • Members and borough grants officers would have the opportunity to further discuss the findings at the upcoming workshop on 7 November. 5.2 Anna Johnson and Dina Papamichael highlighted the following work carried out by Rocket Science: • In August 2024, Rocket Science was engaged by London Councils to support consultations for the 2026-2030 pan-London grants programme. This involved gathering input through multiple workshops and focus groups, including 10 sessions with Safe Lives for the Mayor’s Office of Policing and Crime (MOPAC), a focus group with housing professionals, and additional consultations with stakeholders representing previously funded organisations. Upcoming consultations include one-to-one interviews with strategic partners and a focus group with Grants Committee Members and Borough Grants Officers. • The findings show that the programme for Combatting Homelessness (Priority 1) should focus on fostering awareness and best practices, enhancing collaboration among stakeholders, and providing consistent, pan-London access to homelessness prevention services. For Tackling Sexual and Domestic Violence (Priority 2), the focus for the new programme included empowering individuals to recognise and seek support for abuse, supporting teachers in addressing domestic abuse in schools, and expanding access to refuge and legal support for vulnerable women, including those with no recourse to public funds (NRPF). An emphasis on specialised support for women with complex needs, as well as a better sector-wide understanding of supporting Deaf individuals, was also noted from the consultation sessions. • A future programmes target groups should include Londoners with NRPF, those with non-crisis-level mental health needs, women experiencing rough sleeping, LGBTQ+ abuse survivors, and children in abusive households. Proposed services included funding specialist voluntary sector organizations (VCS), developing preventive initiatives, building organisational capacity, and standardising training for frontline staff. Other needs identified included funding for technology to streamline case management, competitive staff salaries, and support for VCS organizations’ core costs. 9 • The future direction of the programme should seek to achieve better coordination and communication across sectors to reduce service fragmentation and fill service gaps. Priorities also include supporting core operational costs for VCS organisations, improving staff recruitment and retention, addressing geographic inequities in service access, and focusing on prevention and early intervention. Further collaboration and knowledge-sharing among funders should be encouraged to foster more effective commissioning. 5.3 In response to a question about full cost recovery, the Strategy Director said that while the programme does operate under this model, rising inflation and cost of living rises has made it increasingly challenging to cover all costs, which has put significant strain on partners. 5.4 In response to a question about the pressures experienced by partners, the Grants team and Rocket Science replied that one of the main pressures was to achieve genuine pan-London coverage, whilst recognising varying needs in individual boroughs. Although funded organisations aimed to deliver pan London, some were only able to have a physical presence in a few select areas, which has led to feedback from borough officers that they were unaware of services available in their areas. 5.5 In response to a member’s question about what the feedback was on the key priorities and where the programme would gain the most value for its investment, Rocket Science and the Grants team said that discussions on which strands of work would have the biggest impact were continuing. 5.6 London Councils officers said that they would be discussing the findings from Rocket Science with London Funders and London Plus. 5.7 Members made the following comments: • The future programme should include expanding the focus to support neurodivergent people. • It would be helpful to focus on addressing issues such as misogyny more comprehensively in educational settings, including colleges and universities. • Members would like to see measurable outcomes for funded organisations, particularly where impact on personal safety and well-being is used as a measure. • It would be helpful to have better coordination between funded organisations and improved awareness of other pan-London funding streams. • C hildren in abusive households: local authorities have statutory responsibilities in these situations, and a broader range of professionals should be consulted, including social services, to map out where work may already be covered by other bodies. 5.8 Members noted the report. 10 6 M onth 3 Revenue Forecast 6. 1 David Sanni, Director of Resources, introduced this report, which outlines actual income and expenditure against the approved income and expenditure in the budget to the end of June 2024 for the Grants Committee: • The r eport provides a forecast of the outturn position for 2024/25 for both actual and c ommitted expenditure on commissions, along with the administration of all these commissions. • At this stage, a surplus of £48,000 is forecast over the approved budget. This is primarily due to estimated interest on the cash balances. • The projected level of residual reserves at 31 March 2025, if all current known liabilities and commitments are considered, is £482,000. • The residual reserves contain an underspend of £67,000 that arose in the last financial year in respect of an organisation that went into administration. A decision was taken to novate this funding to another organisation. The report recommends a transfer of the £67, 000 from General to Earmarked Reserves. • The next forecast report will be presented to the Grants Committee in November. 6. 2 In response to a member's question regarding the purpose of the current earmarked reserves, the Director of Resources explained that the £78,000 in earmarked reserves was a contribution toward London Councils' new premises and the review of its operating model. 6.3 The Strategy Director added that the recommended transfer of £67,000 from general reserves to earmarked reserves was related to funds originally assigned to AVA, now reallocated to the Women’s Resource Centre prevention project. 6.4 Members: • noted the projected surplus of £48,000 for the year; • approved a transfer of £67,000 from General to Earmarked Reserves in relation to a 2023/24 held back payment, which was recommissioned following the liquidation of a former commissioning partner; and • noted the projected level of Grants Committee reserves and the commentary on the financial position of the Grants Committee. 11 Summary In July 2024, Grants Committee Members agreed a timetable of activity (see Appendix 2) to enable the new pan-London 2026-2030 grants programme to start from April 2026, specifically to: - develop recommendations for a new programme with London l ocal authority officers and stakeholders through roundtables and other appropriate methods, and - present recommendations for the new programme at this Grants Committee meeting for discussion and agreement. This paper summarises the findings from the focus group consultations and sets out recommendations for Grants Committee to consider and enable the next stages of work, in particular drafting the programme prospectus. Recommendations Grants Committee members are asked to: - n ote the consultation findings and recommendations contained in t he report produced by Rocket Science (section 2 and Appendix 1) - deliberate the key consultation findings (section 2) and discuss further considerations (section 3) - consider and agree the recommendations for developing the pr ospectus at section 4: o under Priority 1 (combatting homelessness)  fund prevention and alternative pathways to housing services for the identified target groups (as noted in par agraph 4.4), together with support services to the s ector and boroughs  no longer invest Grants Scheme resources in rough s leeping services; £100 million of resources available from Grants Committee Grants Programme 2026-2030: recommendations for developing the programme prospectus Item: 5 Report by: Sam Armitt Job title: UKSPF Development & Programmes Manager Date: 27 November 2024 Contact Officer: Doug Flight Telephone: 020 7934 9805 Email: doug.flight@londoncouncils.gov.uk 12 other sources (national government and the Mayors office) are best channelled through established local and sub-regional arrangements o under Priority 2 (tackling sexual and domestic abuse)  fund refuge provision and specialist advice and counselling for the identified target groups (as noted in paragraph 4.8), together with support services to the sector and boroughs  explore helpline services to seek potential savings to the programme and make a funding recommendation to Committee in March 2025  no longer invest Grants Scheme resources in prevention services aimed at children; £1 million of resources available through the Mayors office is targeted towards activity for schools o retain £2.5 million of the total four-year project funding to commission further activity at the mid-point of the programme to address changing needs and/or encourage innovation - ask that officers proceed with further work to develop a 2026- 2030 Grants Programme prospectus - note the next steps and indicative timetable for the development and implementation of any future new grants programme beyond March 2026 (section 5 and Appendix 2) - note that the notional budget for the proposed 2026-2030 Grants Programme of £26.9 million will be indicated to Leaders’ Committee this December. 13 Grants Programme 2022-2026: recommendations for developing the programme prospectus 1 Background 1.1 London Councils is responsible for the administration and delivery of the London Councils Grants Programme in accordance with Section 48 of the Local Government Act 1985 on behalf of all the London boroughs and the City of London Corporation. The Programme makes grants to voluntary organisations to deliver improved outcomes for Londoners. 1.2 The Programme operates within a scheme made under Section 48 of the Local Government Act 1985. It is a collective scheme i.e. all the 33 London local authorities (LLAs) fund the scheme and the London Grants Programme through a levy contribution based on a LLA’s proportion of the capital’s population. LLAs must exercise their functions in respect of the scheme ‘with due regard to the needs of the whole of Greater London.’ 1.3 Leaders' Committee determines the operating principles and funding priorities of the Programme and its overall budget. The Grants Committee commissions services, makes awards of funding, manages projects’ performance, and may advise Leaders’ Committee on the Programme. 1.4 Leaders’ Committee on 17 July 2024: 1.4.1 noted the findings from an open consultation relating to funding priorities and endorsed the operating principles for a potential new Grants Programme for 2026-2030 1.4.2 endorsed the funding priorities of Combatting Homelessness and Tackling Sexual and Domestic Abuse 1.4.3 asked Grants Committee to continue to develop a new pan-London Grants Programme for 2026-2030. 1.5 Grants Committee on 18 July 2024: 1.5.1 asked that officers proceed with further work to develop a 2026-2030 Grants Programme 1.5.2 highlighted aspects of the consultation findings that should be considered or prioritised when developing the new programme 14 1.5.3 asked officers to develop recommendations for a new programme with London local authority officers and stakeholders through roundtables and other appropriate methods. 1.6 This paper sets out: 1.6.1 a summary of the findings from the consultation activities (section 2) 1.6.2 further considerations (section 3) 1.6.3 recommendations for developing the prospectus (section 4) 1.6.4 next steps and timetable (section 5 and Appendix 2). 2 Key consultation findings 2.1 Following the July 2024 Grants Committee meeting, Rocket Science was commissioned to engage in and facilitate: 2.1.1 a series of 10 workshops convened by Safe Lives for the Mayor’s Office of Policing and Crime (MOPAC), reflecting the insights of 233 unique participants, 61 of whom were housing and domestic-abuse leads across a representative group of London boroughs 2.1.2 an internal London Councils focus group facilitated by Rocket Science with nine members of the London Councils Policy and Grants teams to explore the grants programme’s design and delivery 2.1.3 a housing and homeless borough lead officer focus group facilitated by Rocket Science with 10 housing professionals across boroughs (including Heads of Housing, Commissioning Managers, and Outreach and Support Service Managers) 2.1.4 a funded organisation focus group facilitated by Rocket Science with 16 participants representing 10 voluntary organisations funded under the current pan-London programme 2.1.5 one-to-one interviews with five individuals who represent strategic pan-London organisations including both major London and national funders, with three further interviews scheduled in December 2024 2.1.6 a Grants Committee member and Borough Grants Officer focus group facilitated by Rocket Science with 18 Grants Committee Members and 22 Borough Grants Officers representing 28 boroughs and the City of London to refine the scope and direction of the future Programme. 2.2 Rocket Science asked questions about the changing needs in London, underserved or unreached community groups, gaps in services and support, partnership working and 15 coordination; how a future grants programme complements borough services and, critically, which sorts of services and interventions are best funded and coordinated at a pan-London level rather than at the borough or sub-regional level. 2.3 The information from the focus group sessions were considered alongside the findings from the open consultation survey that was run earlier this year. 2.4 The diverse approaches to consultation – from survey to focus groups – helped to ensure good access to and responses from a broad range of stakeholders. We are incredibly grateful to everyone who contributed to the consultation activities. Consultation reach 2.5 The key themes that emerged for support from a pan-London programme were: - prevention and early intervention work - support for homeless young people, particularly care leavers and young people experiencing hidden homelessness - support for increasing mental ill health - support for increasing multiple disadvantage - support for crisis response and safe housing - support for perpetrators - Initiatives to increase public and professional awareness about domestic abuse, harmful practices, and community safety - support for voluntary and community sector core costs 2026-2030 Pan-London Grants programme consultation 31 Boroughs and the City of London consulted 312 people Focus Groups 5 Individual Professional discussions with strategic pan- London organisations 155 survey responses 16 - support for capacity building for smaller voluntary sector organisations, and knowledge sharing and training to ensure professional and wider community awareness of the programmes priorities - strategic cross-borough communication, collaboration and data-sharing mechanisms to prevent service fragmentation and duplication 2.6 The key target groups that emerged for support were people: - with no recourse to public funds and/or insecure immigration status - who are youth and young adults - who are women and girls - who are LGBTQ+ - who are disabled or have a learning disability - who are refugees and asylum seekers - who present with non-crisis mental health support needs. 2.7 There was a strong emphasis on using the funds to support marginalised and underserved communities. The pan-London grants programme must have due regard to the needs of the whole of Greater London, although can allocate resources to residents with the greatest need to promote equity and reduce disparities. 2.8 Comments about issues with the current programme were captured, and were predominantly about programme management: reporting burdens, and lack of flexibility to adjust delivery to meet changing need. These matters will be considered in the design of the management of the new programme, alongside the findings of the current programmes' evaluation report, which will be delivered in March 2025. 3 Further considerations 3.1 The findings from the consultation need to be considered alongside other factors that underpin the London Councils pan-London Grants Programme. Many if these factors are detailed in the London Councils Funding and Performance Management Framework. 3.2 The programmes operating principles, agreed by Leaders’ and Grants committees, require London Councils to commission services that: - deliver effectively and can meet the outcomes specified by London Councils - meet a need for services and support that complement borough and other local statutory and non-statutory services - are more economical and efficient delivered on a London wide basis, or where mobility is key to delivery of a service to secure personal safety 17 - cannot reasonably be delivered locally, at a borough or sub-regional level - work with statutory and non-statutory partners and contribute to meeting the objectives of the Equality Act 2010. 3.3 In line with all public sector activity, the programme must consider value for money: economy, efficiency, effectiveness (cost vs quality, long-term benefits, suitability). 3.4 When considering value, it is reasonable for Committee to consider the availability of other sources of funding, including funding for statutory services, to avoid duplication and seek optimal use of the resources available to it. 3.5 There are also other organisations across London that may be more suitably placed to address (or work towards addressing) some of the issues highlighted in the consultation findings. 3.6 Programme funding has remained the same for over a decade and, as with all other local government funding, this represents a real terms reduction in what that funding can reasonably pay for. 3.7 The financial strain on local government is unprecedented. In 2024-25, London boroughs’ core spending power was a fifth (£2.2 billion) lower in real terms than it was in 2010-11. Boroughs are now serving 884,000 (11 per cent) more residents, meaning real terms spending power per person is 28 per cent lower than it was in 2010-11. Demand for many critical services has far outpaced the population growth, and cost increases predominantly due to general inflation, are now baked in. As the programme is funded by London’s boroughs, it shares these strains and in delivering a programme that serves Londoners, it needs to consider how it complements and supports overstretched borough services. 3.8 Simply put, the programme cannot fund everything or compensate for reductions in funding in other services. Maximising the programmes limited funding to support residents and alleviate pressure on statutory services will require a more focussed approach to funding. 4 Recommendations for developing the prospectus 4.1 I nsights from the consultation activities outlined in section 2, the findings from the equalities review for the current programme and the literature review, and the above considerations, have helped to inform the recommendations for the next stages of development of the 2026-2030 programme. 18 Priority 1 - Combatting Homelessness 4.2 Recommended areas to fund: 4.2.1 Prevention and alternative pathways to housing: prevention services, particularly for individuals who are not in priority need. Local authorities in London are managing rates of homelessness not seen before, alongside a severe shortage of affordable accommodation, with limited resources. Prevention services need to develop alternative pathways to housing that go further than simply referring people to a local authority e.g., developing arrangements with private landlords for private rental sector placements, personal budgets etc. 4.2.2 Sector and borough support services: supporting the sector to develop alternatives to housing prevention and housing options, that offer people outside of priority groups viable options to stable housing. 4.3 R ough sleeping is not recommended as a discrete area to consider for funding as (current average annual funding, £430,000): 4.3.1 R ough Sleeping Initiative (RSI) funding, combined with Mayoral funding in London, currently amounts to nearly £100 million for 2024-25 and will remain similar to these levels for the near future. The majority of rough sleeping services are offered at a borough or sub-regional level, with more sub-regional working intended to replace services that are currently offered at a London level in the coming years. 4.3.2 The Ministry of Justice, under its responsibilities to reduce reoffending, funds national programmes to support people released from prison. 4.4 Considering the target groups that emerged through the consultation activities (paragraph 2.6) and the recommendation to fund support for individuals who are not in priority need, it is proposed that single people and young people (including care leavers) are the key target groups for Priority 1. Priority 2 - Tackling sexual and domestic abuse 4.5 Recommended areas to fund: 4.5.1 Refuge provision: emergency specialist refuge/safe accommodation for people experiencing sexual violence or domestic abuse with accompanying support, including support to move on from refuge/safe accommodation into longer term accommodation. 19 4.5.2 Specialist advice and counselling: supporting the safety and wellbeing of people who have experienced domestic abuse and/or sexual violence or harmful practices, through intensive support focussed on addressing multiple disadvantage and mental health needs. 4.5.3 Sector and borough support services: research on intervention methods and models, specialist information and knowledge sharing, support with coordination and collaboration of services. 4.6 It is recommended that Helpline services (current average annual funding, £285,000) are explored to consider where potential savings can be made to the programme. The government funds the national Domestic Abuse Helpline (approximately £2 million annually) and the Men’s Advice Line (approximately £150,000 annually). A recommendation for funding will be made to Committee in March 2025. 4.7 Prevention services aimed at children and young people (current average annual funding, £235,000) are not recommended for funding. The Mayor currently invests £1 million into prevention services aimed at children, delivered through primary schools. In addition to funding workshops and interactive sessions in classrooms to talk about healthy and respectful relationships and attitudes the funding has also delivered a toolkit that can be used by primary school teachers. 4.8 The key target groups that emerged through the consultation activities (paragraph 2.6) are recommended for support under Priority 2. Priorities 1 and 2 4.9 With reference to both Priorities, capacity building for the sector was a key theme throughout the consultation. Councils for Voluntary Services and Volunteer Centres are the two main types of infrastructure support organisations that exist to support frontline voluntary, community and social enterprise sectors in London. We will discuss the findings from the consultation with London Plus, the pan-London body that supports charities and community groups in London. Funding 4.10 L evels of funding for the recommended areas to fund are not proposed from the overall £22.1 million four-year project funding at this stage. Funding levels will be considered during the development of the prospectus. 4.11 Should Committee agree to no longer invest from those areas recommended above (paragraphs 4.3, 4.6 and 4.7) it is further recommended that £2.5 million of the total 20 four-year project funding is retained to commission additional activity at the mid-point of the programme to address changing needs and/or encourage innovation. This would meet Committees request to create more flexibility in the programme. Equalities considerations 4.12 The consultation survey undertaken earlier this year asked respondents to consider the equalities impacts of a pan-London programme (see Appendix 3 Equalities Impact Initial Assessment). Respondents noted potential negative impacts on people with various characteristics if the programme (or elements of the programme) were discontinued. These characteristics include gender, age, disability, and ethnicity. 4.13 Concerns were raised about how a lack of funding could exacerbate inequalities and reduce access to essential services for these groups. Respondents underscored the importance of continued investment, collaboration, and strategic planning to mitigate these effects and ensure that essential services remain available to those in need. 4.14 W ithin the constraints of available funding, steps will be taken to mitigate negative effects as much as possible: 4.14.1 p rioritising actions that mitigate where impacts are the most severe, and targeting interventions and limited resources to the areas where they will have the most significant positive effect 4.14.2 any negative impact on protected groups must be proportionate to the aims of the action; where possible, we will seek to reduce the scale of the negative impact in proportion to available resources 4.14.3 through the specification development stage we will seek alternative solutions that reduce adverse effects 4.14.4 where areas of the current programme are not recommended for funding under the proposed new programme, we have only recommended areas where other sources of funding exist, and we will work with other funders across London to mitigate impacts 4.14.5 sta keholder engagement will continue during development of the prospectus, including market warming events to help to identify solutions that could reduce negative impacts 4.14.6 any changes under the new programme will be monitored through collection of equalities and outcome data. 21 5 Next steps 5.1 The timetable for implementing the 2026-2030 Grants Programme is set out at Appendix 2. Subject to this Committee’s considerations, the substantive work would start immediately and report to the March 2025 Grants Committee Meeting. External evaluation 5.2 The external evaluation of the current 2022-2026 Grants Programme is underway with Phase 1 focusing on equalities now completed. The remaining areas include: - Phase 2: Value for Money and Partners Viability/Outcomes - Report to Grants Committee March 2025. - Phase 3: Mechanics and Operational Processes of the Grants Scheme - Report to Grants Committee March 2025. 5.3 The findings from the remaining phases of the evaluation will inform the development of a prospective new programme. New Programme Prospectus 5.4 Officers will begin work on the prospectus (the combined service specifications). They will consider supply and demand data and contribute to the preparation of specifications, to present to Grants Committee in March 2025 for discussion and agreement. 6 Recommendations 6.1 Grants Committee members are asked to: 6.1.1 note the consultation findings and recommendations contained in the report produced by Rocket Science (section 2 and Appendix 1) 6.1.2 deliberate the key consultation findings (section 2) and discuss further considerations (section 3) 6.1.3 consider and agree the recommendations for developing the prospectus at section 4: 6.1.3.1 under Priority 1 (combatting homelessness) - fund prevention and alternative pathways to housing services for the identified target groups (as noted in paragraph 4.4), together with support services to the sector and boroughs 22 - no longer invest Grants Scheme resources in rough sleeping services; £100 million of resources available from other sources (national government and the Mayors office) are best channelled through established local and sub-regional arrangements 6.1.3.2 under Priority 2 (tackling sexual and domestic abuse) - fund refuge provision and specialist advice and counselling for the identified target groups (as noted in paragraph 4.8), together with support services to the sector and boroughs - explore helpline services to seek potential savings to the programme and make a funding recommendation to Committee in March 2025 - no longer invest Grants Scheme resources in prevention services aimed at children; £1 million of resources available through the Mayors office is targeted towards activity for schools 6.1.4 retain £2.5 million of the total four-year project funding to commission further activity at the mid-point of the programme to address changing needs and/or encourage innovation 6.1.5 ask that officers proceed with further work to develop a 2026-2030 Grants Programme prospectus 6.1.6 note the next steps and indicative timetable for the development and implementation of any future new grants programme beyond March 2026 (section 5 and Appendix 2) 6.1.7 note that the notional budget for the proposed 2026-2030 Grants Programme of £26.9 million will be indicated to Leaders’ Committee this December. 23 Financial Implications for London Councils A final decision on the annual funding for the first year of a 2026-2030 (should it proceed) will be agreed by Leaders’ Committee in December 2025. Legal Implications for London Councils 1 London Councils administers and delivers the London Councils Grants Programme on behalf of all the boroughs and the City of London Corporation. The Programme makes grants to voluntary organisations to deliver improved outcomes for Londoners. 2 The Programme operates within a scheme made under Section 48 of the Local Government Act 1985 1. It is a collective scheme i.e. all the LLAs fund the Programme, through a levy contribution based on the LLA’s proportion of the capital’s population. LLAs must exercise their functions in respect of the scheme ‘with due regard to the needs of the whole of Greater London.’ 3 Leaders' Committee determines the operating principles and funding priorities of the Programme and the overall budget of the Programme. The Grants Committee commissions services, makes awards of funding, manages projects’ performance, and may advise Leaders’ Committee on the Programme. 4 This report takes full account of the legal advice, notably: a. the legal requirements for decision-making by public bodies i.e. to ensure: declaration of interests; that correct procedure is followed; consultation is undertaken lawfully; decisions are rational and evidence- based; all relevant considerations are taken into account; that decisions are taken for a proper purpose; decisions are proportionate and reasonable; and decisions are properly reasoned b. in respect of consultation that the consultation is undertaken when proposals are at a formative stage, the proposals being consulted upon give sufficient reasons to allow for intelligent consideration and response, adequate time be given for consultation responses, and the product of the consultation will be conscientiously taken into account in finalising proposals, and c. the need for proper consideration of the equality impacts of the proposed decisions. 5 It will be important to continue to take legal advice throughout the process to support informed decision-making. Equalities Implications for London Councils In reaching decisions for the implementation of any future grants programme, the Committee is required to have due regard to its obligations under the Equalit y Act 2010 2, particularly the Public Sector Equality Duty. 1 Local Government Act 1985 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/51/section/48 2 Equality Act 2010 https://www.gov.uk/equality- act-2010-guidance 24 Alongside other evidence and analysis which will be collated as to the operation of the current programme, and the factual and policy context, the consultation included a equality impact assessment which has contributed to decisions on the future of the programme. During the different stages of the development process evaluation of equality impacts will be undertaken, including in developing the specifications to deliver the funding priorities. London Councils’ funded services provide support to all persons with protected characteristics who are eligible under the relevant funded project, and target groups highlighted as furthest from support or more affected by the issues being tackled. Funded organisations are also required to submit equalities monitoring data, which can be collated across the grants scheme to provide data on the take up of services and gaps in provision to be addressed. The grants team reviews this data annually. Background Documents Grants Programme 2026-30, Grants Committee, Item 11, 18 July 2024 Grants Programme 2026-30, Leaders committee, item 18, 17 July 2024 Grants Programme 2026-30, Grants Committee, Item 10, 27 March 2024 25 Appendix 1 November 2024 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation Early findings and emerging recommendations 26 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation Contents 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Background to the programme 1 1.2 Key strands of consultation 2 2. Changing pan-London context 4 2.1 Priority 1: Homelessness 4 2.2 Priority 2: Domestic Abuse 5 3. Reflections on the current programme 7 3.1 Programme strengths and opportunities 7 3.2 Programme outcomes 10 4. Perspectives on the 2026-2030 programme 11 4.1 Responding to current needs and challenges within the two priority areas 12 4.2 Learning from the current programme to inform the 2026- 2030 period 20 5. Recommendations 21 27 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 1 Introduction Background to the programme The London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme is a four-year programme administered and delivered on behalf of the 32 London boroughs and the City of London Corporation and covered by Section 48 of Local Government Act 1985. The programme aims to improve equal access across London to specified services for those individuals who most need support through grants to voluntary organisations who deliver improved outcomes for Londoners. The programme operates under the following operating principles: • Commissioning services that deliver effectively and can meet the outcomes specified by London Councils. • Commissioning services where there is clear evidence of need for services that complement borough and other organisations delivery of local services. • Commissioning services where it is economical and efficient to deliver services on a London- wide basis or where mobility is key to delivery of a service to secure personal safety. • Commissioning services that cannot reasonably be delivered locally, at a borough or sub- regional level. • Commissioning services that work with statutory and non-statutory partners and contribute to meeting the objectives of the Equality Act 2010. Grants are currently split between two funding priorities: 1) Combatting homelessness 2) Tackling sexual and domestic abuse. Each priority has a number of strands of activities, as shown in the table below. Between 2022 and 2026, the programme will have awarded £24.65m to 14 projects. Priority 1: Combatting homelessness (£9.89m) Priority 2: Tackling sexual and domestic abuse (£14.76m) 28 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 2 • Prevention and targeted intervention, including specifically for rough sleepers and young people; • Improving the response to homelessness in London (working with housing and homelessness organisations and professionals). • Prevention for children and young people; • Specialist advice, counselling and support for medium risk survivors and target groups not accessing general provision; • Improving the response to domestic and sexual abuse; • Services for people affected by harmful practices. A formative evaluation In May 2024, Rocket Science was commissioned by London Councils to evaluate the current Pan- London Grants Programme, 2022-26. The commission originally comprised three elements delivered in three phases: 1. May – July 2024: Phase 1 – Equalities review 2. July – October 2024: Phase 2 – Value for money 3. November – March 2025: Phase 3 – Mechanics and operational processes The evaluation was always intended both to measure the impact of the 2022-26 Programme as well as inform the shape and focus of a future Pan London Grants Programme, 2026-30. In Summer 2024, the commission was amended to include a facilitated consultation with funded partners (grantees), the wider VCS sector and key stakeholders in the London Councils Pan-London Programme. This report reflects the early findings and recommendations from this additional piece of consultation and stakeholder engagement. Divided into five sections, this report covers the following: • Chapter 1 introduces London Councils’ Pan-London Grants Programme and discusses key strands of our consultation; • Chapter 2 explores the changing policy context, types and level of need in London which will inform the aims of the next phase of the grants programme; • Chapter 3 reflects on what is working well in the current programme, including programme outcomes 29 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 3 • Chapter 4 looks ahead by asking what kinds of services and initiatives could best be funded in the future at the pan-London level; • Chapter 5 closes with a set of actionable recommendations based on the varied consultation findings. Our findings are informed by qualitative data collected in September, October and November 2024, including; • a series of 10 workshops convened by Safe Lives for the Mayor’s Office of Policing and Crime (MOPAC), reflecting the insights of 233 unique participants, 61 of whom were housing and domestic-abuse leads across a representative group of London boroughs; • an internal London Councils focus group facilitated by Rocket Science with 9 members of the London Councils Policy and Grants team to explore the grants programme’s design and delivery; • a housing and homelessness borough lead officers focus group facilitated by Rocket Science with 10 housing professionals across boroughs (including Heads of Housing, Commissioning Managers, and Outreach and Support Service Managers); • a funded organisation focus group facilitated by Rocket Science with 16 participants representing 10 voluntary organisations funded under the current pan-London programme; • one-to-one interviews with 5 individuals who represent strategic pan-London organisations including both major London and national funders; • a Grants Committee focus group with 18 Grants Committee Members and 22 Borough Grants Officers to refine the scope and direction of the future Programme. In our initial consultation, Rocket Science asked questions about the changing needs in London, underserved or unreached community groups, gaps in services and support, partnership working and coordination; how a future grants programme complements borough services and, critically, which sorts of services and interventions are best funded and coordinated at a pan-London level rather than at the borough or sub-regional level. Preliminary findings were presented and refined in a London Councils grants committee focus group where Committee Members and Borough Grants Officers worked in small groups to discuss which recommendations should be prioritised for a future pan-London programme. This report records and interprets those findings, before closing with the select list of target groups and intervention areas to emerge from the above refinement process. 30 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 4 Changing pan-London context The landscape within which the Pan-London Grant Programme operates has significantly shifted in recent years. This section presents headline findings from an initial desk and data review, including insights derived from the equalities phase of the 2022-26 programme evaluation which explored contextual factors influencing London’s voluntary and community sector (VCS), such as post-COVID resource constraints, the rising cost of living, workforce pressures and evolving policy dynamics. Emerging needs are separated between the programme’s two priority themes: Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness, and Priority 2: Tackling Sexual and Domestic Abuse. The findings draw on multiple data sources, including: • our equalities consultation phase and related outputs; • insights from stakeholders across London Councils, MOPAC and Rocket Science-led workshops and focus group sessions; • reports and studies that assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, austerity measures, and recent shifts in public sector funding on vulnerable communities in London. Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness Since COVID-19, the housing crisis in London has continued to deepen. Post-COVID recovery efforts have been slow and the combined impact of reduced public-sector funding and escalating housing costs have exacerbated homelessness across the capital. Key trends include: • Post-COVID recovery restrictions: After emergency pandemic measures, such as temporary housing and eviction bans were lifted, reduced availability of support has placed increased pressure on housing services. • Cost-of-living crisis: Rising inflation and housing costs are pushing more individuals and families into precarious housing situations or homelessness, including previous homeowners. • Policy landscape: Changes in housing policy (such as the end of the “Everyone In” campaign of 2020, a pause in evictions and an uplift in the Local Housing Allowance), particularly at the national level, have led to gaps in support for people at risk of homelessness, especially for those with complex needs, or limited pathways into support such as those with no recourse to public funds. 31 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 5 Emerging needs have been identified for certain groups of service users among: • Young people, particularly those leaving care or who are economically vulnerable, and are at heightened risk of homelessness. • Refugees and asylum seekers can face linguistic and cultural barriers to access housing and support and may be pushed out of London given lack of affordable housing stock, though when in crisis, these same individuals return to the city as it is perceived as a cultural sanctuary given its diversity. As a person’s immigration status changes, they often become ineligible for certain types of housing support and may fall through the gaps. • Support for women rough-sleeping: Recent research indicates that the number of women sleeping rough is underreported and that these individuals require specific tailored support. Priority 2: Tackling Sexual and Domestic Abuse The post-COVID environment has likewise placed significant pressure on services supporting survivors of domestic abuse and Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG). Trends include: • Increased demand: Many domestic abuse (DA) support services have reported a surge in demand, with reports of abuse and poor women’s mental health increasing both during and after lockdowns. • Voluntary sector workforce challenges: The strain on staffing and resources in the sector has increased, and voluntary and community sector organisations are struggling to keep up with the growing caseloads. • Changes to the legal and policy framework: Recent changes, such as the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, while positive, have placed additional responsibilities on service providers, further straining resources. Emerging needs include: • Inter-sectional support: There is growing demand for services that recognise the intersectionality of domestic abuse with other forms of marginalisation, including race, immigration status, and disability. Underlying needs and root causes that account for this complexity are felt to be receiving less attention by funders than tackling problem symptoms like acute crisis support. Domestic abuse is also coming through in unexpected intervention areas, such as disclosures in women’s leadership programmes, highlighting the 32 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 6 interconnectivity of these issues across a person’s life and the need for holistic and responsive support pathways. • Support for young people: Rising reports of violence among young adults were identified in the most recent Crime and Survey for England and Wales (CSEW), ending March 2022 demonstrating that 11.3% of adults between 16-19 and 8.8% of those 20-24 were victims of sexual assault, a higher percentage than any other age group. This has led to calls for more tailored support services. There is also concern around a gap in support for young people as second-hand victims living in abusive households. Existing services are felt to be largely adult- centric in the DA landscape, neglecting secondary victimhood for children and young people. • Support for perpetrators: Without neglecting the support needs of victims, there are increasing calls for perpetrator intervention that is not punitive, acknowledges need, and encompasses wider mental health and support for substance abuse. 33 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 7 Reflections on the current programme This section captures different perspectives on the current London Councils Pan-London Grant Programme. The findings from multiple workshops and focus groups of stakeholders with strong awareness of the London Councils pan-London programme provide a snapshot of what has worked well and of current outcomes. Programme strengths and opportunities Among current programme participants and professionals there is consensus that the Pan-London Grants Programme plays a crucial role in supporting vulnerable communities, but gaps and barriers in service delivery remain. Participants highlighted the programme’s relevance in funding ‘by and for’ services and organisations serving minoritised groups. Leaders from funded organisations underscored the value of a pan-London approach to addressing homelessness and domestic violence, particularly in cases where individuals need to flee across borough boundaries, or require specialised services. By working across boroughs, funded organisations have been able to reach diverse communities which might otherwise be missed by borough-specific provision. Ashyana Network, for example, provides specialist refuge services for women with No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF), as well as those with complex mental health and substance misuse issues, who often cannot access mainstream services. Similarly, GALOP, through the Domestic Abuse Partnership (DAP), collaborates with other voluntary organisations like Stonewall and London Friend to provide an holistic range of services—advocacy, specialist housing, and therapeutic support—which no single organisation could deliver alone. For particularly transient populations, such as those affected by violence or lack of housing, a pan-London approach could provide consistent support across a service user’s experience. These examples reflect how the programme has enabled strong partnership working, allowing smaller voluntary and community sector organisations to leverage each other's specialisms and resources. This has been particularly valuable for services which are culturally specific or identity-focused, ensuring that minoritised communities are adequately served. In a workshop with London Councils on the grants programme’s design and delivery, VAWG coordinators affirmed how they value the specialist, culturally-aware services funded by the programme, which many boroughs struggle to provide themselves. 34 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 8 In the broader provision of support in London, a balance between smaller, specialist voluntary and community sector organisations and larger advocacy partners is considered another success; smaller providers offer grassroots expertise and invariably have communities’ trust to deliver services, while larger partners offer capacity, organisation and connectivity. The commissioning of smaller voluntary organisations by statutory bodies was repeatedly highlighted as needing reform. Stakeholders emphasised the importance of secure local contracts between local authorities and specialist voluntary organisations, particularly those organisations for whom the public sector makes frequent referrals into. Working together, such partnerships have strengthened the local ecosystem of both DA/VAWG and housing support, offering diverse perspectives and approaches to care for survivors. Additionally, the emerging use of technology in streamlining processes, such as the extended care information network (ECIN) or the multi-agency risk assessment conference (MARAC) process, have been praised for improving efficiency in some boroughs. Similarly, reflecting on the whole sectoral landscape, professionals in the DA, VAWG, and housing sectors pointed to the success of multi-agency partnerships. Housing leads referenced the success of the Rough Sleeping Steering Group (and its subgroups) in coordinating approaches to this component of homelessness across boroughs. Independent Domestic Violence Advocates (IDVAs) identified strong working relationships with MARAC coordinators and positive collaboration in co-located spaces. This has contributed to better-quality referrals, with more professionals recognising coercion and control as key aspects of DA. DA and VAWG leads appreciate that knowledge-sharing across boroughs and with third-sector voluntary and community sector organisations has been useful in raising awareness and developing a shared language, through initiatives like learning forums and expert-by-experience panels. An increase in public awareness of domestic abuse, particularly from campaigns, has led to more MARAC referrals and greater recognition of abuse when it happens, demonstrating progress in prevention efforts. Many of the above reflections were drawn from workshop whiteboard activities. The findings from one session with housing leads are summarised in the graphic on the next page: 35 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 9 36 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 10 Programme outcomes Practitioners and funded organisations identified several positive outcomes for service users including: Combatting homelessness • Better understanding and awareness of good practice in delivering homelessness services and supporting people recovering from homelessness • Improved ability to influence key stakeholders in the system to change their ways of working and adopt more cohesive and partnership approaches to homelessness • Consistent pan-London access to homelessness prevention support for those who need it, including for those who live in boroughs that do not provide these services • Joining up and convening partners across the sector to improve local responses to homelessness. Domestic and sexual violence • Young people are better able to recognise abuse and seek support • Teachers and staff are more confident to address domestic abuse in schools • Women are able to overcome barriers and access specialist support to move on from harmful practices • BME women and their communities recognise domestic abuse • Improved understanding and awareness of violence and abuse experiences by LGBT+ people • Increased support for women with NRPF to access refuge and legal support in-house, resulting in women gaining indefinite leave to remain and improving safety • Reduced risk for women with complex needs including mental health, sexual exploitation, problematic substance use • Better understanding across the sector around supporting Deaf People. Despite these positive outcomes, challenges around recording outcomes do remain. Many of the current grant funded voluntary organisations report that some of their outcomes, especially for minoritised groups, do not neatly fit within the specified programme outcomes. There is a call for more flexibility in outcome-setting and for greater consultation around what success looks like for different groups, ensuring that targets are realistic and reflect the needs of the people served. Outcome refinement was not the focus of this stage of the consultation, though this will be explored further in workshops to be held in November and December 2024. 37 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 11 Perspectives on the 2026-30 programme As London Councils looks to the future of a pan-London grant programme, several key recommendations about what should be funded at the pan-London level emerged from consultation workshops with sector leaders, practitioners, and funded organisations. Considering the history of the programme, the London Councils Grants delivery team highlighted how the programme has adapted to meet the scale of housing and homelessness problems in London, in spite of significant funding reductions. These reductions have driven a refocusing of priorities, forcing the programme to think critically about how to maximise impact and always demonstrate value for money. Through the consultation, the following long list of potential target groups and initiatives emerged as requiring additional support: Target groups for further support Services or initiatives requiring additional support in a future programme • Individuals and families with NRPF • Those with non-crisis level mental health need • Women rough sleeping • Women with children aged 12+ • LGBTQ+ DA survivors and perpetrators • Disabled individuals • Refugee families • Single individuals • Children living in households with domestic abuse • Funding for specialist VCS organisations • Prevention initiatives within both priorities including with young people relating to domestic abuse • Capacity-building for small support organisations • Mapping funding across London • Funding for core costs • Ensuring competitive staff salaries • Standardised training and development for frontline professionals • Funding for systems and training to enable consistent use of technology for case and risk management 38 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 12 Reflection on target groups in need In November 2024, Rocket Science worked with the London Councils Grants Committee members and Borough Grants Officers to refine the wider consultation’s list of target groups for further support. Several committee members felt the list should include support for individuals who do not traditionally present as experiencing homelessness, such as those sofa-surfing or sharing overcrowded rooms due to borough hotel maximisation policies. These individuals often lack formal recognition and therefore risk being overlooked by conventional support mechanisms, increasing their invisibility within London’s housing support systems. Care leavers and young carers were also highlighted by the Grants Committee members and Borough Grants Officers as critically underserved groups. Care leavers, who are often expected to assume adult responsibilities far earlier than their peers, face particular challenges related to limited, unaffordable housing. Their difficulties with securing suitable accommodation, employment, and financial stability are exacerbated by the ongoing exodus from the private rental sector and rising rent prices. They are vulnerable to exploitation and debt due to a lack of support systems tailored to their unique needs. Young carers similarly face challenges, often struggling to identify as such and missing out on educational and social opportunities. Though many boroughs do have local Carer Strategies, participants felt that a coordinated approach at the pan-London level could better address gaps in local provision for these individuals. Young people, particularly boys and young men, were also seen as needing targeted preventative support within educational settings. Participants felt that schools are well-placed to introduce these groups to societal values such as respect for women and girls, alongside raising awareness of the impacts of domestic violence and abuse. However, they noted that the increasingly fragmented nature of the school system complicates the consistent delivery of these messages across boroughs, highlighting the need for cross-regional support. Additionally, in relation to homelessness, those with asylum or refugee status were acknowledged as needing greater transitional advice and support, with individuals being displaced from their communities while being moved through temporary accommodation. This displacement complicates service provision and continuity of care, as people are no longer connected to the borough-specific services they relied on previously. Participants emphasised the importance of inter-borough coordination, tracking and information-sharing. 39 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 13 The Grants Committee members and Borough Officers emphasised widely that specialist services, such as those providing support for LGBTQ+ individuals or ethnic groups, are best equipped in terms of gaining trust and achieving impact but can be difficult to support at the pan-London level. The specialism cannot be so niche that it loses relevance across boroughs. Importantly, many of these services may also not be financially viable at an individual borough level, but could operate effectively at a pan-London level, enabling wider access and sustainability across borough boundaries. Reflection on thematic needs The wider consultation also identified a broad list of services or initiatives requiring additional support in a future programme. This list can be organised thematically into the following categories: • Capacity-building for the VCS - internal support for teams and organisations; • Awareness-raising - knowledge sharing and training to ensure professional and wider community awareness of the two programme thematic priorities; • Strategic coordination - coordination across key stakeholders to promote a more strategic, joined-up approach; • Crisis response - responding to emergent needs and demands; • Prevention - preventing crisis points through early intervention. The London Councils Grants Committee members and Borough Grants Officers were asked to consider where, among these categories, they felt a pan-London grants programme could best intervene for impact and systemic change. The below MentiMeter results show, after discussion, where the committee placed greatest priority: 1. Capacity-building for small organisations 2. Funding core costs 3. Prevention initiatives 40 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 14 The importance of capacity-building for smaller organisations The Grants Committee members and Borough Grants Officer focus group participants voiced strong support for funding core costs of smaller, community-based organisations, recognising their unique capacity to engage with hard-to-reach populations. These organisations face severe financial constraints which threaten their survival, especially given rising operational costs. Participants referenced the GLA’s Civil Society Roots Programme as a valuable model for enabling VCS organisations to continue critical frontline work. They argued that investing in these organisations’ core costs, rather than solely funding projects, delivers greater returns and ensures a more stable support network for local communities. The value in awareness-raising and upstream initiatives Participants noted the importance of preventative measures that support healthier relationships and community resilience, suggesting that learning from Domestic Homicide Reviews could foster greater professional curiosity among frontline practitioners. This enhanced awareness would enable them better to recognise early signs of risk. The group felt that such initiatives could help bridge existing gaps in schools and community engagement, ensuring young people across all boroughs have consistent access to resources on healthy relationships and resilience. Strategic coordination is needed for better service delivery, but is difficult to achieve Participants expressed support for increased cross-boundary coordination, as many service users experience a “revolving door” between regional and borough-specific services. However, it was noted there are difficulties in accomplishing this. One suggestion was to focus on establishing universal 41 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 15 standards and training programmes for front-line providers to close these gaps, though it was less certain as to what this standard would encompass, given the differences in borough operating systems. Examples from Integrated Care Systems (ICS) were highlighted as promising models for aligning statutory and voluntary sectors around shared goals, such as supporting healthy lifestyles, better ageing, and end-of-life care, which a future programme could use as a template for service and cross-sector coordination. Some participants questioned the utility of centralised provision at all, other than a need for an element of fund management and coordination. Crisis response vs preventative support Finally, while crisis intervention will always be necessary, participants felt this falls within statutory responsibilities and that the resources of a future programme would have greater impact addressing preventative needs. They noted that early intervention, rather than allowing issues to escalate, helps alleviate strain on crisis systems and provides better outcomes for individuals and communities alike. Prevention programmes that target mental health and community resilience, especially if complementary to existing ICS efforts, were seen as ideal ways for future funding to maximise its impact and reach. Responding to current needs and challenges within the two funding priority areas This section outlines a range of perspectives on how a future grant programme could address current needs and challenges within the two funding priority areas. This includes the wider input of 5 other key funders in London, as gathered through 1-2-1 interviews. Coordination and communication within sectors, including between local authorities and the VCS The funding priorities of the programme remain highly relevant. The housing crisis in London is both chronic and acute, and the current homelessness system is struggling. Despite significant cross- sectoral efforts, the homelessness picture continues to deteriorate, and many professionals are questioning whether current policy and interventions are adequate. While not large enough to solve homelessness, the Pan-London Grants Programme remains crucial to influencing the system, filling key gaps in service provision and potentially driving wider change through its catalytic effect. Similarly, although the maturity and breadth of the domestic abuse and VAWG sectors were felt to be stronger in London than elsewhere in England, funding remains insufficient against the rising level of need. Several key funders in London felt than the VAWG landscape is “fragmented” and “factional” 42 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 16 and noted that the quality of funding applications related to DA and VAWG varies significantly across London, highlighting a lack of widespread sectoral support. One stakeholder explained that as much as better coordination is needed, a pan-London commitment around tackling violence is necessary, affirming one particular area of potential value in a pan-London programme. A more collective vision and minimal standards for both sectors were felt to be potential levers of system-wide change. One participant described the value of in-depth, borough-level needs assessments (including domestic homicide reviews) to map need against provision and share learning. At a local level, working with voluntary and community sector (VCS) organisations which reflect the diversity of London is essential. However, practitioners from the housing side of the programme have reported that borough engagement is inconsistent. Some councils have strong relationships with providers while others struggle to maintain communication owing to high staff turnover and capacity issues. In domestic abuse and VAWG, many VCS organisations are hyperlocal with small staff teams, making partnership working particularly challenging. This lack of cohesion can prevent boroughs from fully benefiting from the programme's support, especially when they fail to see how the grants programme complements their own services. Balancing increasing reach alongside limited funding The balance between meeting existing delivery demands and widening opportunities for support is a challenge many VCS organisations face. Although providers are struggling to deliver their existing commitments, they must continue to promote their services with the aim of expanding service access. A concern raised by current programme participants and wider stakeholders is around core funding and the lack of full cost recovery. Many organisations are subsidising services with other funding streams, which is unsustainable in the long term. Increasing demand for advocacy and partnership work, such as attending meetings or contributing to systemic improvements, are often not accounted for in current funding models. The lack of funding for these activities means that many organisations, particularly smaller ones, are stretched, struggling to meet both the immediate needs of their service users or clients and the broader system-wide challenges they face. Shared systems, processes and language The digital divide also continues to be a barrier for many frontline teams. In the housing sector, there is a particular lack of cohesion in the use of technology for case management, with some providers recording details in Microsoft Word documents and others using Artific ial Intelligence or various 43 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 17 software tools. Some Housing Leads noted a lack of shared language in this space and inconsistency in the quality of reporting on clients. Organisations also expressed a desire for greater consistency and cohesion in linking up support across boroughs. The transient nature of homelessness, with individuals moving between boroughs, demands a coordinated approach, such as a reciprocal sanctuary scheme, that ensures access to services regardless of location. In some areas, local authorities feel well-connected to service providers, but in others, there is a lack of communication and engagement. Addressing this disparity in communication and coordination is seen as essential to ensuring that all Londoners, regardless of where they live, have access to support. The clarity of referral pathways in housing services for DA survivors was noted as lacking coordination across boroughs, further delaying access to permanent housing for many survivors. With limited housing stock and long waits in temporary accommodation, participants across priorities felt that the system fails to offer timely, safe housing solutions for survivors. At times, the eligibility of individuals presents a barrier, as seen recently around housing support for singles. A shortage of specialist services, particularly for children, refugees and those with no recourse to public funds was also cited as a pressing concern. Staff recruitment, retention, development and support Workshop participants across the DA/VAWG and housing sectors emphasised the high levels of burnout among frontline professionals because of heavy workloads, staff turnover, and limited resources. Many DA leads and VAWG coordinators feel backlogged by administrative tasks and frustrated with outdated case management systems that detract from their client work. This issue is compounded by discrepancies in sectoral language, risk management approaches, and the inefficient use of delivery tools, which leads to delays and miscommunication. One VAWG network reflected on a lack of funding to support adequate salary levels to attract and retain staff. Equity of service access across London Another persistent challenge is geographic inequity in service delivery and gaps in provision across boroughs. Participants expressed frustration that while new projects are funded, core services such as refuge provision have not seen any uplift in funding since the COVID-19 pandemic, creating further strain on organisations that are already overstretched. The overlap in funding streams can lead to confusion about who funds what and whether services are being duplicated or under- provided in certain areas. 44 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 18 Prevention and early intervention A consistent theme has been the importance of upstream prevention alongside response to presenting need. Both housing and DA/VAWG professionals recognise the need for more upstream housing interventions to prevent crises before they occur. However, the acute nature of homelessness in London can make it especially difficult to shift focus away from crisis support. Many housing practitioners acknowledged that a more preventative approach, especially in areas like early release schemes or youth homelessness, could alleviate the immense pressures on crisis services. Nevertheless, it remains unclear which types of prevention would be most effective, and more collaboration with boroughs is needed to align resources towards supporting upstream work. There is likewise growing pressure for more preventative work in DA/VAWG, especially within schools to tackle misogyny and gender-based violence at an earlier stage. Coordinators highlighted that while current service provision is vital for responding to crises, more space for prevention would allow for a more proactive approach to reducing violence against women and girls in the long term. Housing leads affirmed this feeling about a potential trade-off between prevention and responding to immediate need, highlighting how prevention and response are interconnected. It was felt that pan- London funding could set the agenda and that sectoral leaders would adjust their work in response. There is a clear recognition of the need for more long-term, relational client support. For example, in the context of DA/VAWG services, once survivors are resettled, ongoing support is critical, but this is often cut short owing to funding limitations. Risks of homelessness and other vulnerabilities increase once support is withdrawn, as many survivors, particularly from marginalised groups, need time to engage fully with services and have their complex needs addressed. In housing and homelessness, housing leads have seen an increase in ‘middle-ground’ mental health needs among those who are not receiving support because they are not yet in crisis. Accommodating preventative mental health support was suggested as a form and measure of homelessness risk prevention. Funder collaboration and knowledge-sharing There is also a need for greater collaboration between funders; many VCS groups observe that boroughs and other funders grant fund and commission similar services. The London Councils Grants Programme, with its unique role across London, is well-placed to advocate for more coherent, joined- up commissioning of support services. The above reflections, which include MentiMeter whiteboard responses from a series of SafeLives MOPAC workshops, are presented in the visual below: 45 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 19 46 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 20 Learning from the current programme to inform the 2026-30 period Flexibility and consultation with VCS organisations Currently funded organisations reflect that the grants programme has the potential to be more flexible and collaborative over its four-year cycle but requires clearer communication between those administering the programme, those participating within it and the wider sector. Funded organisations expressed desires to feel heard and their insights considered, suggesting that engaging more consistently and clearly between boroughs and other stakeholders throughout the duration of the programme could enhance collaboration and ensure that services remain responsive to emerging needs. Individuals across both sectors expressed a desire for greater opportunity to shape the development of the programme over time. The role of London Councils in advocacy and enabling collaboration The role of advocacy is another area where consultees felt London Councils could have a stronger role. Participants noted that London Councils could better facilitate conversations between boroughs and service providers, sharing insights and recommendations to inform policy changes. With recent political changes across government, there is greater potential for alignment and traction toward change. Some advocacy work is already happening unofficially, with larger funded groups working with boroughs to establish escalation routes for housing cases. Strengthening these efforts, alongside evidence-based advocacy, could improve the programme's capacity to influence systemic change across London. Recognition and support for grassroots organisations Finally, the importance of a grants programme in supporting small and grassroots voluntary and community sector organisations was highlighted throughout the workshops. These organisations are often the first point of contact for vulnerable individuals, yet they face significant challenges in sustaining their work over time. There is a need to develop capacity-building strategies which not only help these groups survive, but also build sustainability into their operations. Larger, lead organisations could be better incentivised through the programme to play a role in supporting smaller groups, ensuring that they can continue to fill critical gaps in service provision. 47 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 21 Recommendations The following suggested actions have emerged from the consultation: 1. Prioritise support for emerging target groups: The consultation repeatedly identified several currently underserved groups: children living in households with DA, DA survivors with NRPF, housing seekers with NRPF, LGBTQ+ DA survivors and perpetrators, disabled survivors and housing seekers, and refugee families seeking homes. These groups require targeted support to prevent long-term harm and link better into pathways of support, as their needs can go unmet within existing service structures. In a Grants Committee member and Borough Grants Officer focus group , these target groups were discussed further, with participants highlighting the absence of care-leavers as a group in need, despite views from Borough Grants Officers and members that care-leavers, who have been designated as a Protected Characteristic in some boroughs, require further provision at the pan- London level. In both priorities, specialist community providers were considered to be effective in reaching target groups given their existing cultural competence, geographic proximity and established trust with communities. Continuity of funding and local commissioning for specialist voluntary and community sector organisations would help them to achieve more stable and consistent delivery. The role of small organisations in partnering with larger voluntary and community sector organisations was noted as key a method for expanding access to those most in need. 2. Strengthen partnerships and coordination: The consultation highlighted the success of multi-agency partnerships and recommended further support for collaborations, particularly bringing the housing and DA sectors together. A pan- London programme could facilitate better coordination between boroughs, fostering reciprocal arrangements for housing survivors of DA and reducing geographic inequity across the capital. The implementation of more streamlined administrative systems and data-sharing mechanisms was highlighted as critical to improving consistency of service delivery and case management. 3. Enhance operational flexibility and funding: Participants advocated for long-term funding solutions with built-in flexibility to adapt to emerging needs, such as increased caseloads or the need for more specialised services. Voluntary sector 48 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 22 organisations highlighted the need for clearer communication around the availability of services and local authority funding allocations to ensure transparency and equity. 4. Promote ease of reporting: Simplifying and standardising reporting processes across funded organisations will improve operational efficiency and reduce administrative burden. Rocket Science will gather more insight in this area through the upcoming evaluation of the current Grants Programme’s operational processes. 5. Support for training and professional development: Mandatory training on domestic abuse, particularly around risk management and trauma-informed approaches, should be made available to all front-line professionals across boroughs. Upskilling professionals would help address inconsistencies in service quality and ensure boroughs receive more equally informed support. Similarly, support for voluntary sector staff in drawing up funding applications should be provided to expand the accessibility of the programme and upskill the wider sector. One stakeholder felt that ringfencing a portion of each award as a ‘staff wellbeing grant’ to be spent on activities like training, teambuilding activities, access to counselling or a gym membership, could ensure frontline professionals are better supported in their development and wellness. 6. Improve pan-London housing pathways and support: Housing professionals called for better use of available housing stock, including the retrofitting of old office blocks, establishing more emergency accommodation and developing accommodation as a sustainable asset through social investment. A pan-London programme could work with housing associations to develop consistent sanctuary schemes and routes out of joint-tenancies when there is abuse, as well support perpetrator interventions which protect survivors who may still be living with their abusers. 7. Foster cross-borough learning and best practice: London Councils could play a central role in coordinating and convening cross-borough engagement, learning and knowledge sharing, especially in areas like early intervention, perpetrator accountability, and culturally specific services. Universally, key stakeholders whom we consulted identified London Councils’ considerable potential for “mapping the players”, “galvanising”, “campaigning” for issue awareness and “positioning co-created solutions”. Network- 49 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation 23 building platforms, such as learning forums and expert-by-experience panels, were voiced as best practice having proven effective and could be expanded city-wide. 50 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation John Griffiths, Director Dina Papamichael, Director Anna Pearl Johnson, Research Consultant Offices: London T: 0207 253 6289 Edinburgh T: 0131 226 4949 Newcastle T: 07887 67 34 07 www.rocketsciencelab.co.uk 51 Implementation Timetable Appendix 2 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation Date Activity 28 Feb 2024 Grants Executive meeting - Consider approach and timetable for any post March 2026 grants programme including consultation 11 Mar 2024 Elected Officers - Consider approach and timetable for any post March 2026 grants programme including consultation 27 Mar 2024 Grants Committee Meeting - Agree approach and timetable for any post March 2026 grants programme including consultation From Apr 2024 Evaluation of the current grants programme Apr-May 2024 Complete research of external context (government policy, patterns of need, current LLA provision) May-June 2024 London Councils - Consultation launched (7 May 2024) - Consultation ends (minimum four week window) 17 July 2024 Leaders Committee - Decision on operating principles - Decision on funding priorities - Authorise Grants Committee to oversee specification development 18 July 2024 Grants Committee AGM - Consider consultation findings and direction from Leaders Committee July-Nov 2024 London Councils - Develop specifications with LLA officers and stakeholders 28 Oct 2024 Grants Executive Meeting - Consider draft recommendations on proposed specifications 27 Nov 2024 Grants Committee Meeting - Consider recommendations on proposed specifications - Make recommendations to Leaders’ Committee 10 Dec 2024 Leaders’ Committee - Receive budget recommendations for 2025-26 - Note indicative budget for new programme Subject to Leaders decision December 2024 Jan-Mar 2025 London Councils - Undertake work on specifications - Undertake market warming events 26 Feb 2025 Grants Executive Committee Meeting - Consider any amendments to specifications since November/ December 2024 26 Mar 2025 Grants Committee Meeting - Agree final specifications Apr-May 2025 London Councils - Preparation for commissioning including market warming 52 Date Activity May-Oct 2025 London Councils - Undertake open and competitive commissioning subject to budget being agreed o NB closing date for applications will be 30 July latest - Applications assessment and due diligence 17 Sept 2025 Grants Executive Committee Meeting - Update on commissioning for 2026-2030 programme 26 Nov 2025 Grants Committee Meeting - Agree commissions subject to budget, and recommend budget to Leaders’ Committee 9 Dec 2025 Leaders’ Committee Meeting - Agree annual programme budget for 2020-2027 Dec 2025-Mar 2026 London Councils - Pre-agreement activity and mobilisation to start delivering new programme March 2026 Grants Committee Meeting - Update on pre-agreement process April 2026 New programme launched, projects commence delivery 53 Equalities Impact: Initial Assessment Appendix 3 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2026-2030 Consultation Relevance Test – London Councils pan-London Grants Programme, potential changes to the 2026-2030 programme (from April 2026) EIAs are used to anticipate and identify any discriminatory or negative consequences for a particular group or sector, whether on the grounds of age, disability, race, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, religion and belief, sex, or sexual orientation. Stage one is to carry out a relevance test. An assessment is done to consider if any of the above groups are likely to be put at a disadvantage by use of the policy or service. If equality considerations have been taken account of there will usually be no need to proceed to stage two. Name of policy, service or function being assessed: pan-London Grants Programme, potential changes to the 2026-2030 programme (from March 2026) Mark on the grid below whether the policy/function changes might have an adverse impact on any of the grounds indicated. Equality Area No adverse impact Low adverse impact Medium adverse impact High adverse impact Age  Disability  Gender reassignment  Marriage & civil partnership  Pregnancy and maternity  Race  Religion/belief  Sex  Sexual orientation  Brief summary of reasons for results London Councils is responsible for the administration and delivery of the London Councils Grants Programme in accordance with Section 48 of the Local Government Act 1985 on behalf of all the London boroughs and the City of London Corporation. The Programme makes grants to voluntary organisations to deliver improved outcomes for Londoners. The Programme operates within a scheme made under Section 48 of the Local Government Act 1985. It is a collective scheme i.e. all the 33 London local authorities fund the scheme and the London Grants Programme through a levy contribution based on the proportion of 54 t he capital’s population. London local authorities must exercise their functions in respect of the scheme ‘with due regard to the needs of the whole of Greater London.’ The programme currently funds support across two funding priorities: combatting homelessness and tackling sexual and domestic abuse. Work started on developing a new programme for 2026-2030 early in the 2024, which included a consultation, via survey, of a broad range of stakeholders, asking them about their views on the current programme, areas for a new programme to focus on, and what might be the impacts of withdrawal of funding. These questions where posed in the context of: - programme funding remaining at the same level for over a decade, which represents a real terms reduction in what that funding can reasonably pay for - unprecedented financial strain on local government, and - recognition that the pan-London Grants Programmes financial contribution to services for housing and homelessness and tackling sexual and domestic violence sits alongsi de s ignificantly larger investments from other national and regional sources. Most of the respondents to the survey stated that the impact of a pan-London programme focussed on combatting homeless and tackling sexual and domestic abuse would be positive across the protected characteristics. Respondents mentioned potential negative impacts on people with various characteristics if the programme were discontinued. These characteristics include gender, age, disability, and ethnicity. Concerns were raised about how a lack of funding could exacerbate inequalities and reduce access to essential services for these groups. Respondents underscored the importance of continued investment, but also collaboration, and strategic planning to mitigate these effects and ensure that essential services remain available to those in need. When asked ‘If a 2026-2030 programme did not go ahead, what impact do you think this would have for people with [protected and other] characteristics’, 72 per cent of respondents, stated it would have a negative impact. Following the broad consultation, a series of workshops and focus groups were undertaken to concentrate on which types of services and interventions might best be funded and coordinated at a pan-London level. This information will be presented to Committee members alongside information about the availability of other sources of funding, including funding for statutory services, to seek optimal use of the Grants Programme resources available to it In terms of the three areas of the current programme that are proposed for disinvestment for the proposed new 2026-2030 programme, all the areas have other sources of funding currently invested in them. In terms of impact, whilst survey respondents were asked about the potential impact of the entire programme not going ahead, a reasonable correlation can be assumed between the impact of disinvesting in the entire programme and/or elements of it, particularly considering the context of a period of high need and demand for services. Should Committee agree to the recommendations, more detailed assessments will be undertaken in relation to the proposed service areas, and within the constraints of available funding, steps will be taken to mitigate negative effects as much as possible. 55 Summary At its meeting on 24 November 2021 Grants Committee agreed funding for 13 commissions under the following two priorities: Priority 1 Combatting Homelessness Priority 2 Tackling Sexual and Domestic Abuse In addition, the funding awarded under the 2017- 22 programme to Ashiana Network to deliver the Specialist Refuge Network under Service Area 2.4 was extended to 31 March 2023 to give time to develop longer term arrangements with the boroughs and the Greater London A uthority (GLA) following the introduction of the Domestic Abuse Act. On 26 January 2023, funding for a new commission delivering under Service area 2.4 from April 2023 was agreed. Funding was agreed for the period 2022 to 2026, subject to delivery, compliance with grant conditions and continued availability of resources. This report provides members with: - t he seventh performance report on the two priorities of the 2022-26 Grants Programme, for the period April 2022 to September 2024 (quarters one to ten) Recommendations The Grants Committee is asked to note: a) o utcomes at priority level to end of quarter ten: i) Priority 1, combatting homelessness, overall is one per cent above profile ii) Priority 2, tackling sexual and domestic abuse, overall is 5 per cent below profile Grants Committee Performance of Grants Programme 2022-2026 April 2022 – September 2024 Item: 6 Report by Feria Henry Job title Grants Manager Date 27 November 2024 Contact Officer Feria Henry Telephone 020 7934 9529 Email Feria.henry@londoncouncils.gov.uk 56 (1) The new project delivering under service area 2.1, led by Women’s Resource Centre has commenced and its first two quarters of delivery are included in this report. b) T he number of interventions delivered in the relevant period: i) Priority 1, combatting homelessness – 26,656 ii) Priority 2 , tackl ing sexual and domestic abuse – 176,691 c) P roject level performance, using the Red, Amber, Green (RAG) performance management system (explained at Appendix 1): i) 12 projects are rated Green ii) 2 projects are rated Amber d) T he borough maps (Appendix 2) e) T he project delivery information and contact details (Appendix 3), with up-to-date contact information, as well as an update on performance f) The link to the online borough dashboard which provides programme delivery information including borough outcomes, regular activities and highlight s at both a pan- London and borough level is available here Appendix 1 RAG Rating Methodology Appendix 2 Borough Maps Appendix 3 Project Delivery Information and Contact Details 57 Page 1 of 33 1 Background 1.1 The 2022 to 2026 Grants Programme focuses on the following priorities: Priority 1 - Combatting Homelessness Priority 2 - Tackling Sexual and Domestic Abuse 1.2 Grants Committee agreed funding for 14 projects for the period 2022 to 2026, subject to delivery, compliance with grant conditions and continued availability of resources. 1.3 A one year extension of the Specialist Refuge Network led by Ashiana Network under the 2017-22 programme under service area 2.4 1 - was agreed to run to 31 March 2023 to enable longer term arrangements to be developed with the boroughs and the GLA as a result of the introduction of the Domestic Abuse Act. 1.4 Funding for provision under Service Area 2.4 from April 2023 to 31 March 2026 was awarded to Ashiana Network for the Ascent Specialist Refuge Partnership in January 2023. This service commenced on 1 April 2023. Performance for this project and the extended year of the project under the 2017 -22 programme are included in the figures reported in this paper. 1.5 The Healthy London, Healthy R elationships project, funded under Service Area 2.1, led by Against Violence and Abuse, ceased operations in December 2023. 1.6 On 27 March 2024, the Grants Committee agreed to fund a new project (for one year) under Service Area 2.1 called Ascent Prevention Project, led by Women Resource Centre. The project commenced in April 2024 and performance of the first two quarters is included in this report. 1.7 A list of g rants, including the updates indicated in paragraphs 1.4 to 1.6 is included below, in Table 1. Table 1: London Councils Grants Programme 2022-26 (Priority 1 and 2) Service Area2 Organisation Agreed awarded amount 1.1 Shelter, The National Campaign for Homeless People £3,706,718 1 Service area 2.4 - Emergency refuge accommodation and support and alternative housing options to meet the needs of specific groups 2 See paragraphs 2.1 and 5.1 for a brief description of the service areas 58 Page 2 of 33 1.1 St Mungo Community Housing Association £1,315,749 1.2 St Mungo Community Housing Association £413,021 1.3 New Horizon Youth Centre £3,756,866 1.4 Homeless Link £693,509 Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness £9,885,863 2.1 Against Violence and Abuse £405,1593 2.1 Women’s Resource Centre (April 2024 – March 2025) £234,6354 2.1 Prevention 2025/26 - subject to agreement £263,700 2.2 Galop £642,295 2.2 Women and Girls Network £5,533,157 2.2 SignHealth £1,047,148 2.3 Refuge £1,139,673 2.3 Women’s Aid Federation £100,000 2.4 Ashiana Network (April 2022- March 2023) £840,0005 2.4 Ashiana Network (April 2023- March 2026) £2,520,000 2.5 Women’s Resource Centre £799,5816 2.6 Asian Women’s Resource Centre £1,234,646 Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Violence £14,759,994 Total £24,645,857 1.8 The London Councils Grants Programme enables boroughs to tackle high-priority social need where this is better done at pan- London level . The programme commissions third sector organisations to work with disadvantaged Londoners to 3 Total amount paid to AVA for delivery up to December 2023, original grant awarded was £944,987 4 Grant agreement signed in September 2024, project started in April 2024 at own risk 5 This was for a one year extension (until 31 March 2023) of the Specialist Refuge Service funded under the 2017-22 programme, to allow for the development of longer term arrangements across London following the introduction of the Domestic Abuse Act. Funding under this service area has been awarded for Emergency specialist Refuge Support started on 1 April 2023 6 This figure includes the additional £41,493.75 that was novated from AVA to WRC for quarter eight 59 Page 3 of 33 make real improvements in their lives. This is the seventh report covering the performance of the 2022 to 2026 Grants Programme. Case studies of programme activity are available here on the London Councils website. 2 Priority 1: Homelessness Delivery 2.1 The Committee has allocated £9.9 million to five projects to Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness for 2022-26. Of these five: - Two (with a total value of £ 1.2 million in year one) are delivering against specification 1.1: Prevention and Targeted Intervention - One (value of £0.1m in year one) is delivering against Specification 1.2: Prevention and targeted intervention for rough sleepers - One (value of £0.9 million in year one) is delivering against specification 1.3 Prevention and targeted intervention for young people - One ( value of £0.2 million per year ) is delivering against specification 1. 4: Improving the response to homelessness in London (working with housing and homelessness organisations and professionals) 2.2 At two and a half years into the four year programme , Priority one performance was one per cent above profile. Figure 1 provides further information at a service area level. Outcome targets have been surpassed in three out of the four service areas to the end of quarter ten. The one service area that has performed below target (1.1 – Prevention and targeted intervention) , is within the -15 per cent performance tolerance. 2.3 Service area 1. 4 (support services to the Homelessness sector) has exceeded the +15 per cent tolerance level. The action plan established with London Councils officers to address underdelivery for the sole commission in this strand, the London Plus project, led by Homeless Link , has resulted in increased outcome achievement. The project has revised their methods for capturing feedback which has confirmed improved outcome performance and endorsed by project satisfaction from the service recipients. 2.4 S pecific information on achievement against outcomes at project level is available in Appendix 3. 60 Page 4 of 33 Figure 1: Priority 1 Delivery against Profile Aggregate Outcomes by service area 2022- 26 - Q1 to Q10 1.1 Prevention and targeted Intervention 1.2 Rough sleeping 1.3 Youth homelessness 1.4 Support services to homelessness sector Profile 15,300 1,453 7,885 1,776 Actual 13,941 1,651 8,675 2,389 Difference -1,359 198 790 613 Variance -9% 14% 10% 35% Average Annual Grant Value (£m) £1.23 £0.10 £0.94 £0.17 Number of Providers 2 1 1 1 2.5 Providers continue to support vulnerable and disadvantaged service users within the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. By end of quarter ten7: - 44 per cent were female - 46 per cent were under 25 - 8.6 per cent were over 55 7 Based on self-declaration; users may declare more than one protected characteristic e.g. disability 15,300 1,453 7,885 1,776 13,941 1,651 8,675 2,389 1.1 Prevention and targeted intervention 1.2 Rough sleeping 1.3 Youth Homelessness 1.4 Support services to Homelessness sector Profile Actual 61 Page 5 of 33 - 81.5 per cent were ethnic minorities8 - 32.3 per cent declared a disability - 23.2 per cent were LGBT9 - 1251 people had no recourse to public funds (6.1 per cent) 2.6 The London Youth Gateway (LYG) project led by New Horizon Youth Centre reported 1032, or 11 per cent of young people who have accessed their service since April 2022, declared a history of care experience10. 2.7 London Councils funds organisations to deliver services across London and our monitoring returns include an assessment of equalities. The grants team reports annually on the equalities performance of the programme. Policy and wider environment 2.8 New report - London’s Homelessness Emergency: 183,000 Londoners are now estimated to be homeless and living in temporary accommodation arranged by their local borough. This is the highest -ever level of recorded homelessness in the capital – equivalent to at least one in 50 Londoners. This homelessnes s emergency is highlighted in a new report by London Councils. Other key findings include: - The number of Londoners in temporary accommodation includes almost 90,000 children. London Councils estimate this is equivalent to one out of every 21 children living in the capital – or on average at least one homeless child in every London classroom. - London boroughs collectively spent £114m every month on average – or £4m daily – on temporary accommodation for homeless Londoners in the 2023-24 financial year. - Boroughs’ spending on temporary accommodation jumped by a dramatic 68% in just one year (comparing 2022-23 to 2023-24) 8 Includes Asian - all, Black - all, Chinese, Latin American, Middle Eastern, mixed ethnicity, white European, white Irish and white other 9 Lesbian, gay, bisexual, identify as trans or a person with trans history or declared other 10 “Care Experienced” for LYG reporting means: A young person who has had the support of a social worker at any time, is a looked after child in the care system, has been adopted or fostered. Young people do not need to have "Care Leaver" status to be care experienced. Care Experience can be interpreted as a lifelong characteristic. 62 Page 6 of 33 2.9 Best practice: Lived Experience of Temporary Accommodation - Real experiences of residents in temporary accommodation and staff working in the Kensington and Chelsea Housing Options Team were heard in a public legislative theatre event at the Tabernacle Theatre on 15 October. The project brought together residents and staff to share their experiences to find ways that the existing experience of running and living in temporary accommodation can change for the better. The event focused on both the experience of staff in working in a high pressure environment and of residents experiencing the trauma of losing a permanent home. 2.10 Following the performance and subsequent debate, policy proposals were agreed in three key areas, around the council’s approach to resident experience, triage and support and staff systems and support. 2.11 The event was the culmination of a project commissioned by London Housing Directors’ Group, Trust for London and the GLA and supported by London Housing Foundation. Groundswell delivered the project working with families supported by Home-Start Westminster and staff from Kensington and Chelsea’s Home Options team to create the event. A video and report of the experience will be published in December. 2.12 New research: Private Rented Housing Supply in London - Just 5% of private rental listings in London are affordable to low -income households using Local Housing Allowance (LHA) to pay their rent. That’s what new research from Savills, commissioned by London Councils and Trust for London reveals. The study also provides robust evidence that London’s private rented sector (PRS) has shrunk in size, with Londoners finding it increasingly difficult to secure PRS housing. 45,000 rental properties were sold in the capital without being replaced between April 2021 to December 2023. The study reinforces concerns that the reduced availability of private rented properties is putting low-income Londoners at increased risk of homelessness and further action is needed to improve housing affordability. 2.13 In July 2024 the new government announced a policy on prison release (policy name - SDS40), which entailed preparing certain groups of offenders to be released from prison early after serving 40% of their sentence. The first of these releases took place in September and October 2024. Funded Priority 1 projects 63 Page 7 of 33 have highlighted that as the proportion of all prison leavers who were released homeless in 2023/24 was 13.1 per cent, this early release is likely to put additional pressures on homeless services to respond to the increased demand. To add to these housing pressures, the RSI (rough sleep initiative funding) is due to come to an end at the end of 2024/2025. Homeless services are facing uncertainty about the future and increased anxieties about the future of support available for people who are homeless. 2.14 Immigration eVisas: Priority 1 funded projects have raised concern about the upcoming introduction of eVisas. With only three months remaining until every Biometric Residence Permit (BRP) expires, individuals will soon have no way to prove their legal status other than through the eVisa system. Funded projects note that the level of preparedness for this transition is extremely concerning and estimate that thousands of individuals with a legal right to live in the United Kingdon (UK) may find themselves without any proof of their status. This is especially worrying for their clients e.gs those facing homelessness, as no process has been established for people without biometric documents to register for an eVisa, and applications for replacement BRPs have now closed, with no further BRPs being issued after the end of October 2024, leaving many individuals in precarious situations. Priority One Updates 2.15 Projects funded under priority one continue to face significant demand for project services, with caseworkers not working to resolve immediate risk of homelessness but also supporting service users with highly complex needs such as mental ill health, those subject to domestic violence, discrimination related to their gender identity , unstable immigration status , and no recourse to public funds. Factors such as language barriers, literacy challenges, and physical health issues also contribute to this complexity. The scarcity of local authority accommodation, closure of non- commissioned accommodation and lack of affordable private rented sector housing have served to make the resolution of housing issues more complex and time- consuming as local authorities st ruggle to meet rising demand and manage communication with applicants and their advocates. 64 Page 8 of 33 2.16 Substantial challenges also continue to be faced by larger numbers of young people who have been recently awarded refugee status and therefore need to leave Home Office accommodation, with extremely limited housing options and delays in claiming benefit income exacerbating their housing pressures and risk of rough sleeping. When temporary accommodation is secured, it is often far from where service users have been living, making it more difficult for them to access their usual support services. 2.17 Despite these challenges, funded projects are working diligently to support service users who have increased vulnerabilities, for example: - I n LB Hackney, St Mungo’s HARP Connect project is working with community gang teams, probation and housing advice services. There has also been engagement with Kingston Churches Action on Homelessness (KCAH) and Spear in LB Kingston. - Caseworkers from the London Youth Gateway (LYG) project, led by New Horizon Youth Centre (NHYC) are having success in accessing privately rented accommodation, using the Rainbow Starter Pack funding that partner Albert Kennedy Trust ( AKT) offers. NHYC also launched a new partnership with Settle, supporting 15 young people with Care Experience to sustain their tenancies across several London local authorities. Settle is an award-winning charity that supports care experienced young people as they move into their first home. - The STAR Partnership, led by Shelter provided vital emergency response to residents impacted by the Spectrum building fire in LB Barking and Dagenham, which displaced over 80 residents, including many children . Shelter provided this support with the local authority and a team of housing rights workers. - I n response to the government’s policy on early prison releases, alongside Clinks, London Plus hosted an ‘Early Release from Prison and Homelessness Webinar alongside Clinks. Performance Management 2.18 Four Priority 1 projects are currently rated Green and one is rated Amber (see Table 2). 65 Page 9 of 33 2.19 The HARP Connect project, led by St Mungo’s remains Amber RAG rated for the sixth consecutive quarter, Low performance continues to be primarily driven by lower outcome figures for tenancy sustainment, and resolution of landlord/property issues to maintain tenancy. There are also low outcome achieved for referrals to employment services and the prevention of evictions. Two reasons have been given for low post-support engagement for clients, firstly, they prefer to live independently, without contact with the project, once accommodation has been secured and secondly, c lients may also sell their phones to raise money and cannot be contacted . Outcome figures have also been negatively impacted by project recruitment issues and subsequent staff vacancies. 2.20 Additionally, in regard to low employment referrals, project clients typically have multiple complex needs. Many are on Limited Capability for Work and Work - Related Activity (LCWRA) or receive Personal Independence Payments (PiP). These benefits exempt them from seeking employment, which aligns with the landlords’ preference for tenants who rely o n Universal Credit . Landlords have been reluctant to accept clients who are employed, preferring those on Universal Credit, where this benefit is paid directly to the landlord. 2.21 The government’s early release from prison policy has also resulted in reduced engagement with clients. Where support interventions are started with HARP clients, this support often ends ‘abruptly’ when clients are released from prison early, without notice to the HARP project support staff. 2.22 The wider St Mungo’s organisation has recently also secured the contract with the Ministry of Justice , to work with remand prisoners. Formerly, the HARP service filled this ‘support gap’, refocussing work with those on remand, as they were not receiving support under other prison schemes. St Mungo are currently unclear about what impact the St Mungo contract for supporting remand prisoners will have on the HARP service user numbers. 2.23 An action plan to improve performance has not resulted in an improved RAG rating. Interventions such as volunteer support from student social work placements, increased staff training in recording outcomes for eviction prevention and landlord/property issues resolution and a part time tenancy sustainment worker have not yet resulted in the HARP project improving meeting targets. 66 Page 10 of 33 London Councils officers will be meeting with the HARP project in next quarter to review the action plan, a borough engagement strategy, and also to explore any reprofiling options and how the new St Mungo’s funding affects the HARP project. 2.24 HARP Connect remains below the 85 per cent delivery threshold this quarter. Projects who are at risk of underdelivery will be kept informed throughout the second half of the programme. 67 Page 11 of 33 3 Priority 2: Sexual and Domestic Violence Delivery 3.1 The Committee allocated £12.2 million to nine projects to Priority 2: Tackling Sexual and Domestic Violence for 2022-202611. - One ( average annual value of £ 0.2 million) was delivering against specification 2.1: Prevention (working with children and young people)12. - Three (average annual value of £1.8 million) are delivering against specification 2.2: Advice, counselling and support to access services (for medium risk, post -independent Domestic/Sexual Violence Advocate (IDVA/ISVA) support and target groups not accessing general provision). - Two (average annual value of £0.3 million) are delivering against specification 2.3: Helpline services (advice and support, access to refuge provision). - One13 (average annual value of £0.84 million) is delivering against specification 2.4: Emergency Specialist Refuge Provision. - One (average annual value of £0.19 million) is delivering against specification 2.5: Improving the response to domestic and sexual abuse in London (working with domestic and sexual abuse organisations and professionals). - One (average annual value of £0.30 million) is delivering against specification 2.6: Services for people affected by harmful practices. 3.2 At the end of quarter ten, overall performance was five per cent below profile . Figures 2 and 3 provide further information at a service area level. O utcome targets have been met or been surpassed in four of the six service areas. Of the two service areas that have performed below target (2.2, 2.3), both are within the +/-15 per cent performance tolerance. 3.3 Service Area 2.1 – Prevention has exceeded the +15 per cent performance tolerance. As well as some historic overdelivery from the previous project which delivered under this service area due to intense work in certain boroughs such as Barnet, Islington, Lambeth and Ealing. The Ascent Prevention Service which 11 This figure includes service area 2.4 which was extended for one additional year under the 2017-22 programme to 31st March 2023 12 There is currently one project delivering under Service area 2.1, the project led by Against Violence and Abuse (AVA) ceased delivery in December 2023. 13 See footnote 11 68 Page 12 of 33 started in April 2024 has performed extremely well, delivering in/ engaging with boroughs that were not well served by the previous project such as Barking and Dagenham, Hillingdon and Kensington and Chelsea. 3.4 Service Area 2.4 has exceeded the +15 per cent performance buffer. This is due to cumulative overdelivery , where the project continues to exceed outcome targets for service users with greater feelings of safety, sustai ning lives/independence, safety plans, and access to specialist support services, both outreach and refuge services. There are also increasing numbers of service users who have been supported to achieve more stable immigration status, including Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) and who have successfully secured the Migrant Victims of Domestic Abuse Concession. 14 3.5 Service Area 2.5 – support services to the VAWG sector, has exceeded the +15 per cent performance tolerance. W omen’s Resource C entre, the sol e commission in this strand, attribute this to high demand for some of the training/ information sessions. The project is heavily using w ebinars which allow more people to attend events than if sessions were held in person. Additionally, the Partnership has not adhered to its workplan , postponing some acti vities and bringing forward others which has resulted in its delivery against target fluctuating. 14 Formerly known as the Destitution Domestic Violence Concession (DDVC), enables certain people who have leave to enter or remain as a partner to gain access to public funds following a relationship breakdown with their partner due to domestic abuse. 69 Page 13 of 33 Figure 2: Priority 2 Delivery against Profile Aggregate Outcomes by Service Area (2.1, 2.2, 2.3) 2022-26 Q1 to Q10: 2.1 Prevention 2.2 Advice, counselling, outreach, drop- in 2.3 Helpline and coordinated access to refuge provision15 Profile 20,483 33,962 123,062 Actual 24,226 30,698 112,437 Difference 3,743 -3264 -10,625 Variance 18% -10% -9% Average Annual Grant Value (£m) £0.23 £1.80 £0.31 Number of Providers 116 3 2 15 Refuge records high numbers of callers where their borough of residence is unknown, or unreported. Due to the nature of the service, domestic and sexual violence helplines where callers may be unwilling or too distressed to give this information. 16 Only one project is currently delivering under service area 2.1 : Healthy London, Healthy Relationships ceased delivery in Dec 2023 (Qtr. 7) 20,483 33,962 123,062 24,226 30,698 112,437 2.1 Prevention (children and young people) 2.2 Specialist advice, counselling and support 2.3 Helpline services Profile Actual 70 Page 14 of 33 Figure 3: Priority 2 Delivery against Profile Aggregate Outcomes per service area (2.5, 2.6) 2022-26 Q1 to Q10: 2.4 Emergency Specialist Refuge Provision 2.5 Support services SDV VCOs 2.6 Harmful practices (FGM, HBV, forced marriage, other) Profile 2,238 2,348 2,987 Actual 3,013 2,923 3,394 Difference 668 575 407 Variance 35% 24% 14% Average Annual Grant Value (£m) £0.84 £0.20 £0. 31 Number of Providers 1 1 1 3.6 Providers continue to support vulnerable and disadvantaged service users within the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. By end of quarter ten1718: - 88.9 per cent were female - 20.1 per cent were under 25 17 Based on self-declaration; users may declare more than one protected characteristic e.g., disability 18 These figures also include Year 6 (Qtrs. 1 to 4) of the Specialist emergency refuge provision which was extended for an additional year to 31 March 2023 2,238 2,348 2,9873,013 2,923 3,394 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 2.4 Emergency refuge accommodation 2.5 Support services SDV VCOs 2.6 Harmful practices (FRM, HBV, forced marriage, other) Profile Actual 71 Page 15 of 33 - 8.6 per cent were aged over 55 - 78.9 per cent were ethnic minorities19 - 38.8 per cent declared a disability - 10.4 per cent were LGBT20 - 2,515 people had no recourse to public funds (4.6 per cent) 3.7 London Councils funds organisations to deliver services across London and our monitoring returns include an assessment of equalities. the Grants team reports annually on the equalities performance of the programme. Policy and wider environment 3.8 The government has pledged to halve violence against women and girls within the next decade, a key element of the ‘Take Back our Streets’ mission. 3.9 In September, the Home Office introduced Raneem’s Law and the piloting of new Domestic Abuse Protection Orders (DAPOs), marking the first step in the government’s pledge. Raneem’s Law will embed domestic abuse specialists into 999 control rooms to advise on risk assessments and work with frontline officers to ensure a fast and appropriate response. It will be piloted in targeted police forces from early 2025. DAPOs aim to go further than existing protective orders, with measures such as making it a legal requirement for perpetrators to inform the police of any change in name or address, imposing electronic tagging, and requiring assessments for behaviour change programmes. 3.10 The Online Safety Act 2023 has strengthened protections by elevating the sharing of intimate images without consent to a priority offence, requiring social media firms to proactively remove and prevent the spread of this material. 3.11 Broad implementation timelines for the duty to collaborate under the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 have been published. Needs assessments and strategies will likely be due for publication in early 2027 at the soonest. In London, the GLA will 19 Includes Asian - all, Black - all, Chinese, Latin American, Middle Eastern, mixed ethnicity, white European, white Irish and white other 20 Lesbian, gay, bisexual, identify as trans or a person with trans history or declared other 72 Page 16 of 33 be the relevant local authority, collaborating with the five Integrated Care Boards and the PCC (the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime). 3.12 The Mayor will launch a refreshed VAWG Strategy in 2025 alongside the new Police and Crime Plan. Consultations, workshops and strategic planning sessions with partners and stakeholders will be held until the end of the year to inform these plans. 3.13 The consultation for the Mayor’s Domestic Abuse Safe Accommodation Strategy for 2024- 27 is open until the end of November. This strategy relates to the delivery of support in safe accommodation for victim-survivors of domestic abuse under Part 4 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. London Councils is preparing a response. 3.14 London Councils hosted a meeting for Borough Leaders, Elected Mayors, Cabinet Members for Community Safety and the MPS to discuss the political leadership role in tackling violence against women and girls. The meeting, held on 9 September, was the first subject area deep- dive for councillors, and these will be ad-hoc and in addition to the six-monthly meetings between Leaders and the Commissioner, established in light of the Casey Review recommendations. 3.15 Borough Leaders and Elected Mayors met with Sir Mark Rowley for the third of the twice-yearly meetings with the Commissioner on 9 October. This meeting was a valuable opportunity to review the progress of Casey Review recommendations and London Councils’ Asks and Offers. Key themes of the meeting included community engagement, strengthening partnership working, and tackling VAWG. 3.16 London Councils has established a group to bring together Asylum and VAWG leads from boroughs, aiming to share good practice, identify gaps, and explore strategies to prevent VAWG in asylum dispersal accommodation. Priority Two Updates 3.17 Service Providers aiming to tackle domestic and sexual violence under Priority 2 report a commonality in some of the issues raised, most deriving from the impact of the financial crisis which increasingly permeates multiple facets of service delivery. Ascent: Support Services to Organisations, led by Women’s Resource Centre (WRC), state that the most pressing issue for the majority of its membership is funding. In particular, VAWG services face uncertainty because 73 Page 17 of 33 of a lack of clarity about funding streams that are due to expire in March 2025. Providers report that the difficult funding landscape affects staff retention, the loss of expertise in the sector and creates the risk that smaller specialist services will close. Some services have already had to close due to funding issues. - Moreover, providers explain that the housing shortage has resulted in an increasing number of women, who are fleeing abuse, being placed in unsuitable or unsafe accommodation. The lack of housing prevents women from escaping abusive relationships as many are unable to live independently due to financial instability. - An increasing number of survivors are choosing between private therapy or food and heating. Some service users struggle with thoughts of suicide because they cannot access any form of support. 3.18 In addition, r educed capacity within the wider infrastructure is impacting the VAWG sector's ability to efficiently provide services. It has been reported that: - T here has been a surge in urgent referrals for interim counselling because of long National Health Service (NHS) waiting lists. - D elays receiving interventions from local authorities, when seeking Section 17 21 support for women and children with insecure immigration statuses , have necessitated frequent challenges from funded projects. - There is increased “back-and-forth” between housing, police, social care and domestic abuse services to determine who will take responsibility. Staff note a disparity across local authorities in terms of the grounds on which agencies agree or decline to help women fleeing domestic abuse. Furthermore, an increasing number of service users are on waiting lists for support from local D omestic Abuse services, and/or experiencing poor responses from local services, police or housing. This has resulted in the need to provide additional, more general DA support on top of specialist support. - The shortage of legal aid services, particularly immigration solicitors, continues to be a significant challenge for service providers as it delays their 21 A family with no recourse to public funds may be provided with accommodation and financial support by social services under section 17 of the Children Act 1989, when a child (under 18 years old) has been assessed by social services as being in need. 74 Page 18 of 33 ability to resolve immigration cases and legal proceedings. C lients may be left without the legal protections they need to navigate complex systems. 3.19 Funded projects report a severe lack of appropriate support for women who present with both mental health/trauma symptoms and substance use. The financial strain from the cost -of-living crisis also continues to create significant challenges for survivors, especially for women with no recourse to public funds, with children, mental health issues, and who are single women under 30 subject to benefit restrictions, and with complex needs. 3.20 Priority 2 projects have also observed a recurring trend of victims and survivors being hesitant to report alleged perpetrators to the police or engage with the Criminal Justice System. This reluctance is often influenced by many factors, including fear, trauma, mental health concerns, and societal or familial pressures, such as the fear of bringing "shame" upon their family or community or fear of being outed in the case of members of the LGBT+ community. 3.21 Providers report a rise in far-right racist violence targeting Muslim and minoritised communities across the UK, which has fostered a climate of fear and insecurity and the Deaf Domestic Abuse Service led by Signhealth reported t hat violence escalated during periods including t his summer’s European football tournament and the Olympic Games. Performance management 3.22 At the end of quarter ten, eight Priority 2 projects are rated Green, one is rated Amber (see Table 2). The Ascent Prevention Project signed its grant agreement in October and submitted its first monitoring report in quarter ten. (see paragraph 3.23) 3.23 Ascent Prevention Project , led by Women’s Resource Centre (WRC) commenced at its own risk in April 2024 before the grant agreement was finalised in September, and submitted its first performance data in quarter ten. The project is RAG rated Green. The project has been making significant inroads introducing the project across the boroughs, liaising with borough officers in VAWG and education teams. A co- ordinator was appointed in July who has added much needed coordination and tailored outreach to the project. The project has made 75 Page 19 of 33 progress in boroughs where there had been low take up under the previous project for example in Barking and Dagenham, the broader and refocused of fer has led to delivering a training session for Metropolitan police officers working in schools, a piece of work that the project hopes to replicate in other boroughs. Work has also been delivered in priority boroughs such as LB s Hillingdon and Kensington and Chelsea, Newham and Kingston and have received positive feedback. Bookings in other priority boroughs have been scheduled for quarter 11 and beyond. 3.24 The grants team continue to monitor the project closely and meet with project leadership regularly. From this positive start, the project should be able to balance the requirement to increase delivery in boroughs where there was previous low delivery, with the boroughs where the partners have an established relationship. 3.25 The London Refuges Data Collection Project, led by Women’s Aid Federation, is RAG rated Amber for the fourth consecutive quarter due to it receiving limited feedback f rom borough officers , which is the mechanism by which it demonstrates the success of several of its outcomes. Women’s Aid has outlined changes that it would like to make to address its underdelivery including: − Amending the target number for the outcome: Organisations providing VAWG services in London are able to signpost survivors through access to referrals and service information through Routes to Support (number of logins). The current target of logins is 5,500 logins per quarter. It is proposed that this is reduced to 4,000 per quarter so as to more accurately reflect the current use of Routes to Support from London services following a change in the functionality of the system , which now allows users to mark their refuge service as full for the week limiting the need for them to login to the system each day to update vacancies − Additionally, Women’s Aid will aim to capture feedback for its services by introducing feedback software such as Mentimeter and asking for feedback from borough representatives during meetings 4 Risk-based performance management ( RAG rating ) – Project level performance 76 Page 20 of 33 4.1 P roject performance is measured using the programme-wide Red-Amber-Green (RAG) rating system . The RAG rating system forms part of the Funding and Performance Management Framework agreed in July 2021 22. The methodology for the system is set out in Appendix 1 of this report. The rating system shows whether a project’s performance is going up, going down or is steady across quarters. 4.2 The RAG ratings to the end of quarter ten (April 2022 to September 2024) are set out in the table below. The Committee will note that 12 projects are rated Green and two are rated Amber . The majority of the projects continue to be oversubscribed working with vulnerable people who have multiple complex needs (in particular Mental ill health) which in turn lead to longer periods of support needed. Both Priorities continue to be affected by the scarcity of affordable available housing options in London which affects project’s ability to meet tenancy sustainment outcomes. Evidencing outcomes has improved since the last report to committee in July 2024, the grants team have worked hard with groups to develop new ways of evidencing success and this has worked well, particularly for the PLUS project led by Homeless Link. Officers continued to monitor action plans to improve delivery and will be carrying out monitoring visits . D etailed information on the RAG scoring methodology is provided in Appendix 1. 22 Grants Programme 2022-26: Prospectus for the new programme, Item 14, 14 July 2021 77 Page 21 of 33 Table 2: RAG Results Service area Lead Organisation Project Partners RAG Rating Q9 RAG Rating Q10 1.1 Shelter STAR Partnership (Supporting Tenancies, Accommodation and Reconnections) Thames Reach, Stonewall Housing, Praxis Green ↔ Green ↘ 1.1 St Mungo Community Housing Association HARP Connect (Housing Advice, Resettlement and Prevention Connect) n/a Amber↔ Amber ↓ 1.2 St Mungo Community Housing Association Streetlink London Advice Line n/a Green ↔ Green ↔ 1.3 New Horizon Youth Centre London Youth Gateway Depaul UK, Stonewall Housing, Galop, Albert Kennedy Trust, Shelter, Praxis Green ↗ Green ↔ 1.4 Homeless Link London PLUS Shelter Green ↑ Green ↘ 2.1 Women’s Resource Centre (WRC) Ascent Prevention Service FORWARD, IMECE Women's Centre, Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation (IKWRO), Jewish Women's Aid, Latin American Women's Rights Service (LAWRS) Not reported 23 Green 23 Project was not in grant agreement at time of reporting 78 Page 22 of 33 Service area Lead Organisation Project Partners RAG Rating Q9 RAG Rating Q10 2.2 Women and Girls’ Network Ascent: Advice and Counselling Ashiana Network, Asian Women's Resource Centre (AWRC), Chinese Information and Advice Centre, EACH (counselling and support), IMECE Women's Centre, Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation (IKWRO), Jewish Women's Aid, Kurdish and Middle Eastern Women's Organisation, Latin American Women's Rights Service (LAWRS), Nia, Rape and Sexual Abuse Support Centre (RASASC), Rights of Women, Solace Women's Aid, Southall Black Sisters, Women's Trust Green ↔ Green ↔ 2.2 Galop The LGBT+ Domestic Abuse Partnership (DAP) Stonewall Housing, London Friend, Green ↗ Green ↔ 2.2 SignHealth Deaf Domestic Abuse Service N/A Green ↔ Green ↔ 2.3 Refuge Pan-London Domestic and Sexual Violence Helplines Project Women and Girls’ Network, Rape and Sexual Abuse Support Centre (RASASC), Respect Green ↔ Green ↔ 2.3 Women’s Aid London Refuges Data Collection Project N/A Amber↑ Amber ↓ 2.4 Ashiana Network Specialist Refuge Network Ashiana Network, Solace Women's Aid, The Nia Project, Iranian and Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation (IKWRO) Green ↓ Green ↑ 2.5 Women’s Resource Centre Ascent: Support Services to Organisations Respect (perpetrators), Imkaan, Rights of Women, Against Violence, Abuse and Women and Girls Network Green ↔ Green ↔ 2.6 Asian Women’s Resource Centre Ascent Ending Harmful Practices Partnership Al-Aman (division of Richmond Fellowship), Ashiana Network, FORWARD, IMECE Women's Centre, Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation (IKWRO), Latin American Women's Rights Service (LAWRS), Southall Black Sisters, Women and Girls Network Green↗ Green ↔ 79 Page 23 of 33 5 Value for Money 5.1 London Councils Grants Programme administers public money on behalf of, and with, the London boroughs and therefore must ensure value for money - t he optimal use of resources to achieve intended outcomes. The National Audit Office model of value for money focuses on three E’s: − Economy: minimising the cost of resources used or required (inputs); − Efficiency: the relationship between the output from goods or services and the resources to produce them; and − Effectiveness: the relationship between the intended and actual results of public spending (outcomes) 5.2 The Funding and Performance Management Framework (agreed by members in July 2021) sets out the controls used to ensure value for money for the programme. This includes checks on audited accounts and a review of annual budgets. As agreed by Committee, a full -cost-recovery-approach is being used for the 2022- 26 programme. This will require a new approach to annual budgeting, with projects adjusting budgets annually to match changes in costs, within the four year budget envelope. 5.3 London Councils operates a robust monitoring system to ensure figures reported are verifiable; the work funded projects undertake has a far wider benefit and impact than is often shown through the figures. For example, a frontline organisation may support a person through multiple interventions across the whole partnership. A second-tier project may record work with one organisation but provide services to high numbers of their staff across separate departments or branches and so have a much greater reach in upskilling the voluntary and community sector than the figures indicate. 5.4 The reporting portal has been live since July 2022 and the funded projects submit quarterly reports via this medium. The team continues to look for opportunities to streamline reporting, while balancing that with the need to adequately monitoring performance and ensure pan-London Delivery. 80 Page 24 of 33 5.5 Dashboards: The portal has enabled the development of both a public dashboard on the London Councils website containing high level information about the 2022- 26 programme to date, as well as a more detailed borough dashboard which enables Members and borough officers to see more about the work and outcomes achieved both in their borough , and pan- London by the current programme. This dashboard is updated before every Grants committee meeting, enabling more up to date information to be accessed throughout the year. We continue to welcome member and officer feedback. 5.6 The team is also planning a series of lunchtime sessions with the funded projects, it will be an informal presentation and question and answer session with a group and an opportunity to hear about their services outside of grants committee. An invitation for early December will be sent out to Members and Borough grants officers shortly. 5.7 The team continues to encourage partnership and cross priority working as it led to better outcomes for service users on the previous programme. The funded groups meet quarterly with a view to share good practice and network, hear from other London Councils teams such as policy officers and LIIA 24 regarding developments regarding care experienced service users. Where relevant, funded projects work towards appropriate quality standards , and involve project participants in the design and adaptation of the projects. 5.8 I nformation and data provided through the programme has been used by the policy team at London Councils, and by other stakeholders, to inform the strategic response to these priority areas. 6 Recommendations 6.1 The Grants Committee is asked to note: a) outcomes at priority level: i) Priority 1, combatting homelessness, overall is one per cent above profile to quarter ten 24 London Innovation and Improvement Alliance 81 Page 25 of 33 ii) Priority 2, tackling sexual and domestic violence, overall is five per cent below profile to quarter ten b) the number of interventions delivered in the relevant periods: i) Priority 1, combatting homelessness – 26,656 ii) Priority 2, tackling sexual and domestic violence – 176,691 c) project level performance, using the Red, Amber, Green (RAG) performance management system (explained in Appendix 1): i) 12 projects are rated Green, 2 are Amber, d) the borough maps (Appendix 2) e) the project delivery information and contact details (Appendix 3), produced as a separate resource to provide members with a directory of services, with up- to-date contact information, as well as an update on performance. f) the new borough dashboard which includes delivery information on activities and outcomes by borough Appendix 1 RAG Rating Methodology Appendix 2 Borough Maps Appendix 3 Project Delivery Information and Contact Details Financial Implications for London Councils The London Councils Grants Committee considered proposals for expenditure in 2024- 25 at its meeting in November 2023, and Leaders’ Committee agreed a budget at its meeting in December 2023. Legal Implications for London Councils None Equalities Implications for London Councils 82 Page 26 of 33 London Councils’ funded services provide support to people within all the protected characteristics (Equality Act 2010), and specific targets groups highlighted as particularly hard to reach or more affected by the issues being tackled. Funded organisations are also required to submit equalities monitoring data, which can be collated across the grants scheme to provide data on the take up of services and gaps in provision to be addressed. The grants team reviews this annually. Background Documents Performance of Grants Programme 2022-26 - Item 12, 18 July 2024 Performance Management Update: Against Violence and Abuse (AVA ) – Item 7, 27 March 2024 New Proposal for Service Area 2.1: Prevention – Item 8, 27 March 2024 Proposed Evaluation of the 2022-26 Grants Programme – Item 10, 27 March 2024 Refuge Provision Update - Item 7, 15 March 2023 Refuge Provision Programme Panel and Award meeting, Grants Committee Executive, 20 January 2023. 2022-2026 Pan-London Grants Programme – Recommendations for award of grant, Item 8, 24 November 2021 Grants Programme 2022- 26: Planning and Implementation - Funding and Performance Management Framework, Item 6, 17 March 2021 83 RAG Rating Appendix 1 Page 27 of 33 London Councils officers report quarterly to the Grants Committee on the performance of the grants programme, based on the Funding and Performance Management Framework agreed by Grants Committee in July 2021. The cornerstone of this at project level is a Red, Amber or Green (RAG) rating of all projects: Green 80-100 points Amber 55-79 points RED 0-54 points The RAG rating is made up of: • Performance – Delivery of outcomes and new users - 70 percent • Quality - beneficiary satisfaction25, 10 per cent • Compliance - timeliness and accuracy of reporting, responsiveness and risk management, 20 per cent. The requirement to meet at least 80 points to ac hieve a Green rating was agreed at the March 2018 G rants Committee, following a review by officers to ensure that the RAG rating system was appropriately highlighting performance issues. The framework also sets out a risk -based approach to monitoring in which levels of monitoring are varied dependent on the RAG score of the project. Performance change indicators (changes from one reporting quarter to the next) ↑ an increase of five or more percentage points ↗ an increase of more than two percentage points but less than five ↔ The score has remained relatively static with no significant change allowing for minor fluctuation between -two and +two percentage points ↘ a decrease over two percentage points but less than five ↓ a decrease of five or more percentage points 25 This previously included a self-assessment but will now integrated into a monitoring visit. 84 Borough Maps Appendix 2 Page 28 of 33 Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness actual distribution to September 2024 Boroughs City of London 0.59% Barking & Dagenham 3.46% Barnet 2.75% Bexley 1.48% Brent 3.90% Bromley 2.15% Camden 3.75% Croydon 4.90% Ealing 3.36% Enfield 3.18% Greenwich 2.17% Hackney 5.86% Hammersmith & Fulham 2.32% Haringey 3.74% Harrow 1.10% Havering 1.12% Hillingdon 1.91% Hounslow 2.36% Islington 4.11% Kensington & Chelsea 1.69% Kingston upon Thames 0.88% Lambeth 6.29% Lewisham 4.04% Merton 1.88% Newham 6.42% Redbridge 2.22% Richmond upon Thames 0.54% Southwark 6.63% Sutton 0.71% Tower Hamlets 4.38% Waltham Forest 4.37% Wandsworth 2.56% Westminster 3.16% Legend Low (>=) (<) High Occurrences 0% 1% (4) 1% 2% (6) 2% 3% (7) 3% 4% (7) 4% 10% (9) 85 Borough Maps Appendix 2 Page 29 of 33 Priority 2: Tackling Sexual and Domestic Violence - actual distribution of delivery to September 2024 Boroughs City of London 0.83% Barking & Dagenham 2.19% Barnet 7.34% Bexley 2.23% Brent 4.27% Bromley 2.20% Camden 3.26% Croydon 4.67% Ealing 4.54% Enfield 3.74% Greenwich 2.17% Hackney 3.09% Hammersmith & Fulham 2.73% Haringey 3.09% Harrow 2.37% Havering 2.37% Hillingdon 2.42% Hounslow 3.29% Islington 4.16% Kensington & Chelsea 1.75% Kingston upon Thames 1.10% Lambeth 4.45% Lewisham 4.08% Merton 1.68% Newham 3.14% Redbridge 4.09% Richmond upon Thames 1.34% Southwark 4.14% Sutton 1.34% Tower Hamlets 3.32% Waltham Forest 3.14% Wandsworth 2.57% Westminster 2.91% Legend Low (>=) (<) High Occurrences 0% 1% (1) 1% 2% (5) 2% 3% (10) 3% 4% (8) 4% 10% (9) 86 Performance of Commissions: April 2022 – September 2024 Appendix 3 See separately produced Appendix 3 87 London Councils Grants Committee Item 6 – Appendix 3 London Councils Grants Programme 2022 to 2026 Performance of Commissions April 2022 – September 2024 (Includes contact details for each project) 88 Page 1 of 32 Shelter Project name: STAR Partnership Priority: Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness Specification: 1.1 Prevention and targeted intervention Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £926,680 Delivery partners: Praxis, Stonewall Housing, Thames Reach Shelter is leading the specialist STAR (Supporting Tenancies, Accommodation and Resettlement) Partnership. Our aim is to prevent Londoners from becoming homeless, addressing underlying issues and barriers that put target groups at risk of homelessness. The STAR Partnership will deliver the following activities: - Referral into the service through multiple points of access, enabling pan-London reach. - London-wide targeted engagement and promotion, which is relevant and accessible to priority groups in all 33 boroughs. - Support to directly access accommodation, including crisis accommodation, social housing and the private rented sector. - Intensive support, including skills training, money management and practical help to enable families and individuals to maintain tenancies. - Personal resilience and independence planning to secure a long-term and healthy - Specialist provision for key target groups who face additional barriers to accessing housing, such as those with NRPF status, LGBTQ+ and minority ethnic communities. Our intended impact is to: - Prevent homelessness; through immediate housing advice, support to access crisis accommodation, advice, advocacy and casework to prevent eviction. - Help people find the right accommodation for them; through accommodation searches, accessing funds and tenancy brokerage, advice and advocacy to resolve any issues with accommodation and resettlement support. - Help people to maintain accommodation long-term; building financial resilience and providing advice and guidance to identify and resolve any issues arising in tenancy. - Address underlying issues that increase personal resilience and contribute to homelessness; through immigration advice and casework for people with NRPF, support to access the right local services to improve mental and physical health and improve confidence and ability to self-help. Shelter provides specialist housing advice and casework and resilience support for people who are facing additional barriers, e.g. mental health issues, disabilities. Thames Reach offers personalised, intensive face-to-face support particularly those with high complex needs and a gender-specific service to women who face multiple exclusions. Stonewall Housing provides tailored, specialist housing advice and support for LGBTQ+ people. Praxis provides specialist, accredited immigration advice and casework for people who have NRPF and/or insecure immigration status and are at risk of homelessness. Contact Details Referrals Simone Strachan (Strategic London Lead) Simone_Strachan@shelter.org.uk Stanley Harvey (Service Manager) stanley_harvey@shelter.org.uk https://england.shelter.org.uk/get_help/local_services/london STAR Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mT4Q- Z9yKnM&list=PLrybnVaUKJhDptYtJIckbIfN77mXMyIQT&index=1 89 Page 2 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 Q10 Profile Delivered Number of new people 10120 8626 Number of people assisted to obtain crisis or intermediate short-term accommodation 782 754 Number of people assisted to prevent eviction. 932 767 Number of people assisted to obtain suitable, stable settled accommodation by accommodation type - PRS, social housing, shared, family or friend accommodation 962 997 Number of people assisted to sustain tenancies/accommodation for six months 622 565 Number of people assisted to sustain tenancies/accommodation for 12 months 392 317 Number of people with landlord/property issues resolved (for example, disrepair, required adaptations) and/or able to maintain or supported to obtain alternative tenancy 15,97 1,485 Number of people with improved mental health 1,112 1,291 Number of people with improved physical health 554 612 Number of people with improved life skills 276 662 Number of people referred to employment support 383 278 People able to access immigration advice that will impact on their ability to access suitable accommodation 356 520 People supported through immigration casework to achieve recognised status that supports right to rent within the UK 220 221 People receiving immigration advice and casework are able to access complementary specialist advice and support from the partnership 250 181 Eviction prevention , sustained tenancies , landlord/property resolution and employment support referral: underdelivery continues to be primarily driven by lower outcome figures for tenancy sustainment, and resolution of landlord/property issues to maintain tenancy. There are also low outcome attainment figures for referrals to employment services and the prevention of evictions. Outcome figures have also been negatively impacted by project recruitment issues and subsequent vacant posts. Additionally, in regard to low employment referrals, project clients typically have complex needs, with limited capacity to work. The project however is reviewing London programs and placements to enhance employment referral pathways. Shelter continues to make attempts to use workshops to address invalid section 21s and engage with housing providers to encourage referrals that may lead to eviction prevention. L ow tenancy sustainment outcomes is an issue affecting funded projects across Priority 1 and 2 and has been discussed with London Councils officers and funded commissions. 90 Page 3 of 32 St Mungo’s Project name: HARP Connect Priority: Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness Specification: 1.1 Prevention and targeted intervention Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £328,937 Delivery partners: N/A HARP Connect supports prison leavers at all stages of their journey through the criminal justice system. Starting in prison to the day of release and in the community, we provide expert housing advice and trauma informed targeted interventions to prevent homelessness. Project Activities: - Identify prison leavers aged 25+, who are serving short-term sentences (less than one year), on licence recalls or on remand, and who are at risk of homelessness. - Undertake thorough housing/need and risk assessments and provide comprehensive action plans to address them. - Provide interventions to save existing tenancies at risk. - Support to access temporary and long-term accommodation, including viewings and applications. - Offer of meet at gate on day of release where required. - Support with benefits, bills, furnishings and other essentials. - Work with housing providers, local authorities and private landlords to provide ongoing tenancy support. - Help service users gain personal resilience through referrals to other appropriate community services and wider St Mungo’s services (including our specialist mental health, drug and alcohol rehabilitation, financial advice, ETE (Education, Training and Employment) through our Recovery College and Employment team. - Provision of a service user Move on Fund to enhance settled accommodation outcomes among an often financially disadvantaged target group, to be used towards one-off essential accommodation expenses, including rental deposits. - Promote the service through existing relationships with prisons, probation teams, local authority teams and voluntary sector organisations. Contact Details Referrals Samantha Cowie, Head of Criminal Justice samantha.cowie@mungos.org 020 3856 6000 3 Thomas More Square, 5th Floor, Tower Hill London E1W 1YW www.mungos.org Shiyamali Ankah (HARP, Service Manager) Shiyamali.Ankah@MUNGOS.ORG All referrals must be made through a secure email address. Please contact HARP at harpconnect@mungosofs.cjsm.net Website: https://www.mungos.org/our- services/offender-services/ 91 Page 4 of 32 Outcome 2022-2027 Q10 Profile Delivered Number of new people 3213 2653 Number of people assisted to obtain crisis or intermediate short- term accommodation 1250 1,103 Number of people assisted to prevent eviction. 1230 721 Number of people assisted to obtain suitable, stable settled accommodation by accommodation type - PRS, social housing, shared, family or friend accommodation 700 668 Number of people assisted to sustain tenancies/accommodation for six months1 474 263 Number of people assisted to sustain tenancies/accommodation for 12 months 2 378 98 Number of people with landlord/property issues resolved (for example, disrepair, required adaptations) and/or able to maintain or supported to obtain alternative tenancy 530 352 Number of people with improved mental health 600 649 Number of people with improved physical health 600 536 Number of people with improved life skills 900 750 Number of people referred to employment support 200 151 Underdelivery: Tenancy sustainment: Tenancy sustainment outcomes remain challenging with clients often disengaging from the project after tenancies have been secured and typically changing contact information. The part time Tenancy Sustainment Worker is trying to redress this through conducting home visits and offering client involvement activities. Eviction Prevention: Project staff have been unclear about how the eviction outcomes should be captured, with enhanced induction training, staff will be better able to record eviction prevention evidence. Landlord/Property Issues Resolved : There has been some improvement in outcomes for landlord/property issues resolution, due to project staff ensuring that landlords are aware that HARP staff can be contacted should tenancy issues arise Referral to Employment Support: In regard to the employment support outcome, project clients often have complex needs, with benefit dependency, making them exempt from seeking employment. Focussed employment preparation work however will continue to be offered to clients, to improve their employment opportunities. Due to the ongoing underdelivery, the HARP service is under an action plan, please see main Performance of Grants Programme Report para 2.19) 1 Reporting started in Q3 2 Reporting started in Q5 92 Page 5 of 32 St Mungo’s Project name: StreetLink London Advice Line Priority: Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness Specification: 1.2 Prevention and targeted intervention for rough sleepers Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £103,255 Delivery partners: N/A The StreetLink London Advice line is a telephone advice service for people who are sleeping rough, or at immediate risk of doing so, in London. The service aims to support people to resolve their homelessness rapidly through advice and advocacy work, and by connecting people with services that can help. This includes referring them into accommodation. The service will reduce rough sleeping by: - Providing advice to service users about routes out of rough sleeping - Providing housing options advice - Supporting reconnection with family and friends - Facilitating access to accommodation - Facilitating access to support services including mental and physical health, domestic and sexual abuse - Facilitating access to specialist advice around debt and finance (incl. benefits), legal and immigration issues Contact Details Referrals Stephanie Ratcliffe, Head of Migrant and Advice services stephanie.ratcliffe@mungos.org Lula Main, StreetLink London Advice Line Service Manager Lula.Main@mungos.org 3 Thomas More Square, Tower Hill, London E1W 1YW www.mungos.org streetlinklondon@mungos.org (We do not accept referrals from external agencies/organisations) 93 Page 6 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 Q10 Profile Delivered Number of new people 670 612 Number of people assisted to obtain crisis or intermediate short- term accommodation 238 238 Number of people assisted to obtain suitable, stable settled accommodation by accommodation type - PRS, social housing, shared, family or friend accommodation 50 57 People successfully referred to a support service that assists them to obtain accommodation i.e. Crisis, legal support, street outreach 40 58 People successfully connected to health support e.g. hospital homeless discharge team, Groundswell 5 22 People successfully connected to a rough sleeping street outreach team 50 106 People successfully referred to ongoing case work support i.e. Crisis case management, Stonewall 20 47 People successfully referred to benefits and debt support 70 88 People are better able to resolve their homelessness status via connection to the local authority 300 368 People with increased knowledge of the options available to prevent or end their rough sleeping 640 596 People successfully referred to risk of harm support services i.e. IDVA, Victim Support 10 22 People successfully referred to legal support 20 39 People successfully referred to immigration support 10 10 Overdelivery: Streetlink has overdelivered for several reasons: The figures include historic data from busy periods; for example, the Severe Weather Emergency Protocol (SWEP) when activated generated increased demand during the winter periods. Officers note that several of the targets are small, so a slight increase/ decrease causes sizeable percentage fluctuations. Moreover, the target service users tend to have high need levels requiring extended time to reach the desired outcomes. Increased living costs h ave resulted in more demand, for example the number of people requiring benefits, debt and legal support has gone up. StreetLink, has amended its target group to prioritise vulnerable adult's which is expected to help reduce overdelivery. 94 Page 7 of 32 New Horizon Youth Centre Project name: London Youth Gateway (LYG) Priority: Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness Specification: 1.3 Prevention and targeted intervention for young people Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £939,217 Delivery partners: akt, Depaul UK, Galop, Praxis, Shelter, Stonewall Housing The London Youth Gateway (LYG) makes sure that young Londoners facing homelessness are safe and supported while we help them to achieve long-term stability in terms of housing, income, health and migration status. The LYG targets young people more likely to face homelessness but less likely to find the help they need, for whom boroughs do not have a main homelessness duty and/or for whom it is not cost-effective to commission local services. We offer a genuinely pan-London service, supporting young people through brief interventions or long-term support via in-person and remote delivery. Project activities: - Our LYG portal functions as a central point of access that sits at the heart of our delivery. Young people can self-refer via an online referral form and free telephone line and are seamlessly linked to the most appropriate LYG partner or external agency. - Aside from the portal, we run a specialist LGBTQ+ entry point and a dedicated under-25s advice line for young people requiring help with landlord or tenancy problems, enabling us to deliver crucial interventions and support at scale. - Young people receive clear information, advice and advocacy to prevent homelessness, navigate complex systems, and/or access mainstream services - We offer an integrated, youth-specific package to young people needing longer-term support to access or sustain accommodation, especially where boroughs do not have a statutory duty, including: o Long-term housing advice/casework/advocacy o Comprehensive physical and mental health services o Life skills development and independent living skills o Employability support o Income maximisation and benefits support o Specialist immigration advice Responsive to London’s diversity, the LYG tailors its services to young people most vulnerable to homelessness, including young people from minoritised communities, LGBTQ+ young people, young women, neurodiverse young people and those with no recourse to public funds. Contact Details Referrals Kate Allen, LYG Programme Manager kate.allen@nhyouthcentre.org.uk 07947 906064 68 Chalton St, London, NW1 1JR www.nhyouthcentre.org.uk http://www.londonyouthgateway.org.uk/get-help/ 95 Page 8 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 Q10 Profile Delivered Number of new people 10,236 9097 Number of people assisted to obtain crisis or intermediate short- term accommodation 1,326 1,575 Number of people assisted to obtain suitable, stable settled accommodation by accommodation type - PRS, social housing, shared, family or friend accommodation 1,076 1,162 Number of people assisted to sustain tenancies/accommodation for six months3 353 126 Number of people assisted to sustain tenancies/accommodation for 12 months 4 162 42 Number of people with landlord/property issues resolved (for example, disrepair, required adaptations) and/or able to maintain or supported to obtain alternative tenancy 303 315 Number of people with improved mental health 1,322 1,687 Number of people with improved physical health 600 672 Number of people with improved life skills 1,055 1,708 Number of people referred to education and training opportunities 509 514 Number of people referred to employment support 909 635 Young people supported to resolve/better able to manage immigration issues 270 239 Tenancy sustainment: The scarcity of local authority accommodation, closure of non- commissioned accommodation and lack of affordable private rented sector housing, which impacts disproportionately on young people in homelessness/housing need have led to lower than profiled outcome figures for securing long term housing solutions. Project staff, due to young people’s housing needs have had to prioritise support to young people who are in acute and emergency rough sleeping crisis (due to high rough sleeping rates) rather than concentrated work on re- engaging with young people (after casework has closed) for tenancy sustainment confirmations. Employment Support : Project staff vacancies have impacted employment support referral figures. Although support for young people has needed to focus on new users in acute crisis, a newly recruited Jobs, Education and Training worker should help to increase outcome achievement figures for employment referrals. 3 Reporting started in Q3 4 Reporting started in Q5 96 P age 9 of 32 Homeless Link Project name: PLUS Project Priority: Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness Specification: 1.4 Improving the response to homelessness in London (working with housing and homelessness organisations and professionals) Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £173,377 Delivery partners: Shelter - The PLUS Project aims to strengthen the sector through enhanced collaboration, particularly through improved two-way relationships between LAs and local VCSs, bri ng r elated sectors (e.g., health, social care, housing) together to better understand, define and i dentify their role in preventing homelessness, support providers and commissioners to be responsive to changing patterns of need, policy, legislation and equalities issues and providers to recognise differing needs. To build capacity of providers to be more sustainable, improve pathways between statutory and VCS and improve sector staff wellbeing and resilience, to avoid burn-out and retain expertise in the sector. Activities will include: - In-depth support to boroughs delivered through a consistent learning pathway model. This will including an initial systematic review and analysis of the LA and local VCS sector to identify current processes, practice, collaborations and gaps, informing an evidence-based bespoke development plan of support and training - Rapid review and assessment of organisations, to obtain baseline data on support needs, to guide programme and assess progress towards programme aims - Linking boroughs with similar needs and challenges to facilitate shared learning, peer network development, peer support, and economies of scal e - P roviding specialist advice, support, training and information, at the pan-London, sub- regional and local level to meet the range of needs - Supporting and improving working relationships between the VCS, boroughs and l andlords through targeted and tailored activities - Improving collaboration and communication between the homelessness, employment, domestic/sexual violence, substance use, and health sectors through relationship br okerage, bespoke support and peer networks - Provision of policy, law and research information - R esponsive special initiatives responding to changing needs for the duration of the grant - Targeted wellbeing and resilience support through collaboration events and bespoke t raining. Contact Details Referrals Jeremy White– Head of National Partnerships jeremy.white@homelesslink.org.uk London.Plus@homelesslink.org.uk 07957483844 Homeless Link, 2-5 Minories, London EC3N 1BJ Marie Stewart-Strategic Lead, London Marie.Stewart@homelesslink.org.uk Contact London.Plus@homelesslink.org.uk or call Jeremy White on 07957483844 to discuss any specific queries and sign-up to contact list for all training and events. In depth borough support will be dependent on an Expression of Interest process and advertised to all boroughs via key contacts. 97 Page 10 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 Q10 Profile Delivered Number of new organisations 378 443 Organisations with increased knowledge of housing and homelessness legislation, specifically the Homeless Reduction Act 2017 and the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 301 285 Number of organisations with increased knowledge of policy and best practice in service delivery 230 302 Number of organisations with improved working relationships with local authority statutory services. 160 192 Number of voluntary sector organisations able to demonstrate increased working relationships (with landlords, housing professionals, other local services) 269 264 Number of landlords/housing professionals with increased knowledge of housing and equalities law 60 341 Number of landlords/housing professionals with increased knowledge of housing and homelessness legislation, policy and best practice in client support 150 380 Number of organisations with an increased understanding of funding opportunities and application procedures 304 196 Number of organisations with improved ability to evidence and demonstrate the impact of their services 50 167 Number of organisations with improved ability to develop partnerships/collaborations to improve services. 185 198 By the end of year 1, VSC and community organisations report improved mental health, wellbeing, and greater resilience 60 63 Local Authority / organisations offer improved homelessness and housing advice services following a systemic review 7 1 Increased understanding of funding opportunities/application procedures: Historical underdelivery is reflected in lower than profiled achievement for funding opportunities/application procedures, despite there being over delivery at quarter 10. The action plan established to address underdelivery has resulted in increased outcome achievement across the project there has also been improvements in capturing feedback which has enabled the project to better record outcomes and evidence participant’s feedback. Systemic Review: This work has been affected by staffing capacity within boroughs and the project. Variance however should improve through hosting workshops on systems practice. 98 Page 11 of 32 Women’s Resource Centre (WRC) Project name: Ascent Prevention Service Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.1 Prevention (children and young people) One year Grant Amount: £234,365 (Delivery commenced in April 2024)5 Delivery partners: FORWARD, IMECE Women's Centre, Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation (IKWRO), Jewish Women's Aid, Latin American Women's Rights Service (LAWRS), The Ascent Prevention project is part of the London VAWG Consortium’s strategy to tackle and prevent VAWG across London. The project aims to prevent domestic abuse and sexual violence amongst children and young people, boys and young men as well as girls and young women. The project responds to the need for early engagement of boys and young men in order to challenge ideas and behaviours that lead to violence and abuse. The project aims to empower professionals and young people to develop awareness and behaviours that embed the importance of healthy relationships and tackle attitudes and beliefs that cause violence and abuse; the approach focuses on safeguarding, capacity building and learning. The Ascent Prevention Project’s approach is in line with Ofsted’s Review of Sexual Abuse in Schools (2021) which recommends a whole school approach. The whole school approach works with your setting to support your Relationships, Sex and Health Education curriculum. The intended outcome is that children and young people will have the skills, knowledge, and resources to create healthy relationships, reducing the prevalence of relationship violence and abuse across London. Engaging the professionals that work with children and young people through training and workshops will help to foster culture changes within schools (and other youth settings). The training will enable professionals to improve their safeguarding responses and increase their capacity to minimise harm and identify early opportunities to tackle violence and address abuse. This project will deliver face to face work with students in secondary schools and, where opportunities arise, colleges and other youth settings in targeted London boroughs, within a Pan-London generic offer. It has a needs-led approach, meaning delivery may differ in schools and different boroughs. Meaningful change and outcomes may require more in-depth work with a smaller number of pupils, or introductory work with a school may be about awareness raising thr ough an assembly. The Prevention Coordinator will co- ordinate working with borough representatives and London Councils officers to identify and engage schools in each borough. Delivery will be centred around their needs, rather than a single generic offer. Contact Details Referrals Deborah Oyelakin Prevention Co-ordinator deborah@wrc.org.uk Referrals for the programme can be made via the Prevention Co-ordinator 5 New Proposal for Service Area 2.1: Prevention – Item 8, 27 March 2024 99 Page 12 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 from Qtr. 96 Profile Delivered Number of new people 1126 1267 Number of people who can identify the components of healthy relationships 790 740 Number of professionals reporting increased confidence in addressing issues with children and young people 82 102 Number of people who know where to get support 790 840 Number of professionals reporting increased knowledge and awareness 82 75 Number of people who can identify at least one warning sign of domestic or sexual abuse 790 731 Number of professionals reporting increased commitment to ensuring the work is embedded 0 0 Underdelivery: Following the award of one year funding in March 2024, the project started at its own risk in April and this is their first performance data. The project has spent its first two quarters introducing the project and rebuilding relationships across the boroughs to establish the project and increase engagement. A project co-ordinator was appointed in July and is providing essential co ordination and tailored outreach to boroughs. In these first two quarters, the work has focussed on introducing the new service to boroughs, prioritising boroughs that previously received no/low service from the previous project funded under Service Area 2.1. The project has been undertaking outreach across London and have scheduled bookings for Quarters 11 and 12 . The co-ordinator is also reviewing how the project records its outcomes and surveys users. 6 This project started in Q9 of the 2022-26 programme, and is funded for one year ending 31 March 2025 100 Page 13 of 32 Against Violence and Abuse (AVA) Project name: Healthy London, Healthy Relationships (HLHR) Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.1 Prevention (children and young people) Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £202,580 (delivery ended in December 2023) Delivery partners: FORWARD, IMECE Women's Centre, Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation (IKWRO), Jewish Women's Aid, Latin American Women's Rights Service (LAWRS), Women and Girls Network The ‘Healthy London, Healthy Relationships’ (HLHR) project aims to prevent VAWG against/amongst Children and Young People (CYP), empower both professionals and young people to develop sustainable organisational structures and cultures that embed the importance of healthy relationships and tackle attitudes and beliefs that cause VAWG. This will be done through a system wide, multi- agency approach that focuses on safeguarding, capacity building and learning. This project will consist of a hybrid online/face- to-face offer focused on a holistic, whole schools approach, aims to allow flexibility in delivery to increase its potential reach (and allow scalability) and focus the intensive, bespoke support to children and areas with the most need. Included are materials and tools allowing for its use in non- school settings such as community and faith groups. Our tiered model consists of four key activities: • 1. Development and maintenance of accessible London specific HLHR Hub based on existing “Ask AVA” resource o Comprehensive prevention toolkit including age- appropriate resources for school settings (5-18) o Co-produced resources and tools with experts by experience o Lesson plans, activities for a comprehensive RSE (in- line with Gov guidelines) o Localised referral pathways, signposting for support for children who disclose. • 2. Training and learning for schools/youth organisations including interactive training, specialised e-learning, networking/troubleshooting. • 3. Bespoke support for schools which will be assigned through a triaged system according to need based on the key priorities and vulnerabilities. Applications will be allocated to partner organisations based on specialism, capacity and community connections. • 4. Outreach work for all the above including whole school approach Champions to promote the work through borough pathways and networks; and foster new partnerships such as with the National Education Union, other trade unions, wider community leaders 101 Page 14 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 Qtrs. 1-77 Profile Delivered Number of new people 5,685 10,309 Number of people who can identify the components of healthy relationships 2,181 5,060 Number of people who can identify at least one warning sign of domestic or sexual abuse 2,181 5,244 Number of people enabled to make positive choices for themselves 2,181 3,072 Number of people who know where to get support 2,181 4,252 Number of people who communicate with their peers in a way that reflects a change in knowledge and attitudes about healthy relationships 1,210 1,859 Number of professionals reporting increased confidence in addressing issues with children and young people 5,340 1,022 Number of professionals reporting increased knowledge, awareness and commitment to ensuring the work is embedded 2,670 1,229 Number of schools with the learning incorporated into policies and procedures. 5 0 AVA the lead partner for this project went into administration in February 2024. Project delivery ceased in December 2023. Figures in this table refer to the period April 2022 to December 2023 (Qtrs. 1 to 7) Subsequent to the March 2024 grants committee, figures for quarter seven performance were submitted by the Women’s Resource Centre, who helped to collect information from former HLHR delivery partners. There were high numbers of service users supported in the boroughs of Barnet, Islington, Lambeth and Ealing8. 7 Project delivery ceased during quarter seven (December 2023) 8 Performance Management Update: Against Violence and Abuse (AVA) – Item 7, 27 March 2024 102 Page 15 of 32 Women and Girls Network Project name: Ascent Advice and Counselling Project Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.2 Specialist advice, counselling and support (for medium risk survivors (including post-IDVA/ISVA) and target groups not accessing general provision) Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £1,383,289 Delivery partners: Ashiana Network, Asian Women's Resource Centre (AWRC), Chinese Information and Advice Centre, EACH, IMECE Women's Centre, Iranian and Kurdish Women s Rights Organisation (IKWRO), Jewish Women's Aid, Kurdish and Middle Eastern Women's Organisation, Latin American Women's Rights Service (LAWRS), Nia, Rape and Sexual Abuse Support Centre, Rights of Women, Solace Women's Aid, Southall Black Sisters, Women's Trust The Ascent Advice and Counselling project aims to provide pan-London wrap-around support services for self-identified women, girls and non-binary people surviving the continuum of Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) through individually tailored advice, information, casework and therapeutic services. The overall aim of the project is to enhance survivors internal and external resources, enabling them to better cope and heal from their experiences of violence & abuse, and move to independence. Our activities: At the heart of our pan-London partnership project will be two holistic advice hubs offering: - emotional support - safety planning - information/advice & immediate advocacy support - seamless access to ongoing support services. - needs & risk assessments These will be surrounded by the spokes of specialist services to complement the hubs including: - Targeted 1-1 casework services for, Black and Global Majority women /young women and girls/ women who are sexually exploited and/or faced multiple disadvantages). - A specialist focus on providing housing support/access to safe accommodation, including emergency accommodation funding for single women with NRPF. - 1:1 BACP accredited counselling delivered across London and in over 20 languages. - London legal advice line- providing specialist family law and immigration legal advice - Survivor group work9 to promote recovery and increase understanding of abuse - Training and awareness raising to up skill professionals and staff Contact Details Referrals Ifeoma Williams, Director of Services Ifeoma.Williams@wgn.org.uk CAN Mezzanine, 7-14 Great Dover Street, London, SE1 4YR Website: www.wgn.org.uk and https://www.thelondonvawgconsortium.org.uk Ubah Ahmed, Advice Project Manager Ubah.Ahmed@wgn.org.uk East London (Solace Women’s Aid): 0808 802 5565; advice@solacewomensaid.org West London (Women and Girls Network): 0808 801 0660; advice@wgn.org.uk London Legal Advice (Rights of Women): 0207 608 1137 9 Delivery in year one only. WGN will signpost to alternative provision where available from year two onwards. 103 Page 16 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 Q10 Profile Delivered Number of new people 14,712 15,313 Number of people experiencing greater feelings of safety 8,773 6,763 Number of people with a safety plan 6,815 6,508 Number of people with continuing support to sustain new lives. 8793 6,171 Number of people who can rebuild their lives and move to independence 3,923 4,155 Number of tenancies secured 1,726 1,099 Number of tenancies sustained for six months10 150 148 Number of people accessing health services 430 872 Number of people accessing employment support. 117 179 Local authority officers and local IDVAs/ISVAs can access additional support to wrap around existing services, or make referrals into the service 864 886 Tenancies Secured/Sustained: Accessing safe housing remains a significant challenge for survivors: Project partners have reported several concerns: slow responses from borough housing to high- risk cases, an increase in safeguarding issues for homeless young women and girls, and difficulties securing accommodation, including due to language barriers. Project staff continue to advocate for service users to address these issues with local housing departments. People experiencing greater feelings of safety/Sustaining new lives: The increasingly complex casework with high-risk survivors requires longer intervention. Historical under delivery is being addressed by a new Senior Clinical Team , although project staff resources remain stretched. Overdelivery: This is due to increased numbers of high-risk clients with multiple and complex needs, including mental ill health, requiring project support. 10 Reporting started in Q3 104 Page 17 of 32 Galop Project name: The LGBT+ Domestic Abuse Partnership (DAP) Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.2 Specialist advice, counselling and support (for medium risk survivors (including post-IDVA/ISVA) and target groups not accessing general provision) Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £160,574 Delivery partners: Stonewall Housing, London Friend The London LGBT+ Domestic Abuse Partnership (DAP) is specialist service for LGBT+ survivors of domestic abuse. It is open to any LGBT person experiencing domestic violence living or working in London. This is a service run by, and for, LGBT+ people. The DAP provides services to survivors of domestic abuse, including the following: • Helpline: email, phone and live chat support to all LGBT+ survivors, giving information and support 5 days a week, including signposting to ongoing specialist services and contributing to the overall national helpline service, supporting survivors in London. • Advice and safety planning • Housing advice, including options on finding safe accommodation • Emotional support • Free one-to-one Counselling • Support and assistance with dealing with the police • Help reporting incidents and finding solicitors • Legal advice on civil or criminal protection (e.g., non-molestation orders) • Support through civil and criminal court system • Advice on child safety and child contact issues • Specific support around sexual abuse • Interpreter service available to those who do not have English as a first language • Awareness raising sessions/ consultancy services to multi agency staff at borough level to increase understanding of LGBT+ people’s experiences of domestic abuse and the work of the partnership. The partnership is made up of three LGBT+ voluntary organisations: • Galop specialising in supporting LGBT+ victims and survivors of domestic abuse, sexual violence, hate crime, and other forms of abuse including honour-based abuse, forced marriage, and so-called “conversion therapies”. • Stonewall Housing providing safe accommodation, housing advice, mental health advocacy and support for people fleeing domestic abuse. • London Friend offers counselling and support around issues such as same-sex relationships, sexual and gender identity and promotes personal growth and self-confidence. More information is available on the partnership website: www.lgbtdap.org.uk Contact Details Referrals Gavin Stafford – Gavin@galop.org.uk Survivors and professionals can refer through the online referral form on www.galop.org.uk/make-a- referral/ or by calling the National LGBT DV Helpline 0800 999 5428 105 Page 18 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 Q10 Profile Delivered Number of new people 758 786 Number of people experiencing greater feelings of safety 250 233 Number of people with a safety plan 150 151 Number of people with continuing support to sustain new lives. 250 246 Number of people who can rebuild their lives and move to independence 150 181 Number of tenancies secured 108 105 Number of tenancies sustained for six months 94 91 Number of people accessing health services 50 58 Number of people accessing employment support. 40 36 Local authority officers and local IDVAs/ISVAs can access additional support to wrap around existing services, or make referrals into the service 50 47 LGBT+ victims/survivors of domestic abuse are better able to access additional support from local/specialist support services 150 159 LGBT+ victims/survivors of domestic abuse have improved emotional health/wellbeing 85 93 Overdelivery: GALOP report that it has moved to a new process that captures data in a more accessible way resulting in a higher rate of outcomes being achieved. 106 Page 19 of 32 SignHealth Project name: Deaf Domestic Abuse Service Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.2 Specialist advice, counselling and support (for medium risk survivors (including post-IDVA/ISVA) and target groups not accessing general provision) Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £261,787 Delivery partners: n/a This service aims to educate, empower, encourage and protect Deaf people from all forms of domestic abuse using their preferred language, British Sign Language (BSL). Activities: - Preventative education: work with the Deaf community to raise awareness about unhealthy relationships, different types of abuse, consent and to empower Deaf people with tools to keep themselves safe. - Supporting independence: Deaf IDVAs will support Deaf adults and their families to lead a life free from violence by minimising risk, ensuring safety, and developing skills for independence thus reducing the likelihood of clients returning to abusive relationships or resuming old behaviours. The IDVA support for Deaf people is offered either remotely over online video platforms or face to face. - Accessible resources in BSL: video resources in BSL give Deaf people fair access to the same vital information as their hearing peers. Watch videos here: https://signhealth.org.uk/video-category/domestic-abuse/ - Provision of training and resources for mainstream/hearing providers to improve access to services. Also Deaf awareness training to the police and other external agencies. - Work in collaboration with a range of mainstream providers, who signpost Deaf service users to us. - In-person advocacy where necessary (supporting clients to navigate the family courts, criminal justice, and welfare systems). - Referrals to SignHealth’s Psychological Therapy service for anxiety, depression and/or trauma. Freedom Programme workshops and facilitation of Deaf-led support groups Contact Details Referrals Marie Vickers – Head of Domestic Abuse Services mvickers@signhealth.org.uk SignHealth, CAN Mezzanine Ltd, 7-4 Great Dover Street, London, SE1 4YR (registered address) https://signhealth.org.uk/with-deaf- people/domestic-abuse/ Deaf people can self-refer through our email da@signhealth.org.uk or our SMS number 07800 003421 Professionals can email da@signhealth.org.uk to make a referral 107 Page 20 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 Q10 Profile Delivered Number of new people 146 134 Number of people experiencing greater feelings of safety 132 100 Number of people with a safety plan 132 101 Number of people with continuing support to sustain new lives. 132 97 Number of people who can rebuild their lives and move to independence 132 91 Number of tenancies secured 50 45 Number of tenancies sustained for six months11 22 23 Number of people accessing health services 22 51 Number of people accessing employment support. 22 17 Local authority officers and local IDVAs/ISVAs can access additional support to wrap around existing services, or make referrals into the service 62 53 Number of Deaf people reporting greater awareness of Domestic Abuse and how to get help 176 1,037 Number of professionals reporting greater awareness of Deaf Domestic Abuse and where to go for appropriate services 112 902 Greater feelings of safety; sustaining new lives/independence: Despite lower level s of referrals and historic under delivery , the project’s IDVA will continue to complete risk assessments with service users, to develop safety plans and make informed decisions about their legal, housing, employment, financial and health rights and options. This will result in greater feelings of safety, sustained and independent living. Deaf people and professionals reporting greater awareness of Deaf Domestic Abuse : Overdelivery has occurred due to increased delivery of workshops, which has raised awareness about project services, for professionals and Deaf people. Increased contact has also been established with Deaf clubs/services in boroughs. 11 Reporting started in Q3 108 Page 21 of 32 Refuge Project name: Pan-London Domestic and Sexual Violence Helplines Project Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.3 Helpline services (advice and support, access to refuge provision) Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £284,918 Delivery partners: Women and Girls Network (WGN), Rape and Sexual Abuse Support Centre (RASASC) and Respect This project is a partnership between four specialist providers , the pan-London domestic and sexual violence helpline provides access to confidential, non- judgmental support and advice for anyone in London subjected to domestic or sexual violence, current or historic, including referrals to emergency safe accommodation and support for friends, family and professionals. Support includes: emotional support, risk assessment, safety planning, referrals and information on rights and options, including legal rights, housing rights, child contact rights and pathways into other services; also a refuge referral line for women fleeing domestic abuse, run by Refuge as part of the National Domestic Abuse Helpline (NDAH), with enhanced support for women facing particular barriers to accessing refuge, providing critical insight to London Boroughs. Support can also be accessed via digital channels, including online Live Chat, email support and web content – informed by partner expertise around the ways in which perpetrators track victims’ activity online and misuse technology to abuse. To ensure the needs of all Londoners can be met, our helplines include accessible pathways to support: British Sign Language interpretation, Language Line interpreters; Helpline Advisers and volunteers who speak multiple languages; and translated web content. The partnership will raise awareness of its services across the capital, including an online offer for local authorities and targeted communications where there is low borough engagement , facilitated by a project support officer at Refuge. The partnership will bolster London’s specialist VAWG sector by sharing expertise with each other, including mutual training sessions and regular meetings to share best practice, identify emerging needs particular ‘pain points’ for survivors., as well as smooth referral pathways between partner Helplines. Contact Details Referrals Martina Palmer, Head of Services, Refuge martina_palmer@refuge.org.uk The Freephone 24-Hour National Domestic Abuse Helpline: 0808 2000 247 or contact via secure webform, online live chat (weekdays, 3pm – 10pm) or British Sign Language interpretation (weekdays, 10am – 6pm) https://www.nationaldahelpline.org.uk/ National Sexual Violence Helpline: 0808 802 9999 (24/7), or access support via live chat here: https://rapecrisis.org.uk/get- help/want-to-talk/ Women and Girls Network Sexual Violence Helpline: Freephone: 0808 801 0770 Mon- Fri 10am-12.30pm, 2.30pm-4pm. Late opening on Wednesdays 6pm-9pm. Home | Women and Girls Network (wgn.org.uk) Respect Men’s Advice Line: Telephone support: 0808 801 0327 (Mon to Fri 10am – 8pm), Email support: Monday to Friday – 9am – 8pm, Webchat support: Wednesdays – 10-11.30am and 2.30-4pm Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men | Men's Advice Line UK (mensadviceline.org.uk) 109 Page 22 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 Q10 Profile Delivered Number of new people 41,561 33,496 Number of people referred to a refuge 1,295 442 Number of people referred to alternatives to refuge e.g. reciprocal arrangements for secure tenancies 1,170 1,578 Number of people referred to other general services (welfare, housing, legal rights) 9,120 8,506 Number of people referred to other specialist services (specialists in supporting victims of domestic and sexual abuse, counselling). 7,620 14,329 Borough professionals report being able to respond to service users’ needs 280 446 Borough professionals indicate satisfaction with the service. 280 450 Survivors provided with information to enable self-referral to refuge accommodation 3,380 3,656 Survivors of domestic and sexual abuse have improved understanding of risk and steps they can take to increase safety, both physical and emotional 11,083 11,791 Professionals are empowered with information on responding to domestic and sexual abuse, increasing the likelihood of positive interventions with survivors they're concerned about. 3,036 2,985 Survivors of domestic and sexual abuse and those supporting them experience reduced isolation, increased sense of hope and increased understanding of survivor rights and options 41,561 32,859 Overdelivery: The partnership has overdelivered because the demand for elements of the service has increased (there has been an increase in callers with mental health needs, suicidal ideation and self- injury). Similarly, there has been an increase in those referred to refuge alternatives due to the lack of available refuge spaces. Some of the overdelivery is historic and has now stabilised. Underdelivery: Under d elivery resulted from the lack of suitable accommodation, the length of time taken to support a client being referred (rather signposted) to a refuge, limited staff numbers due to budget constraints and a sessional dip in those accessing services during the summer months. 110 Page 23 of 32 Women’s Aid Project name: London Refuges Data Collection Project Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.3 Helpline services (advice and support, access to refuge provision) Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £25,000 Delivery partners: N/A The London Refuges Data Collection project provides an evidence base on the availability and use of domestic abuse refuge provision in London. It aims to inform stakeholders about these services and support the commissioning of services. The data collection for this project uses Routes to Support (RtS), the UK VAWG service directory which Women’s Aid Federation of England run in partnership with our sister federations in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Data in London on referrals and women’s journeys is collected through RtS as part of refuge services routine work. That means that when London- based staff update refuge vacancies on the system they are required to enter additional information about the women using their services. Women’s Aid share quarterly data reports with London Councils, MOPAC12 and Borough officers including VAWG leads, Commissioners and Community Safety Officers. These stakeholders also have access to an interactive Data Dashboard which is on a password- protected area of the Women’s Aid website. Women’s Aid present the data at various fora in London and also produce an annual data summary which is shared with all London refuge providers. Contact Details Referrals Sarika Seshadri, Head of Research and Evaluation S.Seshadri@womensaid.org.uk www.womensaid.org.uk For queries about the data collected through this project please contact: routestosupport@womensaid.org.uk Services who are interested in joining Routes to Support can find more information here: https://www.womensaid.org.uk/what-we- do/i-work-with-survivors/routes-to-support/ 12 Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime 111 Page 24 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 Q10 Profile Delivered New Users 94 98 Borough Professionals (Housing/VAWG/Community Safety) report being better able to respond to service users’ needs 55 14 Organisations providing VAWG services in London are able to signpost survivors through access to referrals and service information through Routes to Support (number of individual logins) 44,000 35,229 Organisations providing VAWG services enter data on refuge use to provide pan London profile of service use to inform commissioners and stakeholders 64 122 Borough officers (Housing/VAWG/Community Safety) have increased knowledge of the domestic abuse support provision available across London as a result of the project 55 15 Borough officers (Housing/VAWG/Community Safety) use data from the project to inform policy and practice during second half of the project following promotion in first half of project. 50 5 Boroughs are able to signpost survivors of domestic abuse through access to service information through the UK Gold Book (number of new boroughs with access) 13 10 Underdelivery: Women’s Aid is below i ts cumulative target for outcomes requiring feedback from borough officers because it receives limited feedback from them. A new feedback mechanism was introduced; however , this has not resulted in an improved response from boroughs. Women’s Aid has sought further changes to address its under delivery including utilising Mentimeter and asking for feedback during meetings. Additionally, the number of VAWG service provider logins has reduced because new functionality allows providers to update their refuge vacancies week ly rather than daily . The number of logins is used to demonstrate that services are utilising Routes to Support; consequently, Women’s Aid would like to amend the target number of logins to more accurately reflect the changes. Overdelivery: The number of services providing data, to enable the development of a profile on service use, is above target because data entered in year one exceeded the profile target; (see main report para. 3.25) 112 Page 25 of 32 Ashiana Network Project name: Specialist Refuge Network Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.4 Emergency refuge accommodation that offers services to meet the needs of specific groups Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £840,000 (extended for one additional year to 31 March 2023)13 Delivery partners: Ashiana Network, Solace Women's Aid, Nia project, Iranian & Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation (IKWRO) The Specialist Refuge Network provided a unique and innovative Pan- London service through specialist refuge accommodation and targeted support to high- risk women/children affected by domestic and sexual violence (DSV) with complex needs. The Network provided specialist refuge, targeted support and outreach and second stage accommodation. The project work ed intensively with women to assess/address needs, improve safety/health/wellbeing enabling women to exit violent/abusiv e relationships/situations. Delivery: - Programme of group-work/workshops to enhance health/wellbeing/living- skills/resilience - Resettlement programme to support independence/longer lasting outcomes - Outreach service supporting/enabling women to access alternative refuge accommodation/be supported in independent living - Training/awareness raising workshops for professionals to remove barriers/widen access - Housing advocacy securing/maintaining referral pathways with housing providers to secure alternative accommodation for women at risk and unable to access refuge - 38 specialist 24-hour refuge and second-stage accommodation bed spaces and package of intensive targeted support to enhance safety and remove barriers: - 6 (24-hour) bed spaces: Problematic substance use - 5 (24-hour) bed spaces: Sexually exploited women (including prostitution and trafficking) - 8 (24-hour) bed spaces: Women with mental health/problematic substance use - 7 second-stage bed spaces: Trafficked women - 6 bed spaces: Middle Eastern and North African women fleeing harmful practices - 6 bed spaces: South Asian, Turkish and Iranian women with NRPF experiencing DV/SV and harmful practices Within the existing 38 bed spaces, the project allocated an additional 3 bed spaces for women with NRPF 14, particularly for trafficked women and 2 bed spaces for women with mobility related disabilities. 13 Extended for one year only to 31 March 2023 to give time to develop longer term arrangements with the boroughs and the GLA following the introduction of the Domestic Abuse Act 14 No recourse to public funds 113 Page 26 of 32 Outcome 2022-2023 Qtrs. 1-415 Profile Delivered Number of new users 795 1,083 Numbers not returning to a perpetrator 37 57 Numbers with increased awareness of safety planning 195 274 Engagement with in-house and external specialist support and culturally specific provision, (such as drug and alcohol support, support with mental health, support to exit prostitution, harmful practices, immigration and NRPF 155 205 Numbers supported to successfully apply for indefinite leave to remain under the Destitution Domestic Violence (DDV) concession or refugee status under an asylum application 32 38 Numbers of women that demonstrate reduced harmful substance use 50 47 Number of women involved in prostitution and trafficking reporting increased awareness of options to exit prostitution and with personalised action plans 37 49 Numbers demonstrating an increased understanding of sexual and domestic violence/prostitution/trafficking as a form of violence against women 140 274 Number of users demonstrating an increased understanding and stabilisation in their mental health 73 103 Number of users with increased understanding of impact of mental health and substance misuse on their children 17 44 Service users moved on in a planned way 29 54 Service users with increased living skills 67 68 Service users with more stabilised immigration status 45 91 No of people prevented (where appropriate) from unnecessary refuge admission through support to alternative housing options that enable them to stay safe. Support provided to service users for whom specific refuge provision does not exist / scarce / do not wish to access (LGBT) 50 93 Number of referral pathways agreed with registered social landlords and other housing providers 6 4 Number of service users gaining/maintaining tenancies 33 37 Number of professionals with increased knowledge of sexual and domestic violence aimed at increasing clients' access to services 475 538 Removal of barriers in accessing services for people with the protected characteristics of the 2010 Equalities Act 85 286 Number of users with disabilities accessing the service 73 103 15 These performance figures are only for the extended year of delivery 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023. The project has now ended. 114 Page 27 of 32 Ashiana Network Project name: Ascent Specialist Refuge Partnership Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.4 Emergency Specialist Refuge Provision Amount per year: £840,000 (from April 2023 onwards) Delivery partners: Ashiana Network, Solace Women's Aid, Nia, Iranian & Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation (IKWRO) Our project aims to relieve homelessness, reduce and address the harms of domestic abuse by providing routes to safe and appropriate accommodation for women identified as the most marginalised, most frequently excluded by other services, and therefore at great risk of sustained harm and homelessness. This project is an established, proven partnership of four of London’s most experienced, specialist refuge providers. Our project provides three services, of which refuge is the core. We will provide: • 39 specialist refuge and second-stage accommodation bedspaces to marginalised women such as: women with no recourse to public funds (NRPF); Black and minoritised women fleeing harmful practice; women who have been sexually exploited, trafficked, or are exiting prostitution and women with mental health, dual diagnosis and/or problematic drug and alcohol usage. • An OISC level 2 Immigration Solicitor who will assist in regularising the immigration status of survivors, so they are able to access safe and appropriate accommodation they’re currently excluded from. The solicitor is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). • A Partnerships Officer who will work alongside all partners in collaboration with the wider Ascent Consortium to promote and ensure equitable, effective referral pathways into our service from all 33 boroughs, all borough IDVA/ISVA teams, and safe accommodation services. We aim to support 137 women from any London borough with complex and multiple needs and otherwise/unlikely to be accepted into any other form of safe accommodation, access to safe, sustained and highly-specialist refuge beds. We will also support 72 survivors of VAWG to regularise their immigration status. For both sets of women, additional positive impacts will follow including improved sense of safety and improved access to specialist support. 111 of our total cohort will be supported to move on from refuge in a planned way during the lifetime of the project. In achieving these outcomes will help to: • reduce demand pressures on London’s statutory services, including open referral pathways and co- working opportunities with every London borough. • help women avoid unplanned and crisis presentations at housing, health, and frontline commissioned services. • help women present to services in planned ways, support their sustained and positive contact with services, and support women’s readiness for longer-term independence. Contact Details Referrals Shaminder Ubhi, Director shaminder@ashiana.org.uk info@ashiana.org.uk 020 8539 0427 www.ashiana.org.uk Bushra Ekrem, Business & Contract Support Officer bushra@ashiana.org.uk Nia - 07590 712872 (24 hours); 0207 683 1270 info@niaendingviolence.org.uk The Emma Project: 07590 712872 (24 hours) Solace Women’s Aid – Refuge Referrals: Monday & Friday 9.30am-5pm; refuge.referrals@solacewomensaid.org 02031984658 Ext: 236; 07483 025192 IKWRO – Refuge- 07496111963 07846 275 246 (Arabic/Kurdish) 24hrs 07846 310 157 (Farsi/Dari/Turkish)24 Hours 020 7920 6460- info@ikwro.org.uk 115 Page 28 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 Q1016 Profile Delivered Number of new users 109 129 Number of people experiencing greater feelings of safety 66 70 Number of people with a safety plan 68 70 Number of people with continuing support to sustain new lives. 37 38 Number of people who can rebuild their lives and move to independence 35 36 Number of people who move on from refuge accommodation in a planned way 55 51 Number of people accessing specialist support (for example, immigration advice, legal advice, mental health support, substance misuse support)- Refuge & Outreach clients 103 110 Number of people with improved mental health- Refuge & Outreach clients 75 50 Service users with more stabilised immigration status 36 51 Local authority officers and local IDVAs/ISVAs can access additional support to wrap around existing services, or make referrals into the service 16 16 Number of women with exiting prostitution plan in place 7 7 Improved management and awareness of their substance use 25 26 Increase in women’s awareness of trafficking and sexual exploitation and staying safe 7 7 Removal of barriers in accessing services for people with the protected characteristics of the 2010 Equalities Act 109 116 Number of people who move on from refuge accommodation in a planned way: The need for more co- ordination between t emporary accommodation departments and other housing allocation teams within local authorities, has been notes as causing delays in housing allocation and equally unsuitable offers which cause additional stress for residents and staff. Many women will require long- term accommodation with support to address mental health/trauma symptoms and substance use. Project staff continue to work proactively with housing providers to achieve the best outcomes for residents. 16 This project started in Q5 of the 2022-26 programme 116 Page 29 of 32 Women’s Resource Centre Project name: Ascent: Support Services to Organisations Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.5 Improving the response to domestic and sexual abuse in London (working with domestic and sexual abuse organisations and professionals) Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £189,522 Delivery partners: RESPECT (perpetrators), Imkaan, Rights of Women, Against Violence and Abuse and Women and Girls Network The Ascent Support Services to Organisations (SSO) project aims to increase access to support and help for people affected by domestic and sexual abuse, by improving the quality and expertise of frontline domestic and sexual abuse organisations and professionals in London. The aim will be achieved by the annual provision of: - Sustainability Training - One to One Support Sessions - Expert Led Training - Webinars - Accredited Training - Knowledge Hub - Bespoke Training - Needs Analysis - Specialist Briefing Sessions - Case Studies - Special Events - Fact Sheets, Best practice briefings, - E- newsletters These activities will provide best practice guidance and advice and inform and educate on a variety of topics, including policy and legislation, immigration, violence against women and girls (VAWG), organisational development, funding and fundraising, perp etrator work, trauma-informed work, and evidencing and demonstrating impact. Ascent SSO aims to increase the cross-sector awareness of services available and cross - sector collaborations; increase the resilience and sustainability of frontline voluntary sector organisations, increase the wellbeing of staff of frontline organisations , and increase awareness and knowledge about intersectionality and the diverse needs of service users. Contact Details Referrals Ms Vivienne Hayes, CEO vivienne@wrc.org.uk 020 7697 3451 Project Lead – Nour Gazarin United House, North Road, London, N7 9DP www.wrc.org.uk www.imkaan.org.uk www.respect.uk.net www.avaproject.org.uk www.wgn.org.uk www.rightsofwomen.org.uk 117 Page 30 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 Q10 Profile Delivered Number of new organisations 452 361 Number of organisations with increased knowledge of legislation, specifically the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 150 281 Number of organisations with increased knowledge of policy and best practice in service delivery 350 427 Number of organisations with improved working relationships with local authority statutory services. 200 230 Number of voluntary sector organisations able to demonstrate increased working relationships (with health professionals, housing professionals, other local services) 150 181 Number of professionals with increased awareness of the signs of domestic and sexual abuse and knowledge of domestic and sexual abuse services available to their clients 300 360 Number of professionals with increased knowledge of domestic and sexual abuse legislation, policy and best practice in clients support. 300 410 Number of organisations with an increased understanding of funding opportunities and application procedures 50 65 Number of organisations with improved ability to evidence and demonstrate the impact of their services 74 131 Number of organisations with improved ability to develop partnerships/collaborations to improve services. 100 81 Organisations with increased ability to improve the wellbeing of staff and volunteers 74 77 Organisations with increased awareness of intersectionality and structural inequality in the context of domestic and sexual abuse 300 304 Organisations with improved ability to meet the diverse and intersectional needs of service users 300 376 Underdelivery: The partnership under delivered on the number of organisations with improved ability to develop partnerships/collaborations to improve services because only one session relevant to th e outcome was delivered this quarter . Activities related to the outcome are planned for future quarters. Despite making good progress over the last two quarters, the number of new users is below target. Overdelivery: as well as higher than usual d emand for some of the sessions, webinars being utilised as the delivery format has resulted in increased numbers because it enables more people to attend. Moreover, the partnership has not strictly adhered to its workplan, postponing some activities and bringing forward others. 118 Page 31 of 32 Asian Women's Resource Centre (AWRC) Project name: Ascent Ending Harmful Practices Partnership Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.6 Services for people affected by harmful practices Avg. Annual Grant Amount: £308,662 Delivery partners: Ashiana Network, Latin American Women's Rights Service, IKWRO Women’s Centre, IMECE Women’s Centre, Southall Black Sisters Trust, Women and Girls Network, Foundation for Women’s Health Research and Development (FORWARD) and Al- Aman (Division of Richmond Fellowship) The Ending Harmful Practices Partnership (EHPP) aims to improve service provision for those affected by sexual and domestic abuse, specifically, Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), “so called” honour based abuse (HBV), forced marriage (FM) and other harmful practices 17 through the provision of high quality frontline services as well as support services to voluntary and statutory organisations. The EHPP will provide specialist services including intensive support to Women and Girls from BME communities, as well as raising awareness to increase early identification of those at risk and improve institutional responses. Activities will include: - 1:1 advice and information on rights and entitlements: - casework and advocacy support which will include accompanying women to meetings with police, housing and social services departments and courts - therapeutic support groups and a counselling provision to 50 women - raising awareness of the impact of HBV, FM and FGM within communities and other voluntary and statutory agencies (not only BME communities) through delivering workshops, training and presentations - specific work with young women on FGM through the delivery of workshops to support peer mentoring and youth advocacy. The project aims to improve safety and reduce risks for BME women experiencing harmful practices; and present them with options so that they are in a stronger position physically, mentally and emotionally. The intended impact of the combined activities they participate in, will help them achieve greater social and economic independence, enabling them to integrate into and contribute towards their local communities and wider society. Contact Details Referrals Sarbjit Ganger, Director sarbjit@awrc.org.uk Info@awrc.org.uk 020 8961 6549 http://asianwomencentre.org.uk/ Twitter: @AWRCofficial Instagram: @AsianWomenResourceCentre Ascent: 0208 961 6549 0208 961 5701 referrals@awrc.org.uk 17 Faith Based Abuse, and some of the lesser known harmful practices such as acid attacks, menstrual huts, “corrective” rape, dowry and caste abuse. 119 P age 32 of 32 Outcome 2022-2026 Q10 Profile Delivered Number of new people 1,124 1,330 Number of people who have a better understanding of the options available to them and are more aware of their rights 1,125 1,232 Number of people who increased their ability to communicate their needs and views to service providers 90 91 Number of people with enhanced coping strategies through risk assessment and planning 940 970 Number of people who have improved life skills, helping them to rebuild their lives and move to independence 105 114 Number of people with improved mental health 400 405 Number of professionals with improved understanding of harmful practices and the barriers faced by Black, Asian and minority ethnic women in accessing services 186 435 Local authority officers can access additional support to wrap around existing services, or make referrals into the service 65 69 IDVAs/ISVAs, GPs/hospitals and sexual health clinics can make referrals into the service. 76 78 Overdelivery: Women were successfully supported with a range of issues, including safety planning, accessing services, securing safe accommodation, obtaining immigration relief, and improving mental health. There also continues to be project success in improving understanding of harmful practice across a range of service professionals. 120 Grants Executive Committee Month 6 Revenue Forecast 2024/25 Item no: 7 Report by: David Sanni Job title: Director of Corporate Resources Date: 27 November 2024 Contact Officer: David Sanni Telephone: 020 7934 9704 Email: David.sanni@londoncouncils.gov.uk Summary This report: • Outlines actual income and expenditure against the approved income and expenditure in the budget to the end of September 2024 for the Grants Committee; • Provides a forecast of the outturn position for 2024/25 for both actual and committed expenditure on commissions, along with the administration of all these commissions. M embers are reminded that the position stated in this report is at the end of the second quarter of 2024/25, which is the third year of the four-year programme of commissions. At this stage, a surplus of £67,000 is forecast over the approved budget. Recommendations The Grants Executive Committee is asked to: • Note the projected surplus of £67,000 for the year; and • Note the projected level of Grants Committee reserves, as detailed in paragraph 9 and the commentary on the financial position of the Grants Committee included in paragraphs 10-11. 121 Introduction 1. This is the second budget monitoring report to be presented during the current financial year. The next report will represent the nine-month figures, which will be reported to the main Committee in March 2025. 2. The London Councils Grants Committee’s income and expenditure revenue budget for 2024/25 was approved by the Leaders’ Committee in December 2023, following recommendations by the Grants Committee. The total revenue budget for 2024/25 was £6.732m. Variance from Budget 3. Table 1 below summarises the forecast outturn position for the Grants Committee: Table 1 –Summary Forecast M6 Actual Budget Forecast Variance Expenditure £000 £000 £000 £000 Employee Costs 164 279 277 (2) Running Costs 17 19 19 - Central Recharges 62 137 123 (14) Total Operating Expenditure 243 435 419 (16) S.48 Commissioned services 1,948 6,173 6,240 67 London Funders Group 60 60 60 - Transfer to JC – Premises move - 64 64 - Total Expenditure 2,251 6,732 6,783 51 Income Borough contributions towards commissioned services (3,014) (6,233) (6,233) - Borough contributions towards the administration of commissions (435) (435) (435) - Interest on Investments (26) - (51) (51) Transfer from Earmarked Reserves - (64) (131) (67) Total Income (3,475) (6,732) (6,850) (118) Net Expenditure (1,224) - (67) (67) 122 4. The projected surplus of £67,000, is broadly split between the following: • There is no projected underspend in respect of 2024/25 S.48 borough funded commissioned services (paragraph 5). This will be monitored throughout the year. Additional expenditure with regards to a 2023/24 held back payment will be spent during the year (paragraph 7); • G rowth in the team required to manage the programme which commenced in 2023/24 resulted in a higher employee costs. However, this has been largely mitigated by a reduction of other support staff cost being charged to the committee, following the review of London Councils operating model. Current employee costs forecast is an underspend £2,000. Total savings to the Grants Committee in 2024/25 equate to £50,000; • There is a forecast underspend of £14,000 on the recharge of central support services to the committee following the outcome of the review of the operating model which included a reduction to support staff charged to the committee; and • Forecast returns on cash balances is estimated at £51,000, which is not included in the budget. This income line can fluctuate over the year and will be monitored accordingly. Payments to Commissions – London Councils Borough S.48 Programme 5. Table 2 below outlines the actual spend for the period 1 April 2024 to 30 September 2024 for the borough funded commissions, covering priorities 1 and 2. Table 2 – Actual Spend 1 April 2024 to 30 September 2024 – Priorities 1 and 2 2024/25 budget (£) Forecast payments Quarter 2 (£) Actual Payments (£) Projected Underspend (£) Balance (£) 6,172,500 13,014,000 1,612,700 - - 1 Although payments are approved, these amount will be released in Quarter 3. 123 6. T here are no projected underspends in respect of commissioned services at the end of the second quarter. This position will be monitored over the rest of the financial year. 7. During 2023/24 one of the commissioning partners went into liquidation, resulting in £67,000 being held back and included in General Reserves at the year end. Following a formal approval process, the underspend on the programme has been redistributed to another partner. In October 2024, the Grants Executive greed that this amount should be earmarked for payment in the current financial year. 8. As part of the approved monitoring arrangements, officers will continue to review financial information relating to each project during the year and the audited accounts at the end of the year. It is possible that underspends will be identified as the year progresses, which will be reflected in the further monitoring reports scheduled to come before the Committee during 2024/25. Committee Reserves 9. Table 3 below provides an update to the Committee on the projected level of reserves at 31 March 2025, if all current known liabilities and commitments are considered: Table 3 – Analysis of Projected Uncommitted Reserves as at 31 March 2025 General Reserve (£000) Earmarked Reserve (£000) Unaudited Balance at 1 April 2024 837 78 Use of Premise Transition Earmarked Reserve - (64) Transfer between reserves (67) 67 Use of 2023/24 recommissioned funds - (67) Surplus for Year 67 - Projected reserves as at 31 March 2025 837 14 Minimum Level of Reserves (336) - Residual Reserves 501 - 124 Conclusions 10. Projected general reserves of £837,000 are forecast at the year-end, after considering the projected surplus of £67,000 for the year and confirmed transfer to earmarked reserves of £67,000. This level of general reserves relating to the S.48 borough funded commissions (Priorities 1&2), equates to 12.6% of the £6.668 million commissions 2024/25 budget. This figure exceeds the benchmark of £336,000 or 5% agreed by the Grants Committee in July 2023 by some £501,000. There remains uncertainty surrounding inflationary pressures and the impact this may have on the Grants budgets. Potential unforeseen issues could impact later in the financial year, including recovery of of previous underspends. This will be reported on accordingly. 11. A further update on the level of reserves will be reported to the main Committee within the quarter 3 forecast report in February 2025. Recommendations 12. Members are asked to: • note the projected surplus of £67,000 for the year; and • note the projected level of Grants Committee reserves, as detailed in paragraph 9 of this report and the commentary on the financial position of the Grants Committee included in paragraphs 10-11. Financial Implications for London Councils As detailed in report Legal Implications for London Councils None 125 E qualities Implications for London Councils None B ackground Papers London Councils Budget working papers 2024/25 London Councils Income and Expenditure Forecast File 2024/25 126 London Councils Grants Committee London Councils Grants Scheme – Budget Proposals 2025/26 Item 8 Report by: David Sanni Job title: Director of Corporate Resources Date: 27 November 2024 Contact Officer: David Sanni Telephone: 020 7934 9704 Email: david.sanni@londoncouncils.gov.uk Summary This report considers the proposed budget for the Grants Scheme for 2025/26 and makes a recommendation to the Committee on the appropriate level of contributions to recommend to constituent councils for approval, subject to the agreement of the overall budget by Leaders’ Committee. Recommendations Subject to the agreement of London Councils Leaders’ Committee on 10 December 2024, that the Grants Committee agree: • an overall level of expenditure of £6.711 million for the Grants Scheme in 2025/26 (2024/25: £6.732 million); • borough contributions for 2025/25 of £6.711 million (2024/25: £6.668 million); • an increase to the total contribution to the Grants Committee administration costs of £43,000, an average of £1,303 per borough (paragraph 5); • that further to the recommendations above, constituent councils be informed of the Committee's recommendation 127 and be reminded that further to the Order issued by the Secretary of State for the Environment under Section 48 (4A) of the Local Government Act 1985, if the constituent councils have not reached agreement by the two-thirds majority specified before 1 February 2025 they shall be deemed to have approved expenditure of an amount equal to the amount approved for the preceding financial year (i.e. £6.732 million); and • that constituent councils be advised that the apportionment of contributions for 2025/26 will be based on the ONS mid- year population estimates for June 2023. 128 London Councils Grants Scheme - Budget Proposals 2025/26 Introduction 1. This report details the indicative overall budget requirement for the London Boroughs Grants Scheme for 2025/26 of £6.711 million and comprises of: • the cost of borough pan-London commissioned services of £6.173 mil- lion, covering priorities 1 and 2; • the annual membership subscriptions for boroughs for London Funders of £60,000; and • the cost of administering the scheme of £478,000, an increase of £43,000. Budget Proposals for 2025/26 2. In October 2022, London Councils Group Leaders provided a clear steer that the organisation should stop using general reserves to balance its annual budget and put its financial arrangements in a sustainable position. It was agreed that this would be achieved by a combination of moving to a smaller office to reduce premises costs and reviewing our operating model to identify savings and more efficient ways of working. These actions will help ensure that the organisation is in the right shape to deliver the Shared Ambitions within the annual funding envelope agreed by members. 3. The review was completed in March 2024 with final organisational changes agreed in May 2024. The review achieved savings to employee, premises, and general operating costs. 4. The proposals take into account a number of budget pressures which include: • Inflationary pressures estimated at 2.5% which affect employee and member costs, contractual commitments and general supplies and services; 129 • An increase in Employers’ National Insurance contributions included in the budget announcements on 30 October 2024; and • An increase in the value of central recharges allocated to the Committee in 2025/26. This is partly due to a reduction in income from external projects hosted by London Councils which in previous years has been used to offset the cost of central support services recharged across London Councils. 5. The proposals include an increase to the administration element of the contribution to London Councils Grants Scheme to address these ongoing pressures and reflect the Grants Committees decision to the size of the Grants Officer team. The decision to increase the Grants officer team (to 3.1 FTE) was taken by the Grants Executive (via urgency procedures) in January 2023 in order to provide sufficient capacity to manage the grants programme. The increase to the Committee’s budget in that financial year was funded from a transfer from uncommitted General Reserves. There was acknowledgement that this increase should be built into the costs of the programme. While savings have been identified in the other teams that support the committee, these are insufficient to fully offset the increased cost of the Grants Officer team in 2025/26. It is proposed that the total contribution to the Grants Committee administration costs is increased from £435,000 to £478,000, an increase of £43,000 (an average of £1,303 per borough). 6. The staffing costs figures within the proposed 2025/26 budget includes staff working directly on the delivery of the S.48 Priority 1 and 2 programmes, together with the apportionment of time spent on Grants Committee activities by other London Councils staff, such as Grants Committee servicing and Public Affairs. The staffing budget also includes a £10,000 provision for maternity cover and the vacancy level of 2%. 7. In addition, an apportionment of time spent by Corporate Resources, Corporate Governance other than Committee Servicing, the Chief Executive’s office, and London Councils Political Advisors are included in the central 130 recharge figure for supporting the Committee’s functions, as well as a portion of premises cost for the use of office space. 8. Appendix A to this report sets out detailed information relating to the proposed budget for 2025/26. The Committee will need to reach a view on both the appropriate overall level of expenditure and to recommend the budget to constituent Councils, subject to approval of the overall budget by the Leaders’ Committee on 10 December 2024. 9. The financial year 2025/26 represents the final year of the four-year programme of commissions provided by the Grants Committee under S.48 of the Local Government Act 1985, as recommended by the Grants Committee and approved by the Leaders’ Committee in December 2019. The original decision covered the period from 2021 to 2025, however, due to the extension to the current programme as a result of Covid-19 this programme covers 2022 to 2026. Approval of Expenditure 10. The statutory basis of the Grants Scheme is Section 48, Local Government Act 1985. Constituent councils agreed to some changes to the operation of the Scheme as part of the establishment of the new ALG on 1 April 2000: these changes mean that the budget for the London Councils Grants Scheme must be approved by the London Councils Leaders’ Committee. This will need to happen before any budget that is recommended to constituent councils by the Grants Committee can be formally referred to them as a basis for consideration in their respective councils. 11. The recommendations of the Grants Committee will be reported to Leaders’ Committee, which will be considering the budget for the London Councils Grants Scheme for 2025/26 at its meeting on 10 December 2024. If the Leaders Committee does not accept the recommendations of the Grants Committee, and instead agree to recommend a different budget figure to 131 Boroughs, the Grants Committee will need to meet urgently to consider the implications for the Grants programme. 12. Section 48(3) of the Local Government Act 1985 requires that at least two- thirds of the constituent councils in Greater London must approve the proposed overall level of expenditure on grants to voluntary organisations and other costs incurred in “the making of grants”. This is not a decision that can be delegated to the Grants Committee although that Committee is able to make decisions with regard to allocation of that expenditure once overall expenditure has been approved. This means that when the Committee decides on an overall level of expenditure, subject to the agreement of the Leaders’ Committee, it will recommend it to the London Boroughs and the Cities of London and Westminster and at least 22 of them must agree through their respective decision-making arrangements to ratify and give effect to that overall level of expenditure. Once 22 councils have given their approval, the overall level of expenditure and contributions to it are binding on all constituent councils. Timing of Decisions 13. The Committee needs to make its recommendation in good time so that constituent councils are able to consider the budget proposal within their own decision-making arrangements and make a response within the timescales laid down for the Scheme. The Scheme approved by the boroughs provides that constituent councils shall be asked to agree to the Committee's recommended level of overall expenditure not later than the third Friday in January, in this case 17 January 2025. All constituent councils will have received copies of this report and will be informed of the Committee's recommendation as to overall expenditure for next year, once the decision has been taken. 14. The City of London Corporation has been the Designated Council for the Scheme since 1 February 2004. Bearing in mind the issues raised above, it is essential for the Committee to make a recommendation today, to provide 132 sufficient time for constituent councils to consider the matter before the 1 February deadline and enable the City of London Corporation to approve the levy on constituent councils by the deadline of 15 February 2025. 15. In the event that constituent councils are unable to reach agreement by the two-thirds majority required on an overall level of expenditure before 1 February 2025 the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government has powers to intervene and set the budget at the same level as the preceding year. Section 105 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 inserted a new sub-section (4A) into section 48 of the Local Government Act 1985 which states that: "4A. The Secretary of State may by order provide that if - • a scheme requires the total expenditure to be incurred under the scheme in any financial year _  in the making of grants; and  in the discharging by the designated council of its functions under the scheme, to be approved in accordance with the scheme by some or all of the constituent councils; and • the total expenditure to be incurred in any financial year is not approved as required by the scheme before such date as may be specified in relation to that financial year in the order, the constituent councils shall be deemed, subject to any order which has been or may be made under subsection (5) below, all to have given their approval for that financial year to total expenditure of an amount equal to the amount that was approved or, as the case may be, deemed to have been approved for the preceding financial year". Contributions by Constituent Councils 16. Section 48(3) of the 1985 Act provides that the amount of contributions to the London Councils Grants Scheme shall be determined so that expenditure is 133 borne by constituent councils in proportion to the population of their respective areas. Section 48(4) of the 1985 Act states that the population of any area shall be the number estimated by the Registrar-General and certified by him to the Secretary of State 17. Under The Levying Bodies (General) Regulations 1992, arrangements made under section 48 of the 1985 Act (and also section 88) use total resident population as the means of apportionment and it is no longer necessary for the Registrar General to certify the estimates. The Regulations came into force on 11 December 1992. Regulation 6(8) is of particular importance, stating that: "A levying body shall secure that the expenses to be met by levies issued by it under these Regulations by reference to the relevant precepting power conferred by section 48 or 88 of the Local Government Act 1985 are borne by the relevant authorities in a proportion calculated by reference to the total resident population of the area of each relevant authority on 30th June in the financial year beginning two years before the beginning of the financial year in respect of which the levy is issued, as estimated by the Registrar General." 18. The Designated Council is defined as a levying body further to Sections 74 and 117 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988, which means that the levy will have to be approved formally at a meeting of the Court of Common Council of the Designated Council before the payment requests are sent to constituent councils. The Court of Common Council will consider this matter before the deadline of 15 February 2025. The Levying Bodies (General) Regulations 1992 then require the approved levy to be sent out to constituent councils by 15 February in any year. The term levy refers both to the total contributions from constituent councils and to the apportionment of that total between them. 134 Summary Timetable 19. To summarise, the timetable for the approval of the budget for 2025/26 is expected to be as follows: Date Action 27 November 2024 Grants Committee considers proposed budget and borough contributions for 2025/26 detailed in this report and makes recommendations to Constituent Councils, subject to approval of Leaders’ Committee. 10 December 2024 Leaders’ Committee is asked to approve the level of budget and borough contributions for 2025/26, as recommended by the Grants Committee on 27 November. 11-13 December 2024 Constituent Councils formally notified of the approved level of budget and borough contributions for 2025/26. 15 December 2024 – 31 January 2025 Constituent Councils to individually ratify the overall level of expenditure for 2025/26 through their respective decision-making arrangements. 1-15 February 2025 The City of London Corporation, as the Designated Councils for the Grants Scheme, approves the levy for 2025/26 on Constituent Councils. 15 February 2025 Constituent Councils informed of level of approved expenditure and borough contributions for 2025/26. 2024/25 Outturn Projections 20. The Month 6 forecast report is included as a separate report on this agenda and highlights projected surplus of £67,000 in total for 2024/25, predominately due to additional investment income. 135 Use of Reserves 21. The updated position on the overall level of Grants Committee reserves after considering the forecast outturn for the current financial year and the budget proposals for 2025/26 outlined in this report, is detailed in Table 1 below: Table 1 – Estimated Reserves Grants Committee £000 £000 General Earmarked Provisional reserves at March 2025 837 14 22. At its meeting in July 2023, the Grants Executive agreed that the level of reserves to cover the S.48 borough funded commissions (priorities 1 and 2) should be set at 5% of the budget, which equates to £336,000 in respect of a proposed budget of £6.711 million for 2025/26. The projected level of uncommitted General Reserves after taking into account the proposals included in this report is £837,000 which is in excess of the benchmark by £501,000. Borough Contributions 23. Paragraphs 16 to 18 of this report set out the legal position relating to contributions payable by constituent councils to the London Councils Grants Scheme. Contributions for 2025/26 have been calculated using the latest available ONS mid-year population estimates for June 2023 and are set out in Appendix B. Grants Committee Medium-term Financial Plan 2026/27 to 2027/28 24. The indicative Grant Committee budgets for 2026/27 and 2027/28 have been prepared on the basis that borough contributions will change in line with CPI or an alternative measure, such as borough Core Spending Power (CSP). 136 The detailed Grants Committee budget for 2025/26 and 2026/27 can be found at Appendix C. Summary 25. This report considers the proposed budget for the Grants Scheme for 2025/26 and makes a recommendation to the Committee on the appropriate level of contributions to recommend to constituent councils for approval, subject to the agreement of the overall budget by Leaders’ Committee. Specifically, the report proposes an overall level of expenditure in 2025/26 of £6.711 million, which requires borough contributions of £6.711 million (refer to Appendix B). 26. The financial year 2025/26 represents the final year of the four-year programme of commissions provided by the Grants Committee under S.48 of the Local Government Act 1985, as recommended by the Grants Committee and approved by the Leaders’ Committee in December 2019. 137 Financial Implications for London Councils As detailed in the body of the report. Legal Implications for London Councils London Councils Standing Orders are set out in Schedule 6 of the London Councils Leaders’ Committee Governing Agreement. The Standing Orders set out the rules of debate and procedure for the conduct of meetings of the London Councils joint committees. The procedures for approving the annual subscriptions or contributions payable by the London Local Authorities for each of the joint committees (and TfL in respect of LCTEC) is set out in Section 21 of Standing Orders. The approval of the draft budget for the following financial year for each of the groups of functions set out in the Leaders’ Governing Agreement requires the agreement of at least two thirds of those representatives physically present at the Grants Committee meeting where the budget report is presented and entitled to vote on the matter. The Committee considers the draft budget prior to its submission to the Leaders’ Committee for consideration. Constituent councils will consider the recommended budget proposal within their own decision-making arrangements and make a response within the timescales laid down for the Scheme. Equalities Implications for London Councils None Appendices Appendix A – Proposed revenue income and expenditure budget 2025/26; Appendix B – Proposed borough subscriptions 2025/26; Appendix C – Indicative revenue income and expenditure budget 2026/27 and 2027/28. Background Papers 138 Grants Committee Budget Working Papers 2024/25 to 2027/28; Grants Committee Final Accounts Working Papers 2024/25; Grants Committee Revenue Budget Forecast Working Papers 2024/25; and London Councils Consolidated Budget Working Papers 2025/26 to 2027/28. 139 Appendix A Grants Committee Income and Expenditure Budget 2025/26 Original Revised Expenditure Budget Budget 2025/26 2024/25 Movements £000 £000 £000 Payments in respect of Grants London Councils Grants Programme 6,173 6,173 0 Membership Fees to London Funders (for all boroughs) 60 60 0 Sub-Total 6,233 6,233 0 Operating (Non-Grants) Expenditure Contractual Commitments Maintenance of Grants IT system 10 10 0 10 10 0 Salary Commitments Officers 267 247 20 Members 23 22 1 Maternity provision 10 10 0 300 279 21 Discretionary Expenditure Staff training/recruitment advertising 7 7 0 Staff travel 2 2 0 Costs associated with premises move 0 64 -64 9 73 -64 Total Operating Expenditure 319 362 -43 Central Recharges 159 137 22 Total Expenditure 6,711 6,732 -21 Income Core borough subscriptions Contribution to grant payments 6,173 6,173 0 Contribution to non-grants expenditure 538 495 43 6,711 6,668 43 Transfer from Reserves 0 64 -64 Total Income 6,711 6,732 -21 Net Expediture 0 0 0 140 Borough Subscriptions 2025/26 2024/25 2025/26 Base ONS Mid- Base ONS Mid- Base Difference 2022 Estimate Borough 2023 Estimate Borough from of Population % Contribution of Population % Contribution 2024/25 ('000) (£) ('000) (£) (£) 219.99 2.48% 165,453 Barking and Dagenham 222.31 2.49% 166,782 1,329 389.10 4.39% 292,638 Barnet 395.01 4.42% 296,346 3,708 247.84 2.80% 186,394 Bexley 250.85 2.80% 188,194 1,800 341.22 3.85% 256,628 Brent 344.52 3.85% 258,467 1,839 329.58 3.72% 247,872 Bromley 331.16 3.70% 248,444 573 218.05 2.46% 163,992 Camden 220.90 2.47% 165,725 1,732 10.85 0.12% 8,158 City of London 13.46 0.15% 10,098 1,940 392.22 4.42% 294,987 Croydon 397.74 4.45% 298,394 3,407 369.94 4.17% 278,225 Ealing 375.34 4.20% 281,589 3,364 327.22 3.69% 246,101 Enfield 327.43 3.66% 245,646 -455 291.08 3.28% 218,918 Greenwich 294.11 3.29% 220,649 1,731 261.49 2.95% 196,664 Hackney 263.28 2.94% 197,519 855 185.24 2.09% 139,315 Hammersmith and Fulham 186.18 2.08% 139,677 361 261.81 2.95% 196,905 Haringey 262.90 2.94% 197,234 329 261.19 2.95% 196,434 Harrow 263.45 2.95% 197,647 1,212 264.70 2.99% 199,080 Havering 268.15 3.00% 201,173 2,093 310.68 3.50% 233,660 Hillingdon 319.02 3.57% 239,337 5,677 290.49 3.28% 218,473 Hounslow 295.71 3.31% 221,849 3,376 220.37 2.49% 165,740 Islington 220.58 2.47% 165,485 -255 146.15 1.65% 109,921 Kensington and Chelsea 147.46 1.65% 110,628 707 168.30 1.90% 126,578 Kingston upon Thames 170.45 1.91% 127,876 1,298 316.81 3.57% 238,271 Lambeth 315.71 3.53% 236,853 -1,417 298.65 3.37% 224,613 Lewisham 298.71 3.34% 224,100 -514 214.71 2.42% 161,480 Merton 215.22 2.41% 161,463 -17 358.65 4.05% 269,733 Newham 362.55 4.05% 271,994 2,261 310.91 3.51% 233,833 Redbridge 313.39 3.50% 235,113 1,280 194.89 2.20% 146,578 Richmond upon Thames 195.51 2.19% 146,676 99 311.91 3.52% 234,586 Southwark 315.52 3.53% 236,711 2,125 210.05 2.37% 157,978 Sutton 211.12 2.36% 158,387 409 325.79 3.67% 245,022 Tower Hamlets 328.63 3.67% 246,546 1,524 275.89 3.11% 207,491 Waltham Forest 275.98 3.09% 207,047 -444 329.04 3.71% 247,463 Wandsworth 331.46 3.71% 248,669 1,206 211.37 2.38% 158,965 Westminster 211.51 2.36% 158,680 -285 8,866.18 100.00% 6,668,152 Totals 8,945.32 100.00% 6,711,000 42,848 141 Appendix C Grants Committee Indicative Income and Expenditure Budget 2026/27 and 2027/28 Indicative Indicative Expenditure Budget Budget 2026/27 2027/28 £000 £000 Payments in respect of Grants London Councils Grants Programme 6,173 6,173 Membership Fees to London Funders (for all boroughs) 60 60 Sub-Total 6,233 6,233 Operating (Non-Grants) Expenditure Contractual Commitments Maintenance of Grants IT system 10 11 10 11 Salary Commitments Officers 289 295 Members 23 24 Maternity provision 10 10 322 329 Discretionary Expenditure Staff training/recruitment advertising 7 7 Staff travel 2 2 9 9 Total Operating Expenditure 341 349 Central Recharges 181 184 Total Expenditure 6,755 6,766 Income Core borough subscriptions Contribution to grant payments 6,173 6,173 Contribution to non-grants expenditure 546 554 6,719 6,727 Earmarked Reserves 36 39 Total Income 6,755 6,766 Net Expediture 0 0 142