Grants Committee 26 November 2025 11:00 am Agenda 4th floor, 12 Arthur Street , London EC4R 9AB Labour Group: Room: Lea/Ravensbourne 10:30 am Conservative Group: Room: Wandle 10:30 am Liberal Democrat Room: Westbourne 10:30 am Contact Officer: Ana Gradiska Ana.gradiska@londoncouncils.gov.uk Agenda item 1. Apologies for Absence and announcement of deputies 2. *Declarations of Interest 3. Minutes of the Grants Committee AGM held on 16 July (for agreeing) 1-8 4. Minutes of the Grants Executive held on 17 September 2025 (for noting) 9-13 5. Performance of the Grants Programme 2022 – 26 14-62 6. 2022-26 Programme: Presentation from Envoy Partnership on Value for Money - 7. 2026-30 Grants Programme – Implementation Update 63-93 8. 2026-30 Grants Programme - Evaluation Plan 94-98 9. Month 6 Revenue Forecast 2025/26 99-104 10. London Councils Grants Scheme – Budget Proposals 2026/27 105-120 *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, 16 July 2025 M inutes of the meeting of the Grants Committee AGM held on 16 July 2025 London B orough & Royal Borough: Representative: B arking and Dagenham Cllr Saima Ashraf Barnet Cllr Zara Beg Bexley Cllr David Leaf (Vice Chair) Brent Cllr Mili Patel Croydon Cllr Ola Kolade City of London Nighat Quereshi (attending virtually) Ealing Cllr Blerina Hashani Enfield Cllr Sabri Ozaydin Greenwich Cllr Sandra Bauer (attending virtually) Hackney Cllr Christopher Kennedy Hammersmith and Fulham Cllr Rebecca Harvey (attending virtually) Haringey Cllr Peray Ahmet (Chair) Harrow Cllr Janet Mote (attending virtually) Havering Cllr Gillian Ford (attending virtually) Hounslow Cllr Ajmer Grewal (attending virtually) Kensington and Chelsea Cllr Sarah Addenbrooke (attending virtually) Kingston upon Thames Cllr Emily Davey (dep – attending virtually) Lambeth Cllr Donatus Anyanwu Lewisham Mayor Brenda Dacres OBE (Vice Chair) Merton Cllr Eleanor Stringer Richmond upon Thames Cllr Nancy Baldwin (attending virtually) Southwark Cllr Stephanie Cryan Sutton Cllr Marian James (Vice Chair- attending virtually) Tower Hamlets Cllr Saied Ahmed (attending virtually) Waltham Forest Cllr Andrew Dixon Wandsworth Cllr Kemi Akinola London Counc ils officers were in attendance. 1. A pologies for Absence and Announcement of Deputies 1.1 Apologies were received from Cllr Kate Lymer (LB Bromley), Cllr Nadia Shah (LB Camden), Cllr Jonathan Bianco (LB Hillingdon), Cllr Charlene McLean (LB Newham), Cllr Nafsika Butler-Thallasis and Cllr Andreas Kirsch (RB Kingston - Cllr Emily Davey deputising) 2. Declarations of Interest 1 2.1 There were no declarations of interest. 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 2025-26 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 Kemi Akinola (LB Wandsworth). 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 2025-26 Municipal Year 5.1 Through the Chair, the Strategy Director nominated three Vice Chairs for 2025-26, seconded by Cllr Kemi Akinola (LB Wandsworth): • Mayor Brenda Dacres OBE (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 OBE, Cllr Leaf and Cllr James as the Vice Chairs of the Grants Committee. 6. Election of the Grants Executive for the 2025-26 Municipal Year 6.1 The following members were appointed • Cllr Peray Ahmet (LB Haringey) – Chair (Lab) • Mayor Brenda Dacres OBE (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 Sabri Ozaydin (LB Enfield) (Lab) • Cllr Mili Patel (LB Brent) (Lab) • Cllr Sarah Addenbrooke (RB Kensington & Chelsea) (Con) • Cllr Janet Mote (LB Harrow) (Con) • Nighat Quereshi (City of London) (Ind) 2 7. Minutes of the Grants Committee AGM held on 18 July 2024 – for noting 7.1 The minutes of the Grants Committee AGM held on 18 July 2024, which had been previously agreed, were noted. 8. Minutes of the Grants Committee held on 26 March 2025 8.1 The minutes of the Grants Committee held on 26 March 2025 were agreed, with the proviso that the date on the minutes is changed from 26 March 2026 to 26 March 2025. 9. Minutes of the Grants Committee Executive held on 26 February 2025 9.1 The minutes of the Grants Committee Executive held on 26 February 2025 were noted. 10. Constitutional Matters: A. Scheme of Delegations to officers and Grants Executive Terms of Reference B. Revisions to London Councils’ financial regulations The Strategy Director introduced this report which sets out: A. Slight amendments to London Councils’ Scheme of Delegation to officers, which were approved at the Leaders’ Committee AGM on 10 June 2025, and the Grants Executive Sub-Committee Terms of Reference. B. Revisions to London Councils’ financial regulations, which remove references to the old procurement regulations which have been replaced with the new Procurement Act 2023 and regulations made under that Act. The revisions also set out changes to the reporting of external grant funding, the removal of references to the imprest account facility and other minor changes. Members noted the report and agreed the Terms of Reference for the Grants Executive. 11. Operation of Grants Committee 2025-2026 11.1 Doug Flight, Strategy Lead, 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 2025-26. 11.2 The Grants Committee: • Noted the Terms of Reference for the Grants Committee and Grants Executive; • Noted the programme of meetings. 12. Performance of Grants Programme 2022-2026, April 2022 – March 2025 (End of Year Three) 3 12.1 Tilly Holmes, Grants Manager, introduced this report, which provides members with an update on the two priorities of the 2022-26 Grants Programme, for the period April 2022 to March 2025. 12.2 Highlights of the report included: • Priority 1 (combatting homelessness) has performed strongly, and is on profile, with 13 projects RAG-rated green and one RAG-rated red. The performance dashboard shows positive outcomes, particularly in tenancy sustainment and outreach through HARP and linked services. Collaborative work with prisons and other agencies has enhanced service delivery. • St Mungo’s Streetlink London Advice Line’s overdelivery derives from several service improvements including improved partnership working, networking, collaboration, increased pathways for accessing accommodation and improved management of client expectations when negotiating stays with friends and family. Additionally, the project works with a high number of vulnerable clients that required access / referral to relevant support services. • The HARP Connect project, led by St Mungo’s, which is under an action plan to support increased performance achievement, is now RAG-rated green. Grants team officers recently undertook a successful monitoring visit to Wormwood Scrubs Prison. • The London Plus project, led by Homeless Link, continues to deliver increased training to housing organisations and borough officers across London, making up for previous underdelivery in the programme. • Providers continue to support vulnerable and disadvantaged Londoners within the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. The London Youth Gateway (LYG) project led by New Horizon Youth Centre reported that 11 per cent of young people who have accessed their service since April 2022, declared a history of care experience. • Priority 2 (tackling sexual and domestic abuse) has performed 5% below profile with 10 projects RAG-rated green, and one RAG-rate red. Despite this, there have been notable improvements in partnership work, mental health outcomes, and refugee support. Delivery has exceeded expectations in some areas, including successful events and support for the VAWG sector. • The Ascent Prevention Service has delivered above profile, building on outreach work in its first year that successfully engaged boroughs previously under-served by the former provider. This follows overdelivery in several boroughs under the previous project within the same service area. There were improved outcomes for service users with stabilised immigration status and better mental health, including successful support for securing indefinite leave to remain and specialist accommodation for women affected by harmful practices. • The Women’s Resource Centre has also performed above profile, due to a combination of historic overdelivery and a well-attended International Women’s Day event that helped many organisations reach or surpass their targets. • The London Refuges Data Collection Project, delivered by Women’s Aid, was RAG- rated red at the end of quarter 12, following six consecutive quarters at amber. The project has consistently struggled to gain engagement from borough officers, which has impacted its ability to demonstrate progress against key outcomes. Although 4 some solutions were proposed, such as using Mentimeter to improve engagement, implementation has been limited. Women’s Aid requested to renegotiate several contracted outcomes; while one adjustment related to login metrics was approved, the remaining proposals were initially considered to lack pan-London impact and sufficient value for money. No grant payments have been made since quarter 11, as officers await further information, and the latest monitoring report shows that aside from login activity, no other outcomes were achieved. Officers are proposing that the provider be withdrawn from the current programme. However, Woman’s Aid has offered to maintain a data dashboard service until 2026. London Councils officers recommend that c.£1,300 which is still owed by Woman’s Aid be treated as a notional grant to support this continued access. Members were asked to agree to this and to the proposal that no further funding be released. • The Pan London Domestic and Sexual Violence Helplines Project, led by Refuge, has requested a reduction to the four-year figure of one of their outcomes - Number of people referred to refuge. The original four-year target of 2,340 referrals was based on a broader definition that included signposting. However, it was later agreed that only direct referrals to refuges should count. Although the targets should have been adjusted accordingly, this was not done at the time. Following a mid-programme review, a request is now being made to reduce the final year’s targets, bringing the overall four-year target down to 586 to better reflect actual project delivery. • London Councils officers have worked closely with Refuge to ensure that performance targets remain both meaningful and appropriately challenging. Given the increasing complexity of referral cases in recent years, and fluctuations in demand, performance expectations have been reviewed to reflect these evolving service pressures. • London Councils has been working with Envoy Partnership to reassess how best to demonstrate value for money and understand the programme’s social value. At the end of year three, grantees described the programme’s management as clear, structured, and responsive, highlighting strong relationships, open communication, and flexibility during periods of pressure. • London Councils is also collaborating with housing directors and the GLA on the London Homelessness Accelerator Programme. 12.3 Members: • D iscussed whether a formal change of use request would be required for the c.£1,300 notional grant to Woman’s Aid. London Councils officers confirmed that a letter confirming the funds are not recoverable would be sufficient. Officers will continue to explore ways to make data use more effective. • Stated that there is a need to strategically align the programme with forthcoming national and regional strategies on VAWG and raised the importance of identifying and responding to high-risk areas, particularly where young women face homelessness and exploitation. London Councils officers confirmed that the grants programme is intended to complement local borough-level responses, and that wider strategic alignment with government, MOPAC, and the Metropolitan Police is in progress. This will include contributing to the development of shared strategies and holding regular leadership meetings focused on VAWG. 5 • Discussed the best way to improve support for grassroots organisations and exploring how this can be achieved through the current programme. Officers said that organisations such as London Funders, of which the Strategy Director was a trustee on behalf of the Grants Committee, were working on developing grassroots organisations. 12.4 Members noted the report and agreed: • That c.£1,300 owed by Women’s Aid be treated as a notional grant in exchange for the organisation providing a data dashboard service until March 2026. • The requested amendment to the four year target of one of the outcomes of the Pan London Domestic and Sexual Violence Helplines Project. • T hat London Councils officers and Grants Committee Members share the London Funders Annual Report with relevant borough officers to ensure they are aware of the • activities provided. • T hat a discussion on how to use the funding previously allocated to Woman’s Aid project should be held at the next Grants Committee meeting, in November 2025. 13. London Councils Grants Committee - Pre-Audited Financial Results 2024/25 13.1 David Sanni, Director of Resources, introduced this report, which details the provisional pre-audited financial results for London Councils Grants Committee for 2024/25: • The provisional outturn for the last financial year shows a surplus of £156,000. This is primarily due to investment returns on cash balances held by the committee, reflecting London Councils' historically prudent approach to budgeting. However, this area will be closely monitored during the upcoming budget-setting period. • There has been a net overspend driven by higher-than-anticipated staffing costs. • Reserves remain above the minimum level set by the committee, though it is important to note that additional costs are expected as part of the new programme and this should be factored into future planning. • London Councils’ auditors, PKF Littlejohn, have commenced the audit of these provisional figures, and the outcome will be reported to London Councils’ Audit Committee in September. Once approved, the final accounts will be circulated to members of this committee. 13.2 Members noted the provisional pre-audited outturn position and the indicative surplus of £156,000 for 2024/25 and the provisional level of reserves of £945,000. 14. 2026-2030 Pan-London Grants Programme – Recommendations for award of grant 14.1 The Strategy Director introduced the item, presenting recommendations from the Programme Panel for the new programme for 1 April 2026 to 31 March 2030: • A total of 76 applications were received by the application deadline, nearly double the number received in the previous round. Of these, 61 were deemed eligible for scoring. 6 • Independent scoring was undertaken by 33 assessors: 22 London Councils officers, six borough officers and five Grants Committee members. • The eligible applications represented a combined funding request of £94,499,446 against maximum available funding of £22,980,000. • On 3 June 2025, the Programme Panel, comprising the Grants Executive Committee, met to review initial funding recommendations. The panel assessed the proposals in the context of the programme’s overall aims, ensuring they align with pan-London grant principles, fit within budget, add mutual value, and enhance services for both Londoners and boroughs. The panel also provided guidance to the grants team on preliminary recommendations and next steps. • Funding recommendations include both individual organisation and consortium-based grants, which bring together culturally competent provision including multi-language support. • Members were informed that some applications for Service Area 1.1 remain subject to further review and due diligence in August, with final decisions delegated to the Grants Committee Executive, acting as the Programme Panel. A full report will return to Grants Committee in November 2025. • As part of the process, several organisations not recommended for funding submitted feedback under the Right to Reply procedure. These, alongside officer commentary, were noted. Officers also highlighted that the Equality Impact Assessment submitted to the Committee in March 2025 will be reviewed to identify any potential service gaps. Should gaps be identified, final decisions on any additional awards will be delegated to the Grants Committee Executive, acting as the Programme Panel, with funding to be met from the programme’s flexibility allocation or uncommitted reserves as appropriate. • Following the Committee’s decisions, all recommended organisations will enter a pre- award period involving detailed scrutiny of delivery plans, budgets and outcome profiles. Pre-agreement meetings will provide a structured space for organisations, particularly those new to pan-London delivery, to validate their plans and receive guidance to support confident mobilisation. To mitigate risks, London Councils may propose staggered payment models. Funding is not guaranteed until pre-award requirements are met, and either party may withdraw; in such cases, Grants Committee will be advised, and an alternative applicant may be recommended. • There was an emphasis on supporting new organisations many of which engaged through market-warming events. Officers noted increased interest this year, reflecting wider financial pressures across the voluntary sector. London Councils officers, alongside partners such as London Plus, have directed unsuccessful applicants to alternative funding opportunities. Best practice sharing will also be embedded in the new programme through second-tier support activities, enabling organisations to collaborate more effectively. Members were asked to agree the funding recommendations for Priorities 1 and 2, delegate authority to the Grants Committee Executive (acting as the Programme Panel) to approve final decisions for Service Area 1.1, review the Equalities Impact Assessment and delegate authority for additional funding to address equalities gaps, and note applications not recommended for funding and the associated Right to Reply submissions. Members agreed the recommendations. 7 14.2 Members: • Praised the rigour and training involved in the scoring process, describing it as transparent and confidence-inspiring. Members also highlighted the value of understanding the figures behind the headline assessments and the importance of financial scrutiny through the due diligence process. • Raised the importance of documenting the extent to which funded organisations are engaging with communities across London. Officers confirmed that applicants are required to demonstrate an understanding of the local landscape and collaborate with others. Monitoring includes quarterly reporting on partnerships, with current records showing involvement with nearly 1,000 community groups. While it is not feasible to commission an organisation that works with every individual community, the expectation is that providers will have strong local intelligence and the ability to identify and respond to gaps. This approach ensures that emerging needs are effectively addressed through borough-level political advocacy and informed programme delivery. • Discussed the issue of capacity building for applicants who were not successful in this round. London Councils officers said that while London Councils does not have the resources to deliver this support directly, it works closely with bodies such as London Plus to offer development support and through the programmes second-tier offer. This collaborative approach ensures that organisations have access to the tools and guidance needed to strengthen future applications and delivery. The meeting finished at 12.15pm 8 LONDON COUNCILS’ GRANTS COMMITTEE EXECUTIVE – INFORMAL MEETING Minutes of the Informal Grants Committee Executive meeting held via Microsoft Teams on Wednesday 17 September 2025 at 1pm Members: Cllr Peray Ahmet (LB Haringey) – Chair (Lab) Mayor Brenda Dacres OBE (LB Lewisham) – Vice Chair (Lab) Cllr David Leaf (LB Bexley) – Vice Chair (Con) Cllr Marian James (LB Sutton) – Vice Chair (LD) Cllr Stephanie Cryan (LB Southwark) (Lab) Cllr Sabri Ozaydin (LB Enfield) (Lab) Cllr Mili Patel (LB Brent) (Lab) Cllr Sarah Addenbrooke (RB Kensington & Chelsea) (Con) Cllr Janet Mote (LB Harrow) (Con) Nighat Quereshi (City of London) (Ind) London Councils officers were in attendance. The Chair welcomed members and officers to the meeting. 1 Apologies for Absence and Announcement of Deputies 1.1 There were no apologies for absence. 2 Declarations of Interests 2.1 There were no declarations of interest. 3 Minutes of Grants Executive held on 26 February 2025 (to be noted then agreed by Urgency) 3.1 The minutes were noted. 4. Minutes of Grants Committee AGM held on 16 July 2025 (for noting) 4.1 The minutes were noted. 5 Value for money update – Envoy Partnership 5.1 Envoy Partnership has been commissioned by London Councils to undertake an assessment of the value for money of the Pan-London Grants Programme. The evaluation will include an analysis of the programme’s overall social and economic impact, with 9 extrapolations made where possible to estimate longer-term value. It will also provide recommendations for the 2026–30 programme, covering approaches to primary and secondary data collection as well as guidance on reporting methodologies. Initial findings are expected in November 2025, with the final results to be published in July 2026. 5.2 London Councils officers emphasised that the Grants Programme is outcomes-led, with a strong focus on measuring results achieved. Records are maintained of planned activities at the outset, alongside the activities undertaken to support delivery, and these may be subject to spot checks. In previous iterations, performance was measured primarily through activity counts, such as the number of workshops delivered. This has since been streamlined, with the emphasis placed firmly on outcomes. Advocacy is regarded as a means of achieving change, rather than an end in itself. 5.3 Members highlighted the difficulty of linking advocacy activity directly to tangible outcomes, such as securing housing. Advocacy is often time-intensive, and it is not always clear which specific interventions drive results. This raises a central question of value for money: while most projects are meeting their expected targets, how can these outcomes be benchmarked, and how can we determine whether they represent stronger performance than comparable projects? It was agreed that greater insight and benchmarking would be valuable. One suggestion was to assess both the outcomes achieved and the cost- effectiveness of delivery. Even where projects generate different or multiple outcomes, meaningful comparisons could still be drawn. Existing studies in this field could serve as reference points, supported by a qualitative assessment of similarities and differences between approaches. The Strategy Director added that further input from housing policy teams may help provide useful London-wide averages. Previous work by voluntary sector organisations on social value can also provide the relevant insight. 6 Update on under-delivery – 22-26 6.1 Feria Henry, Grants Manager, provided an update to the report presented to the Grants Executive in February 2025: • At that time, three projects were at risk of having their final payments reduced due to under-delivery arising from external issues. Members are now being asked to consider whether to continue with the current arrangements. • Since the last report, one of the projects (Project B, a Women’s Aid service) has closed. Delivery had ceased at the end of March 2025, and the organisation formally withdrew from the programme in July 2025, following discussions with the grants team. • Project A has improved its delivery since the last report; they are now 5.29% below the threshold and have been rated Green RAG since Quarter 12. This was largely due to improved communications with boroughs and resolution of staffing and probation service issues. Earlier underperformance was driven by historic resourcing problems, but in Year 3 the project has filled vacancies and stabilised delivery, enabling progress towards targets. Working with their in-house pro bono legal team has supported improved outcomes, and performance is moving in a positive direction. 10 • For Project C, under-delivery has slightly increased, as the project’s main delivery site was forced to close for several weeks during the summer. This coincided with delays in housing benefit payments linked to the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Bill, which led to service users facing housing insecurity and contributed to the unsafe environment at the centre. The site has since reopened. The project is developing a new system to track clients who disengage. Further information is expected in the Quarter 14 monitoring return. • At the previous meeting, members had not been content with the proposal to cap deductions at 5%. The current approach (possible deductions as set out in the report) will continue. Following this meeting, the Grants team will write to projects at risk to confirm that final payments will be reduced unless sufficient progress is made to meet targets. 6.2 Members confirmed that clawback must remain an available option. While genuine extenuating circumstances should be considered, under-delivery may also indicate underspending, and this should be examined carefully. For Project C, concern was raised about the credibility of regulatory delays as a rationale, given the legislation was passed a year ago, and further evidence will be required if this is to be treated as an exceptional circumstance. Concern was also expressed that Project C’s attempt to introduce a new service model to track disengaged clients comes very late in the programme, as this has been a recurring issue throughout delivery. Nonetheless, it was noted that continuous refinement of engagement methods is to be expected, and this is the final iteration within the programme. 6.3 Members noted the report. 6 Communications plan – 26-30 Programme 7.1 Finbar Donovan-Murphy, Media officer, introduced this item, which presented members with a communications programme for the 2026-30 Grants Programme, which will seek to demonstrate the impact of the programme to Londoners and boroughs and celebrate the achievements to date in the areas of combatting homelessness and tackling sexual and domestic abuse. 7.2 The communications programme will also aim to increase buy-in from boroughs and other stakeholders, improve transparency and demonstrate accountability, and ensure a coordinated approach across stakeholders. 7.3 The London Councils media team will issue a press release inNovember, ahead of the pre-election period. The release will seek to secure coverage in local government and London-focused media, emphasising value for money, careful oversight of borough contributions, and the real impact of the programme on the ground. 7.4 The communications are expected to have a primarily London focus. Coverage in trade press and local government outlets such as the Municipal Journal and Local Government Chronicle would be considered a successful outcome. 7.5 Members made the following comments: • Social media platforms vary in effectiveness and reputation and this needs to be considered carefully when deciding where to publicise the programme. • Case studies and anonymised testimonials from funded organisations could be used to bring the story to life. • It would be good to include borough-specific information, so that each borough can highlight the local impact of the programme. 11 • Potential negative reactions also need to be anticipated, as some media outlets may try to mischaracterise the programme. Communications should therefore be carefully framed, with clear messaging and reactive lines prepared. • A joint statement, signed by all lead members, could reinforce the cross-party nature of the initiative in London. 8 Evaluation discussion – 26-30 Programme 8.1 Pilar Kusel, Priority Manager, introduced this item, which invites the Grants Executive Committee to provide steer on the evaluation of the 2026–30 Grants Programme by considering the proposed timetable for evaluation and identifying the areas of the programme that should be prioritised. 8.2 At the Grants Committee meeting in March 2025, it was agreed that a budget of £100,000 would be allocated to cover the cost of evaluation for the new 2026–30 grants programme. It was also agreed that a programme of evaluation activity would be developed and discussed with the Grants Committee during 2025/26. 8.3 The proposed timeline has been designed to allow sufficient time for evaluations to be implemented effectively. The areas of focus suggested in the paper include: Equalities monitoring and service accessibility; Value for money; Quality of partnerships and Innovation and Learning from best practice. Reporting within 12–18 months is recommended to allow early identification of trends and enable programme adjustments in the second year. 8.4 If the decision is made to continue using the Envoy Partnership Social Value Manager platform to evaluate value for money throughout the four years of the new programme, it is estimated that around £9000 per year would be required. These funds could be drawn from the £100,000 evaluation budget assigned to the 2026–30 programme. 8.5 Members welcomed the inclusion of care-experienced individuals under equalities monitoring and commented that: • W hile equalities monitoring should include protected characteristics, differences within these groups also needed to be considered, and in-depth research will help distinguish how these variations affect service delivery. • I nnovation and learning from best practice will be increasingly important, particularly as resources and funding become constrained; this emphasises the value of sharing insights within organisations and applying new technologies. • It is essential to continuously monitor the value for money. The quality of partnerships could largely be captured through existing monitoring data and may therefore not require additional focus. 8.6 London Councils officers said that the evaluation plan will be revised following this feedback, with a new draft scheduled to be presented to the Grants Committee in November. 9 Month 3 Revenue Forecast 9.1 David Sanni, Director of Resources, introduced the financial report, which sets out actual income and expenditure against the approved budget to the end of June 2025. The report 12 also provides a forecast outturn position for 2025/26, covering both actual and committed expenditure on commissions as well as the administration of those commissions. 9.2 Members were reminded that the figures presented reflect the position at the end of the first quarter of 2025/26, which is the final year of the current four-year programme of commissions. At this stage, a surplus of £62,000 is forecast over the approved budget. 9.3 Members noted: • The projected surplus of £62,000 for the year; and • The projected level of Grants Committee reserves. 13 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 Authority (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 tenth performance report on the two priorities of the 2022-26 Grants Programme, for the period April 2022 to September 2025 (quarters one to 14) Grants Committee Performance of Grants Programme 2022-2026 April 2022 – September 2025 Item: 5 Report by Feria Henry/Tilly Holmes/Pilar Kusel Job title Grants Managers Date 26 November 2025 Contact Officers Feria Henry/ Tilly Holmes/ Pilar Kusel Telephone 020 7934 9529 020 7934 9862 020 7934 9815 Email Feria.henry@londoncouncils.gov.uk Tilly.Holmes@londonCouncils.gov.uk Pilar.kusel@londoncouncils.gov.uk 14 Recommendations The Grants Committee is asked to note: a) o utcomes at priority level to end of quarter 14: i) Priority 1, Combatting Homelessness, overall is in line with the profile. ii) Priority 2, T ackling Sexual and Domestic Abuse, overall is six per cent below profile. b) T he number of interventions delivered in the relevant period: i) Priority 1, Combatting Homelessness – 37,554 ii) Priority 2 , T ackling Sexual and Domestic Abuse – 236,272 c) P roject level performance, using the Red, Amber, Green (RAG) performance management system (explained at Appendix 1): i) 13 projects are rated Green d) t he link to the online committee dashboard which provides: i) Graphs showing outcome delivery against p rofile by service area ii) London maps showing actual distribution of delivery by priority across boroughs iii) P rogramme delivery information, including borough outcomes, regular activities and highlights at both a pan-London and borough level iv) P roject contact information e) Policy and Programme updates - providing context and commentary to the programme such as policy updates (Appendix 2), f) The annual equalities report for the third year of the 2022- 26 programme (Appendix 3) Appendix 1 RAG Rating Methodology Appendix 2 Policy and Programme Updates Appendix 3 The third annual equalities report for the 2022- 26 programme 15 Page 1 of 49 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 ha s agreed funding for 15 projects for the period 2022 to 2026, subject to delivery, compliance with grant conditions and continued availability of resources. 1.3 After the unexpected cessation of the Healthy London, Healthy Relationships project at the end of quarter seven; in March 2024, the Grants Committee agreed to fund a new project under Service Area 2.1, called the Ascent Prevention Project, led by Womens Resource Centre, initially for one year, commencing in April 2024. In February 2025, Grants Executive agreed to extend this funding for a second and final year ending on 31 March 2026 with the rest of the current programme. 1.4 As reported to grants committee meeting in July 2025, the London Refuges Data Collection project, led by Women’s Aid, ceased delivery at the end of March 2025 and withdrawn from the 2022-2026 programme. 1.5 A list of grants is included below, in Table 1. Table 1: London Councils Grants Programme 2022-26 (Priority 1 and 2) Service Area1 Organisation Agreed awarded amount 1.1 Shelter, The National Campaign for Homeless People £3,706,718 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 £405,1592 1 See paragraphs 2.1 and 5.1 for a brief description of the service areas 2 Total amount paid to AVA for delivery up to December 2023, original grant awarded was £944,987 16 Page 2 of 49 2.1 Women’s Resource Centre (April 202 4 – March 2026) £497,365 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 £68,7503 2.4 Ashiana Network (April 2022 - March 2023) £840,0004 2.4 Ashiana Network (April 2023 - March 2026) £2,520,000 2.5 Women’s Resource Centre £799,5825 2.6 Asian Women’s Resource Centre £1,234,646 Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Violence £14,727,775 Total £24,613,638 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 make real improvements in their lives. This is the tenth report covering the performance of the 2022 to 2026 Grants Programme. Case studies of programme activity are available here on t he London Councils website. 2 P riority 1: Homelessness Delivery 2.1 The Committee has allocated £9.9 million to five projects across the four service areas in Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness for 2022-26. Of these five: 3 Total amount paid to Women’s Aid Federation up to the end of quarter 12. Original grant awarded was £100,000. 4 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 5 This figure includes the additional £41,493.75 that was novated from AVA to WRC for quarter eight 17 Page 3 of 49 - 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 the start of the fourth and final year of the programme, Priority o ne’s performance was in line with the profile. Outcome targets have been surpassed in two out of the four service areas to the end of quarter fourteen. The service areas that have performed below target (1.1 – Prevention and targeted intervention and 1.3 - Prevention and targeted intervention for young people), are within the - 15 per cent performance tolerance. 2.3 Service area 1.2 (prevention and targeted intervention for rough sleepers) has exceeded the +15 per cent tolerance level. St Mungo’s Streetlink London Advice line’s over delivery derives from there being a high number of vulnerable clients, increased pathways for accessing accommodation a nd improved management of client expectations when negotiating stays with friends and family. Additionally, the project worked with a high number of vulnerable clients that required access / referral to relevant support services. Seasonal factors like SWEP activation have also contributed to increased referrals. 2.4 Service area 1.4 (support services to the Homelessness Sector) has exceeded the +15 per cent tolerance level. The London Plus project, led by Homeless Link, continues to exceed delivery targets due to the introduction of increased and innovative programmes of training and bespoke systems practice support to local authorities. This includes ‘Systems Thinking' workshops for Housing Options teams and Casework Skills for Prevention and Advice Services. 2.5 Specific information on achievement against outcomes by service area and at project level is available on the Priority One section of the committee dashboard. 2.6 Providers continue to support vulnerable and disadvantaged Londoners within the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. Further information on the latest 18 Page 4 of 49 Priority One equalities figures being served by the programme, can also be found on the committee dashboard linked above. 2.7 The London Youth Gateway (LYG) project led by New Horizon Youth Centre reported 1,328, or 10 per cent of young people who have accessed their service since April 2022, declared a history of care experience.6 2.8 London Councils funds organisations to deliver services across London and our monitoring returns include an assessment of equalities. The third report on the equalities performance of the 2022-26 programme is included in Appendix 3 of this report. Performance Management 2.9 All five Priority one projects are currently RAG rated Green. 2.10 The HARP Connect project , led by St Mungo’s are Green RAG rated for the third successive quarter. The project continued to demonstrate a strong commitment to client advocacy and housing stability in project services. However, challenges remain around rehabilitation and resettlement, particularly with accommodation needs of under 35s. The lack of suitable available accommodation, as well as the reduction in support for remand prisoners has impacted performance delivery; which despite a slight increase, remains narrowly below the 85 per cent delivery threshold. Whilst many young clients are highly motivated to change their lives, the lack of suitable housing options forces them to return to environments associated with gang activity and criminal networks. HARP Connect aims to improve performance through maintaining strong working relationships with prison teams, particularly through regular attendance at First Night Centres; a safer, more controlled environment for newly incarcerated individuals. They have also established engagement with services such as Catch22, Advance Women, Social Services, and the Department of Work and Pensions ( DWP) team at HMP Wormwood Scrubs. 2.11 The London Youth Gateway project, led by New Horizon Youth Centre, remain s just below the 85 per cent delivery threshold. It continues to experience difficulties in tracking long-term tenancy sustainment when casework with young people has long closed, as clients change phone numbers or do not want to re- engage due to the potential for re- traumatisation. The project’s Resettlement Worker continues to seek to address this. The project is also under-delivering in referring service -users to employment support , 6 “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. 19 Page 5 of 49 but over-delivering in referring service-users to education and training opportunities and supporting service- users to improve their life skills . This is due to a combination of staffing issues (which have now been resolved) and changing needs – refugees, asylum seekers and migrants, who are not yet ready to begin work in the UK, have become over half the project’s new users since summer 2023. 2.12 The grants team continue to monitoring delivery thresholds and alert projects so they can take remedial steps before the end of the programme. 2.13 Additional details about Priority one policy , wider environment, and individual project updates in included in Appendix 2 of this paper. 20 Page 6 of 49 3 Priority 2: Sexual and Domestic Violence Delivery 3.1 The Committee allocated £14.7 million to nine projects across the six service areas in Priority 2: Tackling Sexual and Domestic Violence for 2022-20267. - One (average annual value of £0. 2 million) was delivering against specification 2.1: Prevention (working with children and young people)8. - 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). - One9(average annual value of £0.3 million) is delivering against specification 2.3: Helpline services (advice and support, access to refuge provision). - One10 (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 . At the end of quarter 12, overall performance was five per cent below profile. 3.2 For further information at a service area level please see the committee dashboard. 3.3 Outcome 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. 3.4 Service Area 2.4 (Emergency Specialist Refuge Provision) has exceeded the +15 per cent performance buffer. This is due to cumulative overdelivery across the majority of their agreed outcomes, including the provision of wraparound support, specialist legal and substance misuse support, and the development of safety plans and assisting 7 This figure includes service area 2.4 which was extended for one additional year under the 2017-22 programme to 31st March 2023 8 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. 9 There is currently one project delivery under Service Area 2.3, the project led by Women’s Aid Federation ended in March 2025 10 See footnote 7 21 Page 7 of 49 women to rebuild their lives and move on to independence. T he project is committed to support all women in need, and not to turn any service user away. 3.5 Service Area 2.5 – support services to the VAWG sector, has exceeded the +15 per cent performance tolerance. Women’s Resource Centre leads the partnership, which is the sole commission in this strand. The partnership ’s performance is attributed to historic and current overdelivery as a result of the partnership not adhering to its timetable and achieving above the target number of attendees for its training sessions. 3.6 Providers continue to support vulnerable and disadvantaged service users within the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. Further information on the latest Priority Two equalities figures being met by the programme, can be found on the committee portal (under Priority Two). Our monitoring returns include an assessment of equalities. The third report on the equalities performance of the 2022-26 programme is included in Appendix 3 of this report. Performance Management 3.7 At the end of quarter 14, all Priority two projects are RAG rated Green. 3.8 Updates about Priority two policy and wider environment, and individual projects in included in Appendix 2 of this paper. 4. Risk-based performance management (RAG rating) – Project level performance 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 202111. 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 Committee will note that 13 projects are RAG rated Green. The majority of the projects are delivering at a steady ( many oversubscribed) level. The outcomes that remain extremely challenging are those addressing tenancy sustainment or engaging people with employment support. Both priorities continue to be challenged by lack of 11 Grants Programme 2022-26: Prospectus for the new programme, Item 14, 14 July 2021 22 Page 8 of 49 available housing and supporting service users for longer periods of time, as well as the increase complexity of cases. 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 - the 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 March 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 has required a new approach to annual budgeting, with projects adjusting budgets annually to match changes in costs, within the four year budget envelope. 5.3 Officers will close the programme in line with the commissioning monitoring arrangements policy to ensure the safeguarding of public money invested in the programme by the boroughs. The final grant instalment will be split into two to allow for adjustments for any underdelivery and/or underspend. The first payment relating to the final quarter will be released in early 2026, on satisfactory submission of returns relating to the period October -December 2025. The second payment will be made following receipt of a satisfactory final return after the close of the project, including an evaluative report and a report on any underspend. 5.4 Where there is underspend, the final payment will be reduced, or if the figure is greater than the final payment an invoice will be issued. Where there is significant under - delivery (greater than the agreed 15 per cent tolerance), officers will reduce the final payment proportionally in line with the level of underdelivery. Lead partners have already been notified of these proposed steps and officers will follow up with impacted commissions shortly. This was discussed with Grants Executive at their meetings in 23 Page 9 of 49 February and September 2025 and officers will continue to provide update reports to Grants Committee in the normal way and provide a final report after the close of the programme. 5.5 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. 5.6 As reported at the July Grants Committee 12, grants managers have been working with Envoy Partners hip to understand the social value of the programme. Envoy has reviewed and mapped the 2022 -2026 programme outcomes and will present initial findings to the Grants Committee in agenda item 6 of this meeting. Envoy are working towards providing a value for money framework which will be able to be used in future programmes, analysis of the current programme data and recommendations for the 2026-2030 programme over the remainder of the 2022-26 programme. 5.7 The reporting portal has been live since July 2022 and the funded projects submit quarterly reports via this medium . T he team continues to look for opportunities to streamline reporting, while balancing that with the need to adequately monitoring performance and ensure pan-London Delivery. 5.8 Dashboards: this paper now includes links to: − the committee dashboard. At the November 2024 committee meeting, the team was tasked with reducing the paper report and have moved the graphs and tables on to the new dashboard, introduced at the March 2025 committee meeting. This dashboard includes project contact information, Service area and outcome performance information. − It also includes a link to the borough dashboard where m embers and borough officers can see more details about the services offered on both a pan London and borough basis and highlights of the work done in their borough. 12 Grants Committee 16 July 2025, Item 12 - Performance of Grants Programme 2022-2026, April 2022 – March 2025 (End of Year Three) 24 Page 10 of 49 5.9 All dashboards are updated before each Grants Committee meeting, enabling more up to date information to be accessed throughout the year. We continue to welcome member and officer feedback. 5.10 The team continues to seek opportunities to disseminate information about the programme to both Members and borough officers. The team is planning to resume their lunchtime sessions with the funded projects, which comprised of an informal presentation and question and answer session and provide an opportunity to hear about funded services outside of G rants committee meetings. A n ew committee members induction session was held in October, and a recording was sent to all m embers. The team is also arranging opportunities for funded groups to present to various officer network groups such as VAWG coordinators and Borough Grants officers throughout the remainder of the programme. 5.11 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. 5.12 Grants managers are working with Superhighways to integrate the payment system into the portal to make it more efficient. 6. Recommendations 6.1 The Grants Committee is asked to note: a) outcomes at priority level: i) Priority 1, combatting homelessness, overall is in line with the profile to quarter 14 ii) Priority 2, tackling sexual and domestic violence, overall is six per cent below profile to quarter 14 b) the number of interventions delivered in the relevant periods: i) Priority 1, combatting homelessness – 37,554 ii) Priority 2, tackling sexual and domestic violence – 236,272 c) project level performance, using the Red, Amber, Green (RAG) performance management system (explained in Appendix 1): i) 13 projects are rated Green d) t he committee dashboard contains the interactive borough map, project delivery information and contact details, as well as an update on outcome performance and a link to the borough dashboard. 25 Page 11 of 49 e) context and commentary to the programme, including policy updates, f) t he third annual equalities report for the 2022-26 Programme (Appendix 3) Appendix 1 RAG Rating Methodology Appendix 2 Policy and Programme Updates Appendix 3 The third annual equalities report for the 2022-26 Programme Financial Implications for London Councils The London Councils Grants Committee considered proposals for expenditure in 2025-26 at its meeting in November 2024, and Leaders’ Committee agreed a budget at its meeting in December 2024. Legal Implications for London Councils None Equalities Implications for London Councils 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. This document includes the third annual equalities report on the 2022-26 Programme (Appendix 3) Background Documents Performance of Grants Programme 2022-26 – Item 12, 16 July 2025 Proposal for funding for Service Area 2.1: Prevention (25/26) – Grants Committee Executive 26 February 2025 New Proposal for Service Area 2.1: Prevention – Item 8, 27 March 2024 Performance Management Update: Against Violence and Abuse (AVA) – Item 7, 27 March 2024 26 Page 12 of 49 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 27 RAG Rating Methodology Appendix 1 Page 13 of 49 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 poi nts Amber 55-79 poi nts RED 0-54 poi nts The RAG rating is made up of: • Performance – Delivery of outcomes and new users - 70 per cent • Quality - beneficiary satisfaction 13, 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 achieve a Green rating was agreed at the March 2018 Grants 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 13 This previously included a self-assessment but will now integrated into a monitoring visit. 28 Policy and Programme Updates Appendix 2 Page 14 of 49 We have moved additional information about the G rants Programme such as policy and wider environment and p riority level updates to this appendix, for ease of reading. This appendix includes updates for both quarters 13 and 14, which this report covers. 1 Priority 1 – Combatting Homelessness Policy and wider environment 1.1 Homelessness Funding from 2026/27 onwards -The government is proceeding with a range of significant changes to the funding mechanisms for homelessness, rough sleeping and temporary accommodation (TA) from 2026/27 onwards: - Excluding TA, all homelessness and rough sleeping funding will be distributed through a single Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Grant. This will be made up of a merger of the prevention element of the former Homelessness Prevention Grant and rough sleeping funding streams, including the Rough Sleeping Prevention and Recovery Grant. - Key details, such as the allocation methodology and how funding will be apportioned to the GLA, have yet to be confirmed so we do not know how this will impact borough funding levels. - The element of funding for TA that is currently allocated to councils as part of their Homelessness Prevention Grant will be rolled into the Revenue Support Grant, distributed under the new Settlement Funding Assessment. This new approach would remove the ringfence requiring this money to be spent on homelessness services and TA. 1.2 London Councils is still awaiting the publication of the government’s cross-departmental Homelessness Strategy – due this Autumn. 1.3 Ending Homelessness Accelerator Programme Update - The London Ending Homelessness Accelerator Programme (EHAP) is a partnership between London Councils, GLA and London Housing Directors Group (LHDG) working with key partners from across the sector. EHAP is moving from the design and development stage, and into implementation and delivery. 1.4 The first Ending Homelessness Delivery Board took place in October, focused on accelerating efforts to end homelessness across the capital. The Board will develop and agree the strategic plan for EHAP, prioritise initiatives and ensure that system -wide 29 Policy and Programme Updates Appendix 2 Page 15 of 49 funding and policy decisions are aligned with the needs of boroughs and national priorities. The Board is co- chaired by Councillor Grace Williams , London Councils Executive Member for Housing and Regeneration and the Deputy Mayor Tom Copley. 1.5 Thematic Groups will be established to provide insights and expertise on programme priorities: Prevention, Temporary Accommodation, Ending Rough Sleeping, and Supported Housing. 1.6 The programme is supported by a £3.49m funding grant from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government ( MHCLG) to the GLA to provide staffing and programme capacity to support the next steps. This includes set up of a cross - organisational delivery team, hosted by London Councils, as well as funding to build sub-regional capacity, and for projects supporting innovation in service delivery. Priority one updates 1.7 Funded projects report that the combination of unaffordable rents, chronic shortages of suitable housing, and increased competition for tenancies makes it increasingly difficult to prevent loss of accommodation, even where advice and advocacy are provided. As well as day-to-day frontline staffing pressures, the wider housing and welfare landscape continues to present significant barriers to securing stable accommodation for clients. Particularly for the HARP Connect project 14, planning for resettlement is difficult for clients on remand in prison, as their release dates and outcomes remain uncertain. This uncertainty limits its ability to secure accommodation in advance and often results in crisis-led discharges. 1.8 T he persistent systemic issues in the immigration system , including ongoing problems with e-Visas, delays experienced with decision -making, and a growing backlog of appeal cases also remains a challenge for a number of the funded projects within the Combatting Homelessness priority . Immigration tribunal backlogs, particularly for asylum appeals, affects all cases and prolongs already stressful periods of uncertainty for clients. New Horizon Youth Centre (NHYC) report already seeing increased demand in October 2025 due to the return to the 28 day move- on period for Home Office accommodation. 1.9 Despite these challenges, projects funded under Priority one continue to provide vital support to some of the most vulnerable people and communities in need. In the London 14 Led by St Mungo’s 30 Policy and Programme Updates Appendix 2 Page 16 of 49 borough of Enfield, for example, Shelter, lead partner for the STAR Partnership project, met with the London Gypsy and Traveller Trust, an organisation that supports that community with housing and related problems, and has agreed to accept referrals from the organisation, and provide workshops to upskill the staff in their knowledge around housing rights and options . Shelter also attended the Refugee and Migrants Forum based in Hackney to discuss issues faced by people affected by immigration barriers. Shelter launched its anti -racism in housing campaign at the House of Lords, placing people with lived experience of the housing crisis at the heart of the project and highlighting the need to address systemic racism in housing and homelessness services. Shelter and project partner Stonewall Housing secured a presence at Pride, promoting the STAR Partnership with rainbow -themed materials that emphasise the partnership’s specialist support for the LGBTQI+ community. 1.10 The HARP Connect service has established regular communication with the NHS Pathway Homeless Team based at Ealing and Northwick Park Hospitals, contributing to coordinated care and housing support for homeless patients. Pan London support continues successfully, for example, with staff actively promoting the HARP Connect service in Bromley through monthly in- person attendance at the Criminal Justice Substance and Alcohol meetings, contributing to discussions and strengthening links with substance misuse services. Additionally, staff regularly visit the Bromley Probation Delivery Unit, supporting partnership working and increasing the visibility of the service. 1.11 London PLUS 15 project staff attended a City and Hackney Homeless Health Partnership Group meeting to share good practice and provide links to contacts beyond City and Hackney. London PLUS also designed bespoke workshops for the Enfield Voluntary Action Network. Project staff are currently developing trauma- informed/strength-based management training for the management team of Greenwich Housing Inclusion and Support Service and also supporting Newham partners with the review of the Newham Integrated Rough Sleeper Support Service (NIRSS). 1.12 New Horizon Youth Centre (NHYC) and Depaul’s co- run Youth Hub, which has ringfenced beds for London Youth Gateway (LYG) service-users, was featured on BBC Evening News. NHYC launched its new 5 -year strategy in response to the ongoing housing crisis, which will be rolled out over the coming quarters, focusing on a more consistent crisis offer and clearer journeys for young people. LYG partners continue to 15 Led by Homeless Link 31 Policy and Programme Updates Appendix 2 Page 17 of 49 build relationships with PRS providers to combat the shortage of affordable and safe accommodation. 1.13 StreetLink London Advice Line 16 report an increase in street homelessness; in particular, it notes that between April and June 2025, London recorded 4,392 individuals were seen rough sleeping, marking a four per cent increase compared to the same period last year. Of these, 2,014 were first-time rough sleepers, also a four per cent rise year-on-year. Among those seen rough sleeping, 788 individuals were classified as living on the streets, representing a 26 per cent increase year-on-year and a 12 per cent increase compared to the previous quarter. This rise indicates both an increase in long- term rough sleeping and new rough sleepers. Over the course of the quarter, StreetLink responded to 2,112 calls through its inbound phoneline. It continued to strengthen i ts service delivery, with more staff trained in casework, the introduction of a new team - wide prioritisation process, and the identification of new accommodation pathways. 2 Priority 2 – Tackling Sexual and Domestic Abuse Policy and Wider Environment 2.1 The Government is expected to publish a new cross -departmental, 10- year VAWG Strategy later this year as part of its commitment to halve violence against women and girls within a decade. Sector partners are calling for clear accountability, multi -year funding and a stronger focus on prevention. 2.2 The Home Affairs Committee published a report in July 2025 warning that the Government’s fragmented, short-term funding approach risks undermining its pledge to halve VAWG within a decade. The Committee found that specialist “by and for” services remain under-resourced and that prevention work lacks sustained investment. 2.3 The Government announced in August , that it will introduce a statutory definition and guidance on ‘honour -based abuse’ to support a consistent national approach. The measures will include a pilot prevalence study, a national awareness campaign and consultation with survivors and frontline specialists ahead of implementation. 2.4 The Crime and Policing Bill, currently making its way through Parliament, includes several VAWG-related measures, including creating new offences for spiking and non- 16 Led by St Mungo’s 32 Policy and Programme Updates Appendix 2 Page 18 of 49 consensual intimate- image taking, strengthening Stalking Protection Orders and tightening name-change restrictions for registered sex offenders. 2.5 The Sentencing Bill (introduced in September) creates a new earned-progression model for custody, expands electronic tagging and introduces a domestic -abuse flag at sentencing to strengthen monitoring and data. The reforms heighten the need for robust supervision of domestic abuse and sexual-offence cases on release. 2.6 The HM Inspectorate of Probation issued a national alert on 18 September 2025 warning that probation services are failing to properly assess and manage offenders who pose a risk to women and girls, including domestic -abuse and sexual offenders. HMIP paused all routine inspections to urgently focus on improving risk management. 2.7 The Mayor of London, in partnership with Women’s Aid and Airbnb, has launched a new pilot to provide free emergency accommodation for domestic-abuse survivors and their children (up to 60 families, for up to two weeks). 2.8 The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) has launched a Pan- London Sexual Violence Support Service on 1 October 2025, replacing seven separate contracts with one coordinated model delivered by an alliance of specialist providers. The new service aims to strengthen consistency and access to trauma-informed support across the capital. 2.9 The Ascent Prevention Project reported that borough officers have shared their concerns on the lack of government commitment to funding prevention, notwithstanding boroughs that have commissioned their own services through to March 2026. There are concerns that early intervention is not well resourced enough to meet the needs of children and young people who are at risk of using harmful behaviours or those that are potential victims. There is a worry that without long term commitments to Prevention funding there will be increases in VAWG enacted by boys and young men. Priority Two updates 2.10 Service providers aiming to tackle domestic and sexual violence under Priority Two report a commonality in some of the issues raised which are detailed as follows: Many women face unsuitable or unsafe accommodation, while the ongoing cost-of-living crisis disproportionately impacts Black and minoritised communities and women with No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF). Extended National Health Service (NHS) 33 Policy and Programme Updates Appendix 2 Page 19 of 49 counselling waiting times have also increased demand on funded project services, requiring advocates to provide prolonged emotional support in the interim. These intersecting pressures underscore the urgent need for multi -agency responses to ensure timely, and culturally appropriate support. Service users have also revealed recurring personal and systemic challenges; in particular service users struggle with self-doubt, difficulty prioritising themselves, and feelings of not being understood by authorities, particularly in complex immigration or housing situations. 2.11 Over the last two quarters, the Ascent Prevention project has finalised their pilot training for young men and boys led by their new delivery partner, Respect. The project held information sessions which were well attended by boroughs across London includi ng Bexley, Bromley, and Sutton. This pilot has generated a lot of interest with applications from professionals in 13 boroughs including VAWG and PSHE 17 leads, social and youth workers. Participants for the training will be notified before October half term and take place in the next quarter. The influence of far right activity on boys and young men continues to be raised as a concern as has rhetoric about migrants taking resources meant for ‘English people’. 2.12 There has been high numbers of delivery in several boroughs, in particular in Tower Hamlets and Kingston Upon Thames. Project partner, IMECE has expanded its outreach to Kingston Upon Thames, which has increased delivery and IKWRO received positive feedback from a college in Lewisham for the team’s ability to handle sensitive topics effectively. 2.13 Challenges faced by the project include possible higher staff turnover at the project in the final six months due to the end of the funding in March 2026. The project delivered Healthy Relationships workshops to girls in years six and seven transition groups. 2.14 Signhealth continue to deliver the Deaf Domestic Abuse Service with targeted, specialist services across the London boroughs. For example, in Tower Hamlets, project staff delivered a workshop on Honor based abuse. In Wandsworth, project staff also delivered a workshop to the deaf service user group on stalking and harassment. A workshop was delivered to Westminster City Council staff on domestic abuse in the Deaf Community. In celebration of Pride Month, project staff hosted an interactive online workshop focused on helping the Deaf LGBTQ+ community understand the concept of 17 Personal, Social, Health and Economic education, a subject taught in schools to help students develop the skills and knowledge needed to stay healthy, safe, and prepared for life and work. 34 Policy and Programme Updates Appendix 2 Page 20 of 49 consent, recognising signs of sexual abuse, and learning about available support services. 2.15 The Ascent, Advice and Counselling Project, led by Women and Girls Network, continued to undertake a wide range of community engagement and outreach activities, including disability-specific projects such as Action on Disability , and partnerships with faith-based groups within Jewish and Muslim communities. The partnership has contributed to key networks and working groups, including the NHS Talking Therapies Forum, VAWG forums, No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) and Safe Accommodation groups. Notable outcomes include supporting clients affected by coerced debt, providing essential assistance in court. Internally, the project has strengthened organisational capacity by upgrading databases and equipping staff with additional skills in housing, technology-facilitated abuse, and safeguarding. Dedicated work across the London boroughs continues, with for example, in the London borough of Islington where project partner IMECE, chair the Harmful Practices Steering Group, facilitating key discussions on the HBV Identification Tool (Karma Nirvana) . The free Honour -Based Abuse (HBA) Identification Tool is a new resource designed to support frontline professionals in recognising and responding to cases of Honour-Based Abuse (HBA). 2.16 Engagement with the criminal justice system remains a key obstacle. Survivors are often hesitant to involve police due to fears of disbelief, further abuse, or family repercussions. 2.17 The Ascent Specialist Refuge partnership, led by Ashiana, has successfully delivered borough training on Honour based violence, forced marriage and female genital mutilation to Barnet Council staff. The project has also worked closely with several service providers including Hackney Children and Family Services, Agal Wellbeing Services, Refuge, IMECE, London Borough of Tower Hamlets, London Borough of Newham, Asha Projects, Solace, Brent Civic Centre, Asian Women’s Resource Centre and Hestia. Project partner Solace has also been instrumental in supporting several survivors to apply successfully to both the Home Office Flexible Fund and The Flee and Future fund, ensuring rapid access to safety and stability at critical points of need. The Home Office Flexible Fund delivered through Women’s Aid, assists survivors of domestic abuse who lack the financial resources to leave an abusive relationship to be able to access one-off payments of up to £500 through the Flee Fund to cover essential costs such as groceries, nappies, and transport to safety. In addition, survivors 35 Policy and Programme Updates Appendix 2 Page 21 of 49 transitioning to independent living have benefited from the Future Fund, which provides up to £2,500 towards securing stable accommodation and rebuilding independence. 2.18 The Ascent Ending Harmful Practices service, led by the Asian Women’s Resource Centre, has strengthened referral pathways across London boroughs. In the London borough of Harrow, for example, project partners have engaged with the Harrow Youth Stop and both the adult and children’s safeguarding teams to ensure that local professionals are aware of the support available for women at risk. In the London borough of Ealing, project partners have actively engaged with the online Violence Against Women and Girls VAWG Operational Group, contributing to the Ealing Hate Crime Strategy Community Focus Groups. And, in the London borough of Havering, as part of the Havering VAWG Forum, project partners discussed preparations for the 16 Days of Activism campaign, including a new initiative called Men Challenging Men, aimed at engaging men in the prevention of violence against women and girls. 2.19 Rights of Women, a delivering partner for Ascent: Support Services to Organisations’ report positive feedback for its training including 95 per cent of respondents stating that they had increased knowledge of legislation, and had an increased ability to meet the diverse and intersectional needs of service users. 36 Annual Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 London Councils Pan-London Grants Programme 2022 - 2026 Equalities Report Period: April 2022 – March 2025 37 Annual Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 1 B ackground 1.1 The London Councils Pan London Grants Programme enables boroughs to tackle high-priority social need where this is better done at pan -London level. The principles18 of the Grants Programme were agreed in 2012 and reaffirmed in 2021. These principles set out a commitment to fund services that work with statutory and non- statutory partners to meet the objectives of the Equality Act 2010. The priorities of the Grants Programme, Combatting Homelessness and Tackling Sexual and Domestic Abuse, have an equality focus as they impact the most disadvantaged in society and are areas that are overrepresented by particular equalities groups. In addition, the priorities focus on issues that are difficult for boroughs to address at a local level (due to small numbers per borough, and in some cases, relate to people moving across London to flee violence). 1.2 Funded organisations are required to submit equalities monitoring data, which is 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. 2 About this report 2.1 This equalities report provides: • information about the procedures that funded groups have in place to ensure all protected characteristic groups are able to access their services, including how groups have continued to adjust their work in Year 3 towards this aim. • cumulative protected equalities figures (for new users surveyed) as provided by the funded projects, considering the period April 2022 to March 2025 (Years 1 to Year 3 of the 2022-2026 programme). 3 Equalities procedures in place, barriers and adjustments in Year three 18 Outcomes focused, Complementary to borough activity, Economical and efficient at a London level, Partnership, Equality. 38 Annual Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 3.1 Across both priorities, funded projects have continued to embed equalities and an intersectional approach throughout their work, ensuring that people with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 are able to access and benefit from support. 3.2 Projects have strengthened inclusive and culturally competent practice, tailored responses to the needs of different groups, and those facing multiple disadvantage, and have taken steps to eliminate discrimination, harassment and victimisation within service delivery. For example, partners from the Ascent Specialist Refuge Partnership led by Ashiana, have produced a Language Guide to support staff to use inclusive, respectful terminology for different groups and identities, and have strengthened its focus on disabled residents by introducing a specific assessment for residents with disabilities and reviewing how its refuge buildings and procedures can become more inclusive for women with mobility issues. Also, Refuge staff received training on LGBT+ experiences and signposting options, and training on immigration, strengthening advisors’ knowledge and confidence on these matters, to improve responses to LGBT+ survivors and to survivors with insecure immigration status. Women and Girl s Network has continued to review demographic data to identify gaps in engagement and identified underrepresented groups included young survivors (under 17), older survivors (65+), and individuals from Chinese backgrounds. In response, they tailored outreach efforts and focused on reducing the number of ‘prefer not to say’ or unrecorded demographic responses. 3.3 Common actions during Year 3 of the programme included the use of interpreters and multilingual staff, Deaf -accessible communication (including BSL and preferred contact methods), multiple access routes (phone, online and in- person), trauma-informed and survivor-centred approaches, and improvements to triage and referral pathways so that those at greatest risk can be prioritised. For example, Signhealth has guaranteed the service provides Deaf -led, linguistically and culturally accessible support, reducing reliance on interpreters in inappropriate settings and ensuring that survivors can communicate directly with workers who understand their language and context. The LGBT+ Domestic Abuse Partnership led by Galop, has refined its triage process so that those who 39 Annual Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 are most at risk, or experiencing multiple disadvantages, are prioritised and supported more effectively. AWRC has developed partnerships with multi-lingual Immigration and Family Law solicitors to immediately deal with clients’ legal matters, especially those with NRPFs. 3.4 Barriers addressed during Year three of the programme included language, immigration status and digital exclusion. For example, the Ascent Ending Harmful Practices Partnership, led by the Asian Women’s Resource Centre reported barriers addressed included language barriers (through multilingual staff and interpreters), digital exclusion (through alternative contact routes and in-person support), fear of community repercussions (through strict confidentiality and safety planning) and immigration-related uncertainty (through specialist advice and referrals). Similarly, the STAR Partnership project led by Shelter indicated that access barriers addressed included offering multiple access routes —telephone, email and in- person – to ensure that people with different communication preferences or constraints were able to engage effectively with the service. New Horizon Youth Centre also indicated that in Year three, language barriers remained a critical obstacle - particularly for non-English speaking young people navigating complex housing and support systems. Recognising that clear communication is fundamental to solving homelessness, the project invested in professional translation services, providing translated materials in key languages, bilingual advocacy for critical appointments and ensure staff are trained in culturally sensitive communication approaches 3.5 Alongside this, projects have actively engaged in outreach and partnership working – with schools, health services, borough officers, specialist “by-and-for” organisations, LGBT+ and Deaf groups, and community and VAWG networks – to reach people who might not otherwise come forward and to improve the overall system response across London. For example, the Pan- London helpline collaborates with Rape Crisis England and Wales (RCEW) to reach different survivor groups. Shelter has strengthened ties with Southwar k Primary Care Network, a local health service provider, to ensure that individuals with health- related needs, particularly those with mental health conditions or chronic health issues, can access their services, and with Sistah Space to understand the 40 Annual Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 specific challenges faced by Black and African- Caribbean women, particularly those dealing with domestic abuse. London Youth Gateway project led by New Horizon Youth Centre has continued to work with grassroots partnerships which enabled culturally specific co- delivery of workshops with organisations deeply embedded in migrant communities. 4 Equalities figures to Year 3 4.1 Equalities data was captured by all projects except for those providing support to organisations (Tier 2 projects), which are not required to collect equalities data for London Councils monitoring purposes. 4.2 The findings in this section, and the tables and charts in section 5, are listed in the following order: Programme overall figures, Age, Ethnic Background, Religion, Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation, Disability, Deaf or Hard of Hearing, Other Equalities. 4.3 For all protected characteristics, the “Prefer not to say” responses are shown separately. 4.4 Please note the acronyms used in the charts and tables in section 5: - P1: Priority 1, Combatting Homelessness - P2: Priority 2, Tackling Sexual and Domestic Abuse 4.5 Programme overall figures • The percentage of service users supported by the programme under each protected characteristic group has been broadly stable from Year 1 to Year 3 of the Grants Programme. • The percentage of surveyed users, against the total number of service users supported through the programme, was 99.7% for Priority 1 and 87% for Priority 2 (and grows to 99% in Priority 2 when excluding AVA’s project 19). 19 The Healthy London, Healthy Relationships project (HLHR), led by AVA, which ended in December 2023. 41 Annual Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 • Prefer not to say responses from Year 1 to Year 3 were the highest for Religion (31%), Sexual orientation (29%), Ethnic background (26%), and Disability (26%). The lowest Prefer not to say rate was for Age (10%). • In terms of trends, Prefer not to say responses declined across all protected characteristics, with the largest decline being in Religion, from 37% in Year 1 to 25% in Year 3. The only protected characteristic where these responses increased was Gender Identity, from 12% in Year 1 to 16% in Year 3, and for Sexual Orientation these responses remained stable. 4.6 Age • Across Years 1 –3, three quarters of users were between 18 to 44 years old, across both priorities. • Priority differences: Priority 1 supported younger users, with 44% aged 18–24, while in Priority 2 there was a concentration of service users aged between 25– 44 (56% of service users). • Trend: Under-25s increased from 29% (Year 1) to 33% (Year 3), coinciding with the start of the ASCENT VAWG Prevention Project led by Women Resource Centre. The Healthy London, Healthy Relationships project, led by AVA, also supported under-25s. However, the number of new users surveyed in Years 1 and 2 by this project was low (~15%), which means under-25s could have been under-represented in the equalities figures in the first two years of the programme. 4.7 Ethnic Background • Overall composition remained broadly consistent Years 1– 3 in all groups, except for a reduction in service users with a White background (35% to 32%) and a slight increase in service users with an Asian background (19% to 21%). • The largest ethnic groups considering both priorities, Years 1- 3, were White- British (20%), followed by Black-African (14%). 42 Annual Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 • Priority differences: Priority 1 saw relatively higher proportions of Black-African and Black-British users, while Priority 2 was comparatively higher for Asian - Pakistani and Asian-Indian. • Although Ethnic Background was one of the protected characteristics with the largest number of Prefer not to say responses, the rate of users who provided this response dropped noticeably from Year 1 (31%) to Year 3 (23%). 4.8 Religion • The distribution by religion was broadly steady over the three years, with top three categories, Christian, Muslim and No Religion accounting for 80% of service users. • The only categories that showed a slight change were service users of the Muslim faith, growing from 25% to 28%, and Other, which showed a reduction from 9% to 5%, in Years 1-3. • Priority differences: Priority 1 showed a relatively higher representation of users answering None Religious and Christian, while Priority 2 showed a higher representation of Hindu and Muslim users. • Although Religion was one of the protected characteristics with the largest number of Prefer not to say responses, the rate of users who provided this response dropped noticeably from Year 1 (37%) to Year 3 (25%). 4.9 Gender Identity • Across the programme, in Years 1- 3, the majority of respondents identified as Woman (74%). This relates mainly to the number of users served and surveyed in Priority 2 (52,000+) against those served and surveyed in Priority 1 (21,000+). • Priority differences: Priority 2 shows a higher proportion of Women (88%), consistent with VAWG focus; Priority 1 has a more mixed profile (53% Male, 42% Women). • Trend: Across both priorities, from Years 1-3, there was an increase in service users identified as Male (21% to 26%) and a reduction in Women (77% to 71%). 43 Annual Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 There was also a slight increase in users who identified as Trans or a person with trans history (1% to 2%). 4.10 Sexual Orientation • The service remains inclusive of LGBTQ+ communities, who comprised 16% overall, considering Years 1- 3. The remaining 84% self -reported as Heterosexual. • Priority differences: There was a higher LGBTQ+ share in Priority 1 (+12%) against Priority 2. 4.11 Disability • Overall, 35% of users identified as Disabled for Years 1-3, with the top reported disability being mental health (17% of responses) • Priority differences: o The proportion of users identified as Disabled, Years 1-3, was higher in Priority 2 (36%) compared to Priority 1 (33%) o The proportion of users by type of disability was very similar in both priorities, with a slighter higher proportion of those reporting Mobility issues, in Priority 1 (+3%) o The rate of Prefer not to say responses was notably higher in Priority 2 (32%) against Priority 1 (10%). • Trend: Considering both priorities, the number of Disabilities reported by users decreased from Year 1 (40%) to Year 3 (32%). 4.12 Deaf or Hard of Hearing • Overall, from Years 1-3, 2% of respondents identified as Deaf or hard of hearing. • Priority differences: Priority 2 had a higher number of users identified as Deaf or Hard of Hearing (3% against 1% in Priority 1), probably related to having a project in Priority 2 focused solely on this community. 4.13 Other Equalities 44 Annual Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 • Overall, from Years 1-3, o 3% of users identified as being Pregnant or being Mothers. o 5% of users identified as being Married or in a Civil partnership o 5% of users identified as having No recourse to public funds (NRPF) • Priority differences: The proportion of responses for these three categories was similar across both priorities. There was a slightly higher number of users in Marriage/Civil Partnership in Priority 2, and a slightly higher number of users with NRPF in Priority 1. • Trend: Overall, the proportion of users under the three categories remained stable from Years 1 to 3. 45 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Age Ethnic Background Religion Gender Identity Sexual Orientation Disability (excl Deaf) Prefer not to say rate by Protected Characteristic and Priority, Years 1 to 3 Priority 1 Priority 2 99.7% 87% 90% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 Priority 1 Priority 2 P1+P2 Number of users surveyed vs Actual new users, by Priority, Years 1 to 3 Total surveyed Actual new users Surveyed % 5 Charts and tables 5.1 Programme overall data 46 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 Programme overall data: Number and percentage of Total Surveyed against Actual new users, by Priority and Year Overall: Percentage of Prefer not to say responses, against Total Responses, by Protected Characteristic, Priority and Year 47 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 5.2 Age Under 16, 4% 16-17, 1% 18-24, 26% 25-34, 25% 35-44, 23% 45-54, 13% 55-64, 6% 65+, 2% Service users by Age, both priorities, Years 1 to 3 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Under 16 16-17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Service users by Age and Priority, Years 1 to 3 Priority 1 Priority 2 48 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 Age: Number and percentage of service users by Category, Priority and Year 49 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 5.3 Ethnic background Total Asian, 20% Total Black, 30% Total White, 34% Chinese, 1% Latin American, 3% Middle Eastern, 4% Mixed Ethnicity, 8% Service users by Ethnic background groups, both priorities, Years 1 to 3 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Service users by Ethnic Background and Priority, Years 1 to 3 Priority 1 Priority 2 50 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 Ethnic background: Number and percentage of service users by Category, Priority and Year 51 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 52 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 Agnostic, 2.1% Atheist, 3.6% Baha'i, 0.1% Buddhist, 0.9% Christian, 33.8% Hindu, 3.3% Humanist, 0.1%Jain, 0.1%Jewish, 1.4% Muslim, 26.9% Rastafarian, 0.3% Sikh, 1.2% Zoroastrian, 0.2% None, 19.0% Other, 7.1% Service users by Religion, both priorities, Years 1 to 3 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Service users by Religion and Priority, Years 1 to 3 Priority 1 Priority 2 5.4 Religion 53 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 Religion: Number and percentage of service users by Category, Priority and Year 54 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 Male, 23.2% Female, 74.4% Intersex, 0.0% Non-binary, 0.2% Unsure / questioning, 0.1% Other, 0.9% Identify as trans or a person with trans history, 1.1% Service users by Gender Identity, both priorities, Years 1 to 3 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Service users by Religion and Priority, Years 1 to 3 Priority 1 Priority 2 5.5 Gender Identity 55 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 Gender Identity: Number and percentage of service users by Category, Priority and Year 56 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 Bisexual, 4.9% Gay man, 4.5% Heterosexual , 83.9% Lesbian, 2.9% Other, 3.9% Service users by Sexual Orientation, both priorities, Years 1 to 3 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Bisexual Gay man Heterosexual Lesbian Other Service users by Sexual Orientation and Priority, Years 1 to 3 Priority 1 Priority 2 5.6 Sexual Orientation 57 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 Sexual Orientation: Number and percentage of service users by Category, Priority and Year 58 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 Blind or Visual Impairment, 1% Learning Difficulty, 4% Mental health, 17% Other disability, 6% Mobility, 4%Not disabled, 68% Total Responses by Disability type, both priorities, Years 1 to 3 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Blind or Visual Impairment Learning Difficulty Mental health Other disability Mobility Not disabled Total Responses by Disability and Priority, Years 1 to 3 Priority 1 Priority 2 5.7 Disability 59 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 Disability: Number and percentage of service users by Category, Priority and Year 60 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 5.8 Deaf or Hard of Hearing20 20 Deaf and Hard of hearing data is collected and shown separately. This is the way it was done historically in the Grants Programme and it relates to the Deaf Movement's call for Deaf Empowerment and recognition as a distinct identity. Many Deaf individuals reject the label of disability. 61 Equalities Report: April 2022 - March 2025 Appendix 3 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% Pregnancy/Maternity Marriage/Civil partnership No recourse to public funds Service users from Other Equalities Groups, by Priority, Years 1 to 3 Priority 1 Priority 2 5.9 Other Equalities Other Equalities: Number and percentage of service users by Category, Priority and Year 62 Summary At the July 2025 meeting, Grants Committee agreed recommendations for grant funding for Priority 1, Combatting Homelessness (except Service Area 1.1) , and Priority 2, Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse for the 2026- 2030 Pan- London Grants Programme. Recommendations for Service Area 1.1 were delegated to the programme panel , which met on 8 September 2025. This report updates members on implementing the 2026- 2030 programme. Recommendations Grants Committee is asked to: - note the activity to -date (sections 1 and 2) and continuing activity (section 3) to implement the 2026- 2030 pan-London Grants Programme - note the provisional grant values to lead partners who will be delivering the programme from April 2026 (table 1 and appendix 1) - note the findings of the updated Equality Impact Assessment and agree to delegate authority to the Grants Executive Committee, acting as the Programme Panel, to approve the use of unallocated programme funding from the 2026- 30 Programme and/or uncommitted reserves for mitigation actions to address priority gaps. Grants Committee 2026-2030 Pan-London Grants Programme - Implementation update Item: 7 Report by Feria Henry/Pilar Kusel/ Tilly Holmes Job Title: Grants Managers Date 26 November 2025 Contact Officer Feria Henry/Pilar Kusel/ Tilly Holmes Telephone 020 7934 9529 020 7934 9815 020 7934 9862 Email: feria.henry@londoncouncils.gov.uk Pilar.kusel@londoncouncils.gov.uk Tilly.holmes@londoncouncils.gov.uk 63 2026-2030 Grants Programme – Implementation update 1 Background 1.1 At the July 2025 meeting, Grants Committee agreed recommendations for grant funding for Priority 1, Combatting Homelessness (excluding Service Area 1.1) , and Priority 2, Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse for the 2026- 2030 Pan- London Grants Programme. 1.2 The total funding available through the prospectus for the life of the programme was £22,980,000; £8,800,000 for combatting homelessness and £14,180,000 for tackling domestic and sexual abuse. Funding was split across nine services areas: 1.2.1 Priority 1 – Combatting homelessness - Services that ensure homeless is Prevented, is Rare, Brief and Non-Recurring 1.1 Wrap around support for individuals and families in temporary accommodation; targeted intervention and alternative pathways to secure housing (adults aged 25 and over) - £4million 1.2 Wrap around support for care leavers; targeted intervention and alternative pathways to secure housing (young adults aged 18 to 25) - £4million 1.3 Working with the housing and homelessness sector and borough professionals to innovate and improve the response to homelessness in London - £800,000 1.2.2 Priority 2 – Tackling domestic and sexual abuse Services that Intervene Early, Support and Enable 2.1 Specialist advice, counselling and support (for medium risk survivors (including post -IDVA/ISVA) and target groups not accessing general provision - £7million 2.2 Advice and support services to enable access to refuge and other secure provision/accommodation - £1.2million 2.3 Refuge services - £3.88million 2.4 Services for people affected by harmful practices - £1.3m 64 2.5 Working with the domestic and sexual abuse sector and borough professionals to innovate and improve the response to domestic and sexual abuse in London - £800,000 1.3 The prospectus and service specifications are available on the London Councils website. 2 R ecommended applicants 2.1 At the July 2025 meeting, Grants Committee agreed on recommendations for projects for all service areas, excluding service area 1.1. 2.2 At that same meeting, Grants Committee agreed Grants Committee Executive, acting as the Programme Panel, use delegated authority to approve final funding decisions for Priority 1 Combatting Homelessness, Service Area 1.1 applications where the status was Pending. 2.3 The Programme Panel met in September and agreed to fund five projects under Service Area 1.1 (see table 1) . The Panel recommended lower amounts of funding for projects than that requested by applicants to provide a breadth of partners. 2.4 Grants officers will work closely with these projects, as with all recommended organisations, to review and refine the outcomes that can be delivered within the available budget and ensure that core service objectives are maintained. 2.5 Across all service areas, thirteen organisations were recommended for 13 grants to deliver the services outlined in the prospectus. Please see Table 1 for the projects list and Appendix 1 for project summaries. 65 Table 1: Recommended projects, 2026-30 Grants Programme Service Area (Lead) Organisation Original requested amount Provisional total grant 1.1 St Mungo Community Housing Association - Streetlink £662,179 £331,085 1.1 Bridges Outcomes Partnership £3,994,346 £2,396,608 1.1 Latin American Disabled People’s Project £598,388 £299,194 1.1 London Gypsies and Travellers £811,943 £405,972 1.1 Veterans Aid £1,000,000 £500,000 1.2 New Horizon Youth Centre £3,999,929 £3,999,929 1.3 Homeless Link – 2nd tier £760,979 £760,979 Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness £11,827,764 £8,693,767 2.1 Furnishing Futures £1,272,098 £1,272,098 2.1 Women and Girls Network £5,703,503 £5,703,503 2.2 Refuge £1,198,808 £1,198,808 2.3 Ashiana Network £3,880,000 £3,880,000 2.5 Asian Women’s Resource Centre £1,300,000 £1,300,000 2.6 Women’s Resource Centre – 2nd tier £799,786 £799,786 Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Violence £14,154,195 £14,154,195 66 Appendix 1 3 Continuing activity and next steps 3.1 Now that a portfolio has been recommended, continuing activity for the team and next steps include: 3.1.1 Pre-agreement meetings – to cover a range of pre- award matters including: • roles and responsibilities (grant agreement) • review of activity, outcomes, and budget profiles • monitoring and reporting (including borough level) 3.1.2 Programme assessment • assessment of outcomes against prospectus • review of all profiles and budgets to assess pan- London delivery and value 3.1.3 Co-design of reporting arrangements (working with Superhighways) using a collaborative approach to review the current system and scope the future system with the aim of: • reducing time grants officers spend on collating and analysing information • reducing time, and funding, grantees spend on reporting to London Councils • sharing collated reporting outcomes with grantees and Committee on a more consistent basis. 3.1.4 finalising actions from pre-agreement meetings 3.1.5 a greeing new reporting arrangements 3.1.6 complet ing and issue funding agreements by 1 April 2026 3.1.7 m aking first payments 3.1.8 progressing the 202 6-2030 programme evaluation (see Item 8 of November 2025 Committee Papers). 67 4 E quality Impact Assessment 4.1 At its July 2025 meeting, the Grants Committee agreed to the recommendation to undertake a review of the Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA) first submitted in March 2025. In September 2025, following approval of recommended projects for the 2026–2030 Pan-London Grants Programme, the EQIA was updated. The purpose of the review was to identify any potential gaps in service provision for individuals with protected characteristics and propose that the Programme Panel (Grants Committee Executive) take decisions on additional awards and funding to address them. 4.2 The updated EQIA show ed that the requirements of section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 have been properly considered and found that the proposed programme is well positioned to meet the needs of protected characteristic groups for homelessness and domestic and sexual abuse. It includes both experienced generalist organisations and specialist by and for organisations representing women and girls, Black and minoritised communities, Gypsy Roma and Traveller communities, and Latin American disabled people and people with no recourse to public funds. 4.3 While the programme is well balanced, the updated EQIA found that material risks remain, which require targeted mitigations: • Under-provision risks: for Deaf/British Sign Language users, LGBTQ communities including trans and non- binary people, male survivors of domestic and sexual abuse, older people with mobility and digital barriers, people with learning disabilities and neurodivergence, and people of faith who require faith literate support. • Borough reach concerns: especially outer London access, travel cost barriers, and reliance on digital access routes that can create indirect discrimination. • Inconsistent provision: for people with NRPF and others with insecure status in both homelessness and domestic and sexual abuse pathways. • Gaps in protected characteristic data collection. 4.4 Grants officers are developing a plan to address these gaps. Potential actions include: 68 • Developing plans with funded organisations for how they will serve protected characteristic groups where gaps were identified in their application. • Considering a fixed amount of additional funding available to all projects to meet costs for interpreters, BSL provision and broader accessibility work, subject to approval from Grants Committee/Programme Panel through delegated authority. • Supporting groups to connect with specialist organisations through C ross- Priority Meetings (where the funded portfolio can share learning and best practice) and through other networking opportunities. • Delivering thematic sessions to funded groups, including on equalities data collection and best practice. • Including equalities as one of the key areas of work in the 2026– 30 programme evaluation, subject to approval from the Grants Committee. • Conducting monitoring visits that include accessibility checks (working with specialist organisations where relevant). • Working with Tier 2 organisations to define how they can support this work. • Considering a mid-programme thematic review in relation to protected groups where gaps have been identified and noting that potential adjustments or resources could be explored if needed. 69 5 Recommendations 5.1 Grants Committee is asked to: 5.1.1 note the activity to-date (sections 1 and 2) and continuing activity (section 3) to implement the 2026-2030 pan-London Grants Programme 5.1.2 note the provisional grant values to partners who will be delivering the programme from April 2026 (table 1 and appendix 1) 5.1.3 note the findings of the updated Equalit y Impact Assessment and agree to delegate authority to the Grants Executive Committee, acting as the Programme Panel, to approve the use of uncommitted programme funding from the 2026-30 Programme and/or uncommitted reserves for mitigation actions to address priority gaps. Financial Implications for London Councils A decision on the annual funding for the programme will need to be agreed by Leaders’ Committee. Legal Implications for London Councils 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. 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.’ 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. This report takes full account of the legal advice, notably: • 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 1 Local Government Act 1985 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/51/section/48 70 purpose; decisions are proportionate and reasonable; and decisions are properly reasoned • 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 • the need for proper consideration of the equality impacts of the proposed decisions. 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 Equalities Act 2010, particularly the Public Sector Equalities Duty. London Councils’ funded services provide support to people within all the protected characteristics (Equality Act 2010), and targets groups highlighted as particularly hard to reach or more affected by the issues being tackled. Funded organisations are als o 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. This paper includes a section about the Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA) carried out on the 2026- 30 Grants Programme, considering projects recommended for funding. Background Documents Grants Committee, 26 March 2025, Item 6, 2026- 2030: Prospectus for the new programme Grants Committee (AGM), 16 July 2025, Item 14, 2026- 2030 Pan- London Grants Programme – Recommendations for award of grant 71 Appendix 1 Bridges Outcomes Partnership Project name: London Boroughs Outcomes Partnership (LBOP) Priority: Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness Specification: 1.1 Homelessness – Wrap around support for individuals and families in temporary accommodation; targeted intervention and alternative pathways to secure housing (adults aged 25 and over) Delivery partners: Hestia Housing and Support, Refugee Council, Micro Rainbow CIC The London Boroughs Outcomes Partnership (LBOP) aims to support local authority partners and communities by delivering pan-London support and homelessness prevention services that complement, not duplicate, existing local provision.   Our ability to find homes in the private sector is not driven by incentive payments. We therefore do not compete for homes with local authorities or government departments. We have instead created a unique offer meeting landlords priorities and positioned ourselves in the market as capable, responsive and flexible. We have taken the time to build trusting relationships with landlords and set clear expectations on property standards.   Our core focus is providing person-centred, holistic support to adults aged 25+ and families, particularly those living in temporary accommodation and individuals from underrepresented or marginalised groups. This includes people with no recourse to public funds, LGBTQ+ individuals, refugees and asylum seekers, and survivors of domestic abuse.  Led by Bridges Outcomes Partnerships (BOP), this programme brings together trusted delivery partners; Hestia, Refugee Council, and Micro Rainbow, to offer a coordinated, trauma-informed, and culturally responsive response to homelessness. Our shared mission is to help individuals build resilience, prevent homelessness, and sustain long- term housing.  We will operate a central triage and assessment hub, managed by Bridges Outcomes Partnerships, to ensure all referrals are appropriately assessed and directed to the partner best placed to meet the individual's needs. This centralised model ensures a consistent, equitable, and person-centred approach, helping prevent people from falling through gaps in service provision.  Each partner will play a key role in the service delivery:  • Bridges Outcomes Partnerships will manage referrals, triage and initial assessment across the programme.  • Hestia will provide support for single adults and families in temporary accommodation.  • Refugee Council will provide housing and support for single homeless refugees.  • Micro Rainbow will provide housing and support for single homeless LGBTQ+ individuals.  Our experienced, trauma-informed caseworkers will deliver tailored support across a range of needs: housing advice, tenancy readiness, landlord engagement, and access to the private rented sector; as well as budgeting, benefits guidance, employment 72 Appendix 1 pathways, immigration and legal support, and access to health services and community networks. This holistic approach helps individuals stabilise their lives and move forward with dignity and confidence.    To drive system-wide improvement, we will also establish a Pan-London Housing- Related Support Forum, a collaborative platform to share best practice, align services, and strengthen cross-borough pathways. This will ensure more joined-up working across the capital and a more effective collective response to homelessness.  Our work aligns with London Councils' SHPS priorities by delivering:  • Individualised, empowering support.  • Sustained homelessness prevention and resolution.  • At least six months of tenancy sustainment.  • Improved resilience, wellbeing, and life skills.  • Inclusive, equitable services shaped by lived experience.  Through close partnership and shared values, LBOP will deliver compassionate, practical support that improves outcomes for individuals and adds real value for borough partners across London. 73 Appendix 1 Latin American Disabled People’s Project Project name: Community Roots: Homelessness Prevention and Resilience Project Priority: Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness Specification: 1.1 Homelessness – Wrap around support for individuals and families in temporary accommodation; targeted intervention and alternative pathways to secure housing (adults aged 25 and over) Delivery partners: None. LADPP’s proposal directly responds to Specification 1.1 by delivering wraparound support to Spanish and Portuguese- speaking adults aged 25+ who are in temporary accommodation or at risk of homelessness. Our holistic, pan- London model tackles the barriers this community faces, language, immigration status, digital exclusion, disability, and mental health, through tailored, culturally responsive advice, tenancy support, and cross-sector partnerships.  Our infrastructure includes a dedicated advice centre in Southwark and a satellite hub in Lewisham, supported by trained bilingual staff and volunteers. LADPP is Advice Quality Standard (AQS) certified (2024) and has a strong track record of housing, welfare, and integration services, reaching over 1,800 clients annually.  We bring legacy and sustainability to this work. From 2021–2024, LADPP delivered the Community Welfare, Housing, and Representation Project, funded by Transport for London. Even after the grant ended, we continued the service using trained volunteers, proof of our resilience, deep community roots, and lasting commitment to addressing housing inequality.  Our services support Spanish and Portuguese-speaking migrants from Latin America, Europe, and Africa, including Angola, Mozambique, and Equatorial Guinea, many of whom are excluded from mainstream systems and face multiple layers of disadvantage.  Our aim is to make homelessness within our community rare, brief, and non-recurrent through a planned, preventative approach. We will provide early, culturally competent interventions, intensive support in temporary accommodation, and clear pathways to long-term housing. At the same time, we will help individuals build resilience and life skills, reduce barriers to services, and improve engagement with local authorities, housing associations, and private landlords.  The project will deliver:  • Wraparound casework in temporary accommodation, including needs assessments and action plans  • Housing advice and tenancy sustainment, including support with PRS access, landlord mediation, and applications to social housing  • Welfare and NRPF support, guiding people through complex systems to increase income security and legal housing entitlements  • Mental health and wellbeing support, via group workshops and internal referrals to LADPP’s mental health and isolation-reduction programme  74 Appendix 1 • Life skills and integration workshops, including English and digital literacy classes, financial education, prevention of fraud and income maximization workshops, and peer mentoring  • Cross-sector collaboration, working with councils, legal providers, housing associations, the NHS, and community groups for joined-up support  This project meets a critical need for tailored, specialist support across London. By working holistically and collaboratively, we will break the cycle of homelessness and empower our community to build safe, independent lives. 75 Appendix 1 London Gypsies and Travellers Project name: Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Advice and Advocacy service Priority: Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness Specification: 1.1 Homelessness – Wrap around support for individuals and families in temporary accommodation; targeted intervention and alternative pathways to secure housing (adults aged 25 and over) Delivery partners: None. This project will provide accommodation advice, support, and advocacy for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller (GRT) adults aged 25 and over who are at risk of homelessness or living in temporary, insecure or overcrowded accommodation. We will support people to understand their housing rights, apply for housing, challenge poor decisions, manage arrears and sustain their tenancies. This work is delivered through weekly advice sessions (both in-person and by telephone), service, tailored tenancy skills workshops and support with navigating benefits and related systems, and community outreach to families living on caravan sites. This project delivers wraparound support aligned with Service Area 1.1, providing tailored housing advice and advocacy for Gypsy and Traveller adults aged 25+ in temporary or insecure accommodation.  We support people who are overlooked or excluded by other services. Many are living in overcrowded or unsuitable accommodation, struggling in unaffordable private rentals, poor living conditions and overcrowding on council-run caravan sites, Other families living without amenities and are facing the constant threat of eviction on roadside camps.   A significant number have faced negative experiences with statutory housing services or have been unfairly denied assistance. Traditional and mainstream advice services are often out of reach due to barriers such as low literacy, lack of digital access, or limited cultural understanding from the services.  The project is delivered by an experienced team based at the charity London Gypsies and Travellers (LGT). We have been delivering this work for over 25 years and are well known and trusted across Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities. In 2024, we supported 641 families in 31 boroughs. Most referrals come through word of mouth or trusted community routes. We work across all London boroughs and provide support in person, by phone, or remotely, depending on what people need.  We track casework using Lamplight (CRM) and use the data to review outcomes, identify borough-level trends and inform service development. We also use insight from our front- line work on accommodation to feed into our wider campaigning and policy work. In recent years this has included highlighting failures in local connection criteria, unsafe site conditions, and barriers to support for people placed out of borough.  We particularly support people with minimal local authority connection, digital exclusion, or those who have been excluded from housing systems—priority target groups under Service Area 1.1. This project will build upon on our work with families in temporary accommodation, funded by TFL as part of their better temporary accommodation initiative.   76 Appendix 1 St. Mungo’s Project name: Streetlink London Priority: Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness Specification: 1.1 Homelessness – Wrap around support for individuals and families in temporary accommodation; targeted intervention and alternative pathways to secure housing (adults aged 25 and over) Delivery partners: None StreetLink London takes the fundamentals of assessment and move on planning for rough sleepers and delivers this via a phoneline. By doing so, it provides a rapid intervention to identify and facilitate pathways away from the street for people into sustainable housing without the need for them to be verified by a street outreach team. This reduces demand on statutory and commissioned services and improves the client journey. Street Link London is staffed by a team of Assessment and Reconnection Workers (A&R) alongside volunteers, and open between 9am and 9pm, 7 days a week. Client Journey  Activities  1. Client phones StreetLink London   Caller triaged - must be rough sleeping or at imminent risk of in London to be eligible.  Staff will use sector tools i.e. MHCLG Rough Sleeping Risk Assessment alongside professional judgement to ensure service is provided to target groups.    (Callers - not at imminent risk of rough sleeping will be directed to appropriate services)  1. Client assessment and identification of a move on offer  Using the St Mungo’s (StM) assessment tool (used by outreach and assessment centres e.g. No Second Night Out),  A&R worker will complete an assessment of clients’ needs and wishes, including reason for homelessness and accommodation and support needed.   Tailored pathway into accommodation will be identified and agreed with the client, including:  1. Private rented sector  1. S188 accommodation under Pt 7 Housing Act  1. Mediation with family or friends  1. Voluntary sector pathways  1. Home Office Accommodation   1. Accommodation under Care Act  If client is rough sleeping, work is recorded on CHAIN, so outreach teams have awareness and duplication of support is avoided.  • Action Planning and Intensive Casework   A&R Worker will identify an action plan, provide SMART actions and advice, including making a universal credit claim, referrals into accommodation. Support is provided until homelessness is resolved.  77 Appendix 1 Client will be referred to specialist services depending on needs, including:  • Social Care  • Immigration advice  • Mental Health support   • ESOL and Employment Services  Added value; client will have access to StM services:   • Legal advice   • Welfare Rights Service including debt advice to enable income maximisation   • Immigration Advice OISC Level 1 EUSS  • Learning, Training and Employment offers  78 Appendix 1 Veteran’s Aid Project name: Pathways to Wellbeing Priority: Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness Specification: 1.1 Homelessness – Wrap around support for individuals and families in temporary accommodation; targeted intervention and alternative pathways to secure housing (adults aged 25 and over) Delivery partners: None. Veterans Aid’s Pathways to Wellbeing programme aims to combat veteran homelessness across London, ensuring it is prevented, rare, brief, and non-recurring. Through rapid intervention, targeted housing support, and wraparound care, the project will provide sustainable housing solutions for veterans aged 25 and over and their families, preventing and addressing the devastating cycle of homelessness, addiction, unemployment, mental health issues and social exclusion.    Activities Delivered  To achieve these goals, Pathways to Wellbeing project will deliver:    • Safe emergency accommodation & long-term housing support   • Provide nights of accommodation at New Belvedere House (NBH) and elsewhere (hotels, B&Bs etc)   • Swift, holistic and client-led support to cover the complex need of veterans living in temporary accommodation.  • Holistic support services which aim to tackle the underlying issues that led to homelessness/crisis in the first place, things like childhood trauma, addictions, mental health issues, social isolation etc.  • Holistic support includes, but is to restricted to:  • Mental Health support and counselling, treatments and psychotherapy provided for as long as needed.   • Detox & rehabilitation for veterans struggling with addictions irrespective of the addiction, drug, alcohol, gambling etc.   • Employment & training programmes, ensuring long-term stability   • Support to secure long-term housing, that meets the financial means, location, size etc. of the client. All long-term accommodations are furnished and equipped with the necessary facilities for the client to make a new start and live comfortably.  • Advice and peer support & well-being services, leveraging lived experience for veteran-to-veteran support and anything else clients need in order to successfully recover and minimise relapse.    New Belvedere House, our accommodation facility which temporarily houses 66 veterans at any one time, stands as a model of success, officially reopened by HRH the late Duke of Edinburgh (Phase 1) and Mayor Sadiq Khan (final phase), both calling it inspirational. Through this funding, Veterans Aid will continue delivering life-changing interventions, ensuring that no veteran is left without the dignity, security, and support they deserve.  79 Appendix 1 New Horizon Youth Centre Project name: London Youth Gateway Priority: Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness Specification: 1.2 Wrap around support for care leavers; targeted intervention and alternative pathways to secure housing (young adults aged 18 to 25) Delivery partners: Depaul UK, Stonewall Housing, Akt, Praxis, Centrepoint, Coram Voice, Settle Support London Youth Gateway (LYG) aims to provide wrap-around support for Care Leavers and targeted housing interventions for young adults (18-25) experiencing homelessness. Our mission is clear: to ensure homelessness is prevented, rare, brief, and non- recurring.  Building on 13 years of successful delivery, funded by London Councils, LYG has evolved to meet young people’s changing needs - always placing them at the heart of our work. Youth homelessness is complex, and no single organisation can tackle it alone. Through expert partnerships, we will deliver tailored support to those who need it most. Our pan-London coalition - led by New Horizon Youth Centre (NHYC) and including Depaul UK, Stonewall Housing, Akt, Praxis, Coram Voice, Settle Support and Centrepoint, specialises in supporting:  • Care Leavers  • Young people with No Recourse to Public Funds and/or insecure immigration statuses. • LGBTQ+ youth  • Young women  • Disabled young people  • Young Refugees and Asylum Seekers  • Those with non-crisis mental health needs  We will prioritise young people with minimal local authority connections or those not deemed "high priority" for statutory support, including those fleeing violence or requiring specialist transitions to mainstream services.  Using a hub-and-spoke model, NHYC will act as the central referral hub, directing young people to partner services where appropriate. Our upgraded website and free phone line at Centrepoint will ensure seamless access. Key activities include:  • Housing support including bespoke casework, private rental sector guidance, tenancy brokerage, access to crisis accommodation, long-term accommodation and eviction prevention.  • Tenancy sustainment and supporting to resolve property issues.  • Advocacy and support to access services.  80 Appendix 1 • Support for Refugees, Asylum Seekers, those with NRPF and insecure immigration statuses.   • Basic needs access to ID’s, bank accounts, translation services and tackling digital exclusion.  • Financial support including PIP/UC claims, housing benefit, debt advice and income maximisation.  • Mental health counselling, substance misuse support, physical health support and youth coaching.   • Support for Care Leavers to better understand statutory rights and entitlements.   • Jobs, education, and training access  LYG works alongside - not in duplication of - statutory services, easing pressure on public services while upholding Equality Act 2010. Through multi-agency collaboration, lived-experience-informed design, and robust evaluation, we will ensure flexible, high- impact support - even amid crises, ensuring homelessness is rare, brief, and non- recurring for young Londoners. 81 Appendix 1 Homeless Link Project name: London PLUS Priority: Priority 1: Combatting Homelessness Specification: 1.3 Working with the housing and homelessness sector and borough professionals to innovate and improve the response to homelessness in London Delivery partners: Shelter Aim: To ensure that homelessness is rare, brief and non-recurring by improving the services delivered by frontline housing and homelessness organisations and professionals and creating stronger connections across all London’s boroughs. Background: Homeless Link and Shelter have partnered to deliver London PLUS since 2010. Over the past 15 years we have developed and refined an impactful programme of support for housing and homelessness sector and borough professionals across London to improve outcomes for people experiencing homelessness. From Apr 2022- 25:  • Supported 507 professionals in total from across statutory and voluntary sectors. Already securing 112% above our four-year target, within the first three years.  • Engaged 443 different statutory and non-statutory organisations across every borough of London   Activities:  We will continue to deliver our comprehensively tested programme for local authorities, housing professionals and voluntary sector organisations across pan-London (Tier 3), sub-regional (Tier 2) and local level (Tier 1). Our 2026-30 London PLUS programme will have a renewed priority on ensuring homelessness is prevented, brief and non-recurring in response to the rising numbers of people living in temporary accommodation across the capital. We will deliver support to organisations through:  • Assessment of sector to establish understanding of local needs, prioritising organisations supporting people in TA, care leavers and underserved groups.  • Specialist Training & Advice covering a range of topics including legislation and policy, income generation, impact measurement, workforce resilience.   • Developing alternative pathways to housing, supporting ad brokering relationships with landlords and housing professionals.  • Collaboration events to build connections, share best practice, address common challenges, co-develop solutions  • Targeted sessions bringing together organisations working on specific themes: cross-borough, commissioners, frontline workers, care leavers, people in TA.  • Co-production activities with people with lived experience of housing/homelessness services and from underserved groups  • Supporting Structured Engagement and Impact & Collaboration Exchange Events  • Development and dissemination of best practice resources, regular briefings on developments that impact the sector.  82 Appendix 1 • Bespoke sessions with boroughs to introduce and apply a 'Systems Thinking' approach to better understand individual challenges, improve collaboration, and develop systemic responses to prevent homelessness.   • Adapting activities in response to market demands and changing needs, including alignment with the Towards Ending Homelessness accelerator programme and other strategic London initiatives.  • Monthly newsletter and development of new online London Plus hub  Our 2026-30 programme has been developed in direct response to the increasing challenges faced by the sector, to deliver the following impact:  • Prevention of homelessness by supporting frontline voluntary sector organisations to improve the quality and expertise of their services through increased knowledge of housing and homelessness legislation, policy and best practice in service delivery, and improved working relationships with local authority statutory services.  • Increased housing options for people across London by supporting housing professionals, social and private landlords and other relevant local services to build and strengthen working relationships, increase knowledge of housing and equalities law, legislation, policy and best practice for client support.  • Frontline voluntary sector organisations are more resilient through increased understanding of funding opportunities, improved ability to demonstrate impact and develop impactful partnerships. 83 Appendix 1 Furnishing Futures Project name: Healing Homes for Survivors Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.1 Specialist advice, counselling and support (for medium risk survivors (including post-IDVA/ISVA) and target groups not accessing general provision Delivery partners: None. Healing Homes for Survivors is an innovative, pan -London project designed and delivered by Furnishing Futures to provide safe, trauma -informed, fully furnished homes as a key component of holistic resettlement support for women and children who have fled domestic abuse and been placed in empty social housing.   Through strategic partnerships with the interiors industry, we fill a gap in existing service provision by transforming unfurnished accommodation into dignified homes while providing holistic support as survivors rebuild their lives. This unique combinatio n of trauma-informed interior design and holistic resettlement support offers survivors the foundation they need to recover in comfort and safety, often once other services have withdrawn.  Furnishing Futures is the first and only organisation in London offering this unique type of resettlement support, and our proven ‘healing homes’ model has scaled rapidly due to demand. During 2024 - 25 we created 48 healing homes supporting 190 women and children, and in 2025-26 we aim to deliver 90 homes supporting around 300 women and children with homes and support services. The project’s core activities include:  • Providing wraparound holistic resettlement support including needs assessments, safety planning, advice and advocacy   • Creating professionally designed, trauma- informed furnished homes that sustain tenancies and support survivors’ wellbeing and safety  • Delivering essential furniture to those in need, including white goods, beds, mattresses and other essential furniture  Healing Homes for Survivors is an innovative intervention that combines survivor-centred support with the provision of practical fully equipped homes, aligning with London Councils’ priorities to reduce domestic abuse, enhance safety, and promote long- term independence.  During the four -year project we aim to fill this urgent gap in resettlement support by furnishing homes using trauma- informed, biophilic design principles, whilst providing holistic resettlement support to beneficiaries. The project will increase survivors ’ safety, sustain tenancies, reduce financial and emotional stress, enhance wellbeing and build independence by ensuring survivors have everything they need to rebuild their lives after domestic abuse. 84 Appendix 1 Women and Girls Network Project name: Ascent Advice and Counselling Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.1 Specialist advice, counselling and support (for medium risk survivors (including post-IDVA/ISVA) and target groups not accessing general provision Delivery partners: Solace Women's Aid, Ashiana Network, Asian Women's Resource Centre, Chinese Information and Advice Centre, EACH Counselling and Support, IKWRO Women's Rights Organisation, IMECE Women's Centre, Jewish Women's Aid, Latin American Women's Rights Service, The NIA Project, Rape Crisis South London (aka. RASASC), Rights of Women, Southall Black Sisters, Woman's Trust. Aims Ascent Advice and Counselling (AAC) aims to develop its track record of delivering services to 18,680 women across all 32 boroughs and the City of London since 2022 by deploying an updated delivery model that will feature expanded ISVA/IDVA support and an improved digital platform that will:  • develop and strengthen platforms and access points across London  • address the urgent need for trauma-informed, culturally responsive, and accessible support services for women and girls affected by domestic and sexual violence (DV/SV)  • enable a tailored, intersectional approach leveraging the 15 partner’s specialisms for those experiencing barriers in underserved groups  • enable AAC to work with statutory and community partners to deliver a service that can meet the changing needs at a pan-London and local level.  Activities  1. Crisis advice and information: Our two advice hubs and specialist spokes provide emotional support, information and guidance, legal advice, and referrals/pathways to support services for women and girls across London. To improve delivery for 2026-2030, we will develop a dedicated AAC website/digital platform to act as a first point of access for victims/survivors (V/S). This platform will include:  • Online and telephone helpline  • Online resources (e.g., referral guidance)  • Pathways to AAC partners and statutory support  • Legal and personal safety awareness (e.g., ‘Know Your Rights’ modules)  2. Crisis services: Our Crisis Hub, situated within the Advice Hubs, will provide tailored support for acute crises through:  • Telephone and online helpline  • Brief ISVA/IDVA support  • Risk assessments and bespoke safety planning  • Up to 5 crisis counselling sessions for those in high risks situations  85 Appendix 1 • Online legal rights workshops (led by Rights of Women)  3. Individualised empowerment services: Specialist caseworkers and advocates will provide wraparound support, including:  • Mobile satellite outreach and drop-in sessions  • Legal advocacy  • Housing and refuge support/access to safe accommodations.  • Specialised support for NRPF  • Specialised support for prostitution  • Financial advocacy  • Connecting survivors with mental and physical health services, including GPs and mental health specialists  4. Therapeutic interventions: We will offer up to 20 sessions of trauma-informed 1:1 BACP accredited counselling and access to EMDR, delivered within each borough and in over 20 languages. We will provide culturally competent therapy for marginalised communities.  5. Group work: Online and in-person group sessions will promote recovery and increase understanding of abuse, including our ‘Moving On’ group that provides 6 weeks of trauma and VAWG informed sessions.  Intended Impact  Through these activities, we aim to have the following impact across London:  • V/S being empowered to make safer choices through:   • Greater feelings of safety, with robust safety plans in place   • Improved awareness and understanding of their rights through legal resources and advice   • Improved awareness and understanding of DV/SV  • V/S feeling supported to sustain a new life:  • Increased confidence and self esteem   • Improved mental health and wellbeing  • V/S feeling enabled to be more independent through:  • Help securing tenancies receiving support with housing needs   • Improved financial health   • Improved health and access to health care   • Support to access employment opportunities  • DV/SV is prevented and reduced    • Professionals have access to resources and wrap around services to support survivors’ recovery journeys. 86 Appendix 1 Refuge Project name: Pan-London Domestic & Sexual Abuse Helpline Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.2 Advice and support services to enable access to refuge and other secure provision/accommodation Delivery partners: Respect/Men's advice Line, Women and Girls Network, Galop Aim   • 24/7 access to confidential, non-judgmental support/advice for London-based DA or SV victim/survivors  • Empowering victim/survivors through tailored housing and rights/options support, to access safe accommodation (SA)  • Referrals to emergency SA: refuges and alternatives to refuge   • Enhanced short-term casework support for victim/survivors requiring additional housing support  • Share data with London Councils, identifying emerging support needs and victim/survivor barriers  Activities:   • Empowering callers with housing rights/options information, enabling access to SA via Section 7 of the Housing Act.   • Dedicated ‘refuge referrals’ caller option, run by Refuge  • Enhanced support via Refuge HESC and Galop HSSC for women and LGBT+ victim/survivors facing additional barriers to accessing refuge/SA, providing critical insight to Borough professionals. Caller referral criteria includes:   • Language barriers   • Disability   • No phone access  • No recourse to public funds (NRPF)   • Requires urgent local DA support   • Age of caller (young/elderly)  • Free, 24-hour confidential DA support for women. Free, confidential support for any woman/girl (13+), male victim/survivors, or LGBT+ victim/survivors. Includes emotional support, risk assessment, safety planning, and information on rights and options e.g., legal rights, child contact  • Pathways into general services e.g., welfare, housing, and/or specialist services e.g., DA services, counselling.   • Digital support options including online Live Chat, email support, web content – informed by partner expertise regarding perpetrators’ use of technology to abuse.  • Refuge and Galop's HESC and HSSC work with victim/survivors and borough professionals to meet victim/survivors’ accommodation needs.   • Accessible Helpline support: British Sign Language (BSL) and Language Line interpreters; Helpline Advisers/volunteers who speak multiple languages; translated web content.   87 Appendix 1 • London-wide awareness-raising. Online offer for local authorities and targeted communications where the partnership sees less borough-engagement from residents/professionals.   • Capacity-building, smooth partnership referral pathways, including mutual training sessions. Regular meetings to share best practice. Recent meeting topics include: supporting Frequent Enquirers, supporting remote-working teams, managing challenging callers, managing demand  • Data collection and dissemination: informing VAWG service planning and identifying emerging needs/barriers facing London’s victim/survivors.   Impact:   • Empowering survivors with information on rights/options, demystifying complex statutory systems. Survivors able to make informed decisions about their accommodation options.   • Marginalised victim/survivors supported into safe accommodation by HSSC/HESC caseworkers, increasing safety.   • Supported pathway into DA and SA services, providing life-saving support, when survivors are most at risk of homicide.   • Support local authority VAWG work, providing victim/survivor access to refuge/ other support services.  • DA prevention: on-the-spot crisis support; risk assessments; safety planning; safeguarding. Helping survivors understand DA risks by unpicking abuse dynamics, reducing isolation, increasing trust in local authority housing and statutory services through advocacy/signposting  • Reducing pressure on public services through expert support, empowering callers with safety plans; coping strategies; next steps; signposting to appropriate onward services.  • Contribute to public understanding of DA/ SV through London-based awareness- raising and one-to-one interventions.  Supporting callers to understand VAWG power dynamics/root causes. This supports the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime London work, to reduce VAWG and change the VAWG-enabling culture.  88 Appendix 1 Ashiana Project name: Ascent Specialist Refuge Partnership Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.3 Refuge services Delivery partners: IKWRO, Nia, Solace Womens Aid Our project aims to continue our established work relieving homelessness and reducing and addressing the harms of domestic abuse on Londoners by providing routes to safe and appropriate accommodation for women underserved and/or excluded from other safe routes to accommodation. By continuing our work we contribute to pan- London effectiveness in reducing revictimization, harm and homelessness. We are an established, proven partnership of four of London’s most experienced, networked and innovative specialist refuge providers. Our project provides three services, of which refuge is the core. We have been delivering this work for London Councils since the grant’s inception in 2013 – supporting 1,445 women and training 4,601 professionals. We will provide specialist refuge and second- stage accommodation bedspaces to the most marginalised women across all London’s boroughs: women with no recourse to public funds (NRPF); Black and minoritised (B&M) 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. A Group Worker (PT) will offer workshops and activities in Solace refuges. Our OISC level 2 Immigration Solicitor assists in widening safe accommodation access by regularising immigration status of survivors. Ashiana has applied for level 3 accreditation at which point we will be able to take on appeals. We train and support professionals across all boroughs to understand the harms, needs, rights and pathways of the women we support, who otherwise face frequent exclusions / barriers to service access. We will support women from all boroughs who are otherwise excluded / poorly served by safe accommodation. We will support survivors to regularise their immigration status so they can also access safe accommodation. This safe housing and the wraparound support we offer will give women access to their rights, and to informed choices, and therapeutic and social recovery. Women will be supported to move on from refuge in a planned way during the grant period. Throughout the grant, all 33 London boroughs will be able to refer into the services through clear and accessible pathways. The impact of these positive outcomes will be continuing reduction of demand pressures on London’s statutory services, including open referral pathways and co- working opportunities with every London borough. Achieving positive outcomes with our cohort helps women avoid unplanned and crisis presentations at housing, health, and frontline commissioned services. Our positive outcomes for women help them present to services in planned ways, support their sustained and positive contact with services, and suppor t women’s readiness for longer - term independence and reduction in demand over their lifetimes, including a reduction in hidden and known homelessness and housing insecurity in London. 89 Appendix 1 Asian Women’s Resource Centre (AWRC) Project name: Ascent Ending Harmful Practice Partnership Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.4 Services for people affected by harmful practices Delivery partners: Ashiana Network, IMECE Women's Centre, IKWRO, Latin American Women's Rights Service (LAWRS), Women and Girls Network (WGN), Foundation for Women's Health Research and Development (FORWARD), Africa Advocacy Foundation (AAF) “I got lots of support from your group. They taught me to live better life and keep be positive in life. So, thanks for this positive support.” "Thank you for your incredible help, unwavering support, and heartfelt concern for my children, my family, and myself. Your kindness has meant everything’ The Ending Harmful Practices Partnership (EHPP) aims to prevent, identify and improve service provision in London for those affected by harmful practices, specifically, Female Genital Mutilation, ‘honour’ based abuse, forced marriage, spiritual abuse, and other harmful practices, through the provision of high-quality front-line services to survivors and those at risk, and training to voluntary and statutory professionals. In doing so the EHPP will enable London’s boroughs to provide better outcomes for more survivors and those at risk. The EHPP is a pioneering partnership of nine specialist organisations addressing harmful practices led by and for Black, minoritised and migrant women. We are the incumbent provider with a long-standing positive relationship with London Councils and over-exceeding our targets in sequential grants under which we have supported 1,571 women (16% over-performance). Last year we trained 469 professionals (116% overperformance). We also lead MOPAC’s parallel P&ACT pan-London harmful practices prevention project. The EHPP will continue to provide intense support to women and girls affected by harmful practices, including lesser-known harmful practices such as acid attacks, menstrual huts, “corrective” rape, dowry and caste abuse, across all London boroughs. EHPP activities will include: 1) 1:1 advice and information on rights and entitlements: 2) casework and advocacy support which will include accompanying women and advocating their needs to social services 3) therapeutic support groups and counselling provision to 50 women a year 4) raising awareness of the impact of harmful practices within communities and other voluntary and statutory agencies through delivering workshops, training and presentations and 5) specific work with young women on FGM through the delivery of workshops to support peer mentoring and youth advocacy. The EHPP will improve safety, reduce risk, and improve identification of survivors and those at risk of harmful practices. It will support survivors and those at risk to understand and access their rights and choices and support their emotional and practical recovery and safety. Our wraparound, strengths-based, needs-led support will enable greater social and economic independence, enabling them to integrate into and contribute 90 Appendix 1 towards their local communities and wider society. The positive impact will, therefore, be felt much more widely in the longer term, reducing costs associated with trauma, isolation, poor psycho-social and physical health, and economic inactivity. All EHPP partners are specialist in harmful practices and have established track records demonstrating we already have in place the necessary knowledge, skills and experience to continue to provide an excellent service, combined with the infrastructure, relationships and pathways required to ensure that the project delivery is integrated and seamless. We have played a key role driving understanding and profile around harmful practices, including influencing the shift in norms around FGM in affected communities, and awareness across London’s statutory sector. 91 Appendix 1 Women’s Resource Centre (WRC) Project name: Ascent Support Services to Organisations Priority: Priority 2: Tackling Domestic and Sexual Abuse Specification: 2.5 Working with the domestic and sexual abuse sector and borough professionals to innovate and improve the response to domestic and sexual abuse in London Delivery partners: Imkaan, Respect, Rights of Women, Women and Girls Network Ascent Support Services to Organisations project is a partnership of five organisations: Women’s Resource Centre, Rights of Women, Imkaan, Respect and Women and Girls Network. Aim The project aims to strengthen the capacity, expertise and impact of services responding to domestic and sexual abuse in London. Drawing on our diverse and specialist expertise, and working closely with professionals across London boroughs, the project offers a comprehensive support framework structured around four key pillars outlined below. Annual Activities: Building Resilience and Sustainability Through Knowledge and Evidence This pillar includes research reports on the needs of frontline organisations, tracking VAWG funding, and a landscape mapping of Black and minoritised 'by and for' VAWG organisations. It also encompasses sustainability sessions focused on equitable funding (including meet-the-funder events) and professional resilience. The online knowledge hub includes digital toolkits and resources on Equality Act 2010, equality impact assessments, working with perpetrators and male victims, fundraising, demonstrating impact, partnership working, and wellbeing, alongside best-practice briefings and e- newsletters providing sector updates and VAWG legal education. Providing Specialist Expert Led and Accredited Training on Policy, Legislation and Best Practices This pillar includes webinars covering perpetrator accountability in healthcare and best practices (survivor safety, multi-agency work) and the Equality Act 2010. Accredited training cover suicidality, supporting Black and minoritised women affected by VAWG, and trauma-focused recovery from sexual violence. Expert-led training cover understanding perpetrators, Domestic Abuse (DA) accountability for housing, an overview of the DA Act 2021, immigration and VAWG, DA concessions, forced marriage/FGM, specific issues for Black and minoritised women and sexual violence, culturally responsive intersectional practice, and harmful practices. Fostering Pan-London Collaboration and Networking (Sector and Cross Sector): 92 Appendix 1 This pillar includes a roundtable on commissioning; peer support sessions for VAWG professionals on perpetrator programmes and supporting victims of DA; and networking events covering DA and perpetrator accountability, as well as cross-sector and sub- regional borough engagement to support London Councils Structured Engagement Activities and Impact and Collaboration Exchange. Coordinating Strategic Partnerships and Policy Engagement This pillar includes providing strategic leadership support sessions to Black and minoritised organisations and workshops to coordinate responses to policy consultations, as well as engagement in key policy forums, and meetings with policy offices at London Councils, the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime, and the Domestic Abuse Commissioner. Impact: • Enhanced Knowledge and Evidence Base: Improved understanding of the needs of frontline organisations and the specific challenges faced by Black and minoritised communities, informed by specialist expertise. • Increased Sustainability and Resilience: Stronger and more sustainable VAWG organisations with improved capacity to secure funding and support their staff. • Improved Practice and Service Delivery: More skilled and knowledgeable professionals delivering consistent, effective, and survivor-centred support, grounded in specialist knowledge. • Increased Collaboration and Networking: Stronger connections and coordination among VAWG professionals and across sectors, leading to a more integrated response. Strengthened Strategic Partnerships and Policy Influence: Greater influence of the VAWG sector on policy development, resulting in more supportive legislation and resource allocation, and ensuring the voices of marginalised communities are heard. 93 Summary This paper invites the Grants Committee to agree the timetable and areas of focus for the evaluation of the 2026– 30 Grants Programme, which will run from April 2026 to March 2030. Recommendations Grants Committee members are asked to note: − that the Committee has already agreed the budget for the evaluation, as part of the establishment of the 2026-30 programme. − that the Grants Committee Executive, at its September 2025 meeting, discussed and provided steer on the draft timetable and the areas of the programme that should be prioritised for evaluation. Grants Committee members are asked to agree: − the timetable and three areas of work proposed. Grants Committee Proposed timetable and areas of focus for the Evaluation of the 2026-30 Grants Programme Item: 8 Report by: Feria Henry Tilly Holmes Pilar Kusel Job title: Grants Managers Date: 26 November 2025 Contact Officer: Feria Henry / Tilly Holmes / Pilar Kusel Telephone: 0207934 9739 0207934 9815 0207934 9862 Email: feria.henry@londoncouncils.gov.uk tilly.holmes@londoncouncils.gov.uk pilar.kusel@londoncouncils.gov.uk 94 1 Background At the Grants Committee meeting in March 2025, it was agreed that a budget of £100,000 was going to be assigned to cover the cost of an evaluation for the new 2026-30 grants programme. It was also agreed that a programme of evaluation activity will be discussed with Grants Committee during 2025/26. 2 Pur pose 2.1 A critical and objective evaluation throughout the 2026-30 Grants Programme four -year life aims at supporting the Grants Committee to make judgments about the programme, improve its effectiveness, inform changes as part of the annual review process, and inform the deployment of additional resources at the mid-point of the programme. 3 Suggested timeline and process 3.1 The proposed timeline anticipates starting the evaluation process prior to the commencement of the 2026– 30 Grants Programme, allowing sufficient time during the programme to implement recommendations arising from the evaluation. 3.2 The number of evaluation phases may vary depending on the scope and number of areas being assessed. Similarly, the duration required to implement recommendations will need to be adjusted based on the nature of the recommendations, the number of stakeholders involved, and other relevant factors. At the Grants Executive meeting in September 2025, members considered the following timeline reasonable. 3.3 T imeline Programme Year Milestone Start Date End Date Pre- Programme Executive Grants Committee steer on evaluation Sep-25 Draft Evaluation Plan to Grants Committee Nov-25 Final Evaluation Plan approved Mar-26 Year 1 (Apr 2026–Mar 2027) Invitation to Quote issued and bid window Apr-26 Jun-26 Evaluator appointed and contract signed Jul-26 Aug-26 Phase 1 Evaluation window Sep-26 Feb-27 Phase 1 Findings to Grants Committee Mar-27 Mar-27 Year 2 (Apr 2027–Mar 2028) Phase 1 Recommendations implementation Apr-27 Dec-27 Phase 2 Evaluation window Jul-27 Feb-28 Phase 2 Findings to Grants Committee Mar-28 Mar-28 Year 3 (Apr 2028–Mar 2029) Phase 2 Recommendations implementation Apr-28 Dec-28 Phase 3 Evaluation window Jul-28 Dec-28 Phase 3 Findings to Grants Committee Mar-29 Mar-29 Phase 3 Recommendations implementation Apr-29 Nov-29 Final Evaluation Report to Grants Committee Nov-29 95 Year 4 (Apr 2029–Mar 2030) Implementation planning for post-2030 grants programmes Dec-29 Mar-30 4 Suggested areas for evaluation 4.1 The three areas outlined below are put forward by the Grants Team, having received a steer from Grants Executive, drawing on previous evaluations and areas of interest. i) Equalities monitoring and service accessibility The Equalities Impact Assessment (EQIA) presented to Grants Committee in March 2025 highlighted the importance of strengthening equalities monitoring and ensuring service accessibility to address any potential adverse impacts of the new programme. Evaluati on in this area will focus on protected characteristics and care-experienced individuals, assessing how effectively services are accessible and inclusive, considering differences within these groups. It will also evaluate efforts to address stereotypes and misconceptions, ensuring funded services reach and benefit all groups equitably across London. Reviewing equalities in the 2026– 30 programme will build on the evaluation work undertaken in this area during the 2022–26 programme. In addition, care-experienced individuals represent a new focus group requiring specific attention under the new programme. ii) Value for money During the planning for the evaluation of the 2022-26 Programme, Value for Money was identified as an area of focus. Earlier this year, the Value for Money phase in the 2022-26 evaluation was paused to take a step back and further assess what was required by both the boroughs and London Councils. Since summer 2025, the Grants Team has been working with Envoy Partnership, who are developing a Value for Money Outcomes Framework and will do some initial reporting on the current programme to Grants Committee in November 2025 and March 2026. There is an opportunity to access Envoy’s Social Value Manager platform to continue analysis of Value for Money in the new programme which would incur an annual fee of £9,000+VAT. The work the Grants Team is currently doing with Envoy includes the setup of the platform with project data, training for team members and recommendations for refining the framework for use in current and future programmes. If the decision is made to continue to use the Social Value Manager platform throughout the four years of the new programme, a total of £43,200 including VAT w ill need to be 96 deployed. It is anticipated that these funds could be covered from the £100,000 evaluation budget assigned to the 2026-30 Grants Programme. iii) Innovation and learning from best practice The evaluation will explore innovation in service delivery, including how organisations adopt new approaches, technologies, or service models that improve access, engagement, and outcomes. It will also examine how lessons from best practice across London boroughs are identified, shared, and applied, and whether successful approaches are scaled or adapted to different local contexts. 4.2 In addition, and based on feedback from Grants Executive members, the Grants team proposed carrying out an in-house evaluation on the quality of partnerships . The evaluation will assess how effectively funded organisations collaborate to deliver services across London, including borough-level analysis. 5 Recommendations Grants Committee members are asked to note: − that the Committee has already agreed the budget for the evaluation, as part of the establishment of the 2026-30 programme. − that the Grants Committee Executive, at its September 2025 meeting, discussed and provided a steer on the draft timetable and the areas of the programme that should be prioritised for evaluation. Grants Committee members are asked to agree: − the timetable and three areas of work proposed. Financial Implications for London Councils This report advises members that the evaluation work can be carried out with a budget approved in the Committee meeting in March 2025. Legal Implications for London Councils London Councils manages the London Councils Grants Programme on behalf of all the boroughs and the City of London. The Programme makes grants to voluntary organisations to deliver improved outcomes for Londoners. 97 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 boroughs fund the Programme, through a levy contribution based on the boroughs' proportion of the capital’s population. Boroughs must exercise their functions in respect of the scheme ‘with due regard to the needs of the whole of Greater London’. Leaders' Committee determines the principles and priorities of the Programme and the overall budget of the Programme. The Grants Committee commissions services, awards funding, manages projects’ performance and may advise the Leaders’ Committee on the Programme. 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 Equalities Act 2010, particularly the Public Sector Equalities Duty. London Councils’ funded services provide support to people within all the protected characteristics (Equality Act 2010), and target 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 data annually. The evaluation specifications include a review of the Grants Programme’s impact considering an Equalities perspective, to assist the Committee in continuing to improve the way the programme serves all groups listed under the protected characteristics and feed into the equalities objectives of any future programme. Background Documents Grants Committee, 26 March 2025, Item 6: 2026-2030: Prospectus for the new programme, and Appendix 4: Equalities Impact Assessment Grants Committee Executive, 17 September 2025, Item 8: Evaluation discussion – 2026-30 Programme 98 Grants Executive Committee Month 6 Revenue Forecast 2025/26 Item no: 9 Report by: David Sanni Job title: Director of Corporate Resources Date: 26 November 2025 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 2025 for the Grants Committee; • P rovides a forecast of the outturn position for 2026/27 for both actual and committed expenditure on commissions, along with the administration of all these commissions. Members are reminded that the position stated in this report is at the end of the second quarter of 2025/26, which is the final year of the four-year programme of commissions. At this stage, a surplus of £7,000 is forecast over the approved budget. Recommendations The Grants Executive Committee is asked to : • N ote the projected surplus of £7,000 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. 99 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 2026. 2. The London Councils Grants Committee’s income and expenditure revenue budget for 2025/26 was approved by the Leaders’ Committee in December 2024, following recommendations by the Grants Committee. The total revenue budget for 2025/26 is £6.711m. 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 and Member Costs 165 300 357 57 Running Costs 11 19 26 7 Central Recharges 80 159 159 - Total Operating Expenditure 256 478 542 64 S.48 Commissioned services 2,447 6,173 6,142 (31) London Funders Group 60 60 60 - Total Expenditure 2,763 6,711 6,744 33 Income Borough contributions towards commissioned services (3,168) (6,233) (6,233) - Borough contributions towards the administration of commissions (239) (478) (478) - Interest on Investments (20) - (40) (40) Transfer from Earmarked Reserves - - - - Total Income (3,427) (6,711) (6,751) (40) Net Expenditure (664) - (7) (7) 4. The projected surplus of £7,000, is broadly split between the following: 100 • A projected underspend in respect of 2025/26 S.48 borough funded commissioned services of £31,000 (paragraph 5); • An overspend on employee costs initially arose due to maternity cover requirements. However, additional expenditure has also been incurred through secondment arrangements, required to address capacity to manage and conclude the current scheme, as well as to concurrently support the implementation of the new programme scheduled to begin in 2026/27. • An overspend on running costs of £7,000 in part due to the development of a new payment recording system; and • An additional sum of £40,000 from investment income is forecast to be received on Committee reserves, which is not included in the budget. However, this budget line can be unpredictable as interest rates change through the year, therefore it will be monitored closely during the year Payments to Commissions – London Councils Borough S.48 Programme 5. Table 2 below outlines the actual spend for the period 1 April 2025 to 30 September 2025 for the borough funded commissions, covering priorities 1 and 2. Table 2 – Actual Spend 1 April 2025 to 30 September 2025 – Priorities 1 and 2 2025/26 budget (£) Forecast payments Quarter 2 (£) Actual Payments (£) Projected Underspend (£) Balance (£) 6,172,500 13,061,250 2,429,000 25,000 25,000 6. As at Q2 there were no balance of payments on hold, however this will be monitored and reported on as the year progresses. Payments made during the previous year 1 Although payments are approved, these amount will be released in Quarter 3. 101 are also under review, and there is a £6,000 underspend to be recovered as discussed below in paragraph 7. Any further prior year underspends identified during the year will be reported in future forecast reports. 7. There is a projected underspend in relation to Women’s Aid Foundation which stopped delivering on 31 March 2025, at the July Grants committee meeting it was agreed not to pay any more instalments, this has resulted in a forecast underspend during 2025/26 of £25,000 and £6,000 relating to 2024/25. The underspend is currently reflected in the forecasted general reserves. However, if a decision is taken to repurpose this underspend, a transfer will be made to Earmarked Reserves to support future expenditure. 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 further underspends will be identified as the year progresses or that the known underspend will be repurposed, which will be reflected in the further monitoring reports scheduled to come before the Committee during 2025/26. Committee Reserves 9. Table 3 below provides an update to the Committee on the projected level of reserves at 31 March 2026, if all current known liabilities and commitments are considered: 102 Table 3 – Analysis of Projected Uncommitted Reserves as at 31 March 2026 General Reserve (£000) Earmarked Reserve (£000) Unaudited Balance at 1 April 2025 906 44 Surplus for Year 7 - Projected reserves as at 31 March 2025 913 44 Minimum Level of Reserves (336) - Residual Reserves 577 - Conclusions 10. Projected general reserves of £913,000 are forecast at the year-end, after considering the projected surplus of £7,000 for the year. This level of general reserves relating to the S.48 borough funded commissions (Priorities 1&2), equates to 13.6% of the £6.711 million commissions 2025/26 budget. This figure exceeds the benchmark of £336,000 or 5% agreed by the Grants Committee in July 2023 by some £577,000. 11. As previously reported, the start of the new four-year programme will incur additional expenditure during its initial phase and work will be undertaken to establish the full extent of these costs. There is likely to be a call on the uncommitted reserves to support this work. Also, 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 previous underspends. This will be reported on accordingly. 103 Recommendations 12. Members are asked to: • note the projected surplus of £7,000 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 Equalities Implications for London Councils None Background Papers London Councils Budget working papers 2025/26 London Councils Income and Expenditure Forecast File 2025/26 104 London Councils Grants Committee London Councils Grants Scheme – Budget Proposals 2026/27 Item 10 Report by: David Sanni Job title: Director of Corporate Resources Date: 26 November 2025 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 2026/27 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 9 December 2025, that the Grants Committee agree: • an overall level of expenditure of £6.734 million for the Grants Scheme in 2026/27 (2025/26: £6.711 million); • borough contributions for 2026/27 of £6.724 million (2025/26: £6.711 million); • that further to the recommendations above, constituent councils be informed of the Committee's recommendation 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 105 councils have not reached agreement by the two-thirds majority specified before 1 February 2026 they shall be deemed to have approved expenditure of an amount equal to the amount approved for the preceding financial year (i.e. £6.711 million); and • that constituent councils be advised that the apportionment of contributions for 2026/27 will be based on the ONS mid- year population estimates for June 2024. 106 London Councils Grants Scheme - Budget Proposals 2026/27 Introduction 1. This report details the indicative overall budget requirement for the London Boroughs Grants Scheme for 2026/27 of £6.734 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; • the cost of administering the scheme of £501,000, an increase of £23,000: • an increase to the borough subscriptions from £6.711 million to £6.724 million, representing an average increase of £394 per borough; and • £10,000 in investment income generated from the committee’s cash balances. Budget Proposals for 2026/27 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 helped 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. 107 4. These proposals take into account a number of budget pressures which include: • higher than expected pay award for 2025/26 of 3.2%, compared to the 2.5% originally budgeted; • an increase to employer pension contributions due to the removal of the current discount, subject to the outcome of the triennial valuation; and • i nflationary pressures estimated at 2.63% impacting employee and member costs, contractual commitments and general supplies and services. 5. An inflationary increase of 2.63% (based on forecast CPI) has been applied to the portion of the borough subscriptions that fund administration costs, increasing it from £478,000 to £491,000 a rise of £13,000 (average of £394 per borough). The inflationary increase has been applied to prevent the erosion of the Committee’s funding base as agreed in the 2025/26 budget setting process. 6. The staffing costs figures within the proposed 2026/27 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 recharge figure for supporting the Committee’s functions, as well as a portion of premises cost for the use of office space. 108 8. Following a review of the committees’ historic investment returns on its cash balances a prudent level of investment income has been budgeted for in 2026/27 of £10,000. 9. Appendix A to this report sets out detailed information relating to the proposed budget for 2026/27. 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 9 December 2025. 10. The financial year 2026/27 represents the first year of the new 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 2024. Approval of Expenditure 11. 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. 12. 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 2026/27 at its meeting on 9 December 2025. If the Leaders Committee does not accept the recommendations of the Grants Committee, and instead agree to recommend a different budget figure to Boroughs, the Grants Committee will need to meet urgently to consider the implications for the Grants programme. 109 13. 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 14. 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 16 January 2026. 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. 15. 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 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 2026. 110 16. 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 2026 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 17. 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 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 111 shall be the number estimated by the Registrar-General and certified by him to the Secretary of State 18. 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." 19. 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 2026. 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. 112 Summary Timetable 20. To summarise, the timetable for the approval of the budget for 2026/27 is expected to be as follows: Date Action 26 November 2025 Grants Committee considers proposed budget and borough contributions for 2026/27 detailed in this report and makes recommendations to Constituent Councils, subject to approval of Leaders’ Committee. 9 December 2025 Leaders’ Committee is asked to approve the level of budget and borough contributions for 2026/27, as recommended by the Grants Committee on 26 November. 10-12 December 2025 Constituent Councils formally notified of the approved level of budget and borough contributions for 2026/27. 13 December 2025 – 31 January 2026 Constituent Councils to individually ratify the overall level of expenditure for 2026/27 through their respective decision-making arrangements. 1-15 February 2026 The City of London Corporation, as the Designated Councils for the Grants Scheme, approves the levy for 2026/27 on Constituent Councils. 15 February 2026 Constituent Councils informed of level of approved expenditure and borough contributions for 2026/27. 2025/26 Outturn Projections 21. The Month 6 forecast report is included as a separate report on this agenda and highlights projected surplus of £7,000 in total for 2025/26. 113 Use of Reserves 22. 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 2026/27 outlined in this report, is detailed in Table 1 below: Table 1 – Estimated Reserves Grants Committee £000 £000 General Earmarked Provisional reserves at March 2026 913 44 23. 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 £337,000 in respect of a proposed budget of £6.734 million for 2026/27. The projected level of uncommitted General Reserves after taking into account the proposals included in this report is £913,000 which is in excess of the benchmark by £576,000. 24. As previously reported, the start of the new four-year programme from April 2026 will incur additional expenditure during its initial phase and work will be undertaken to establish the full extent of these costs. There is likely to be a call on the uncommitted reserves to support this work. Borough Contributions 25. Paragraphs 17 to 19 of this report set out the legal position relating to contributions payable by constituent councils to the London Councils Grants Scheme. Contributions for 2026/27 have been calculated using the latest available ONS mid-year population estimates for June 2024 and are set out in Appendix B. 114 Grants Committee Medium-term Financial Plan 2027/28 to 2028/29 26. The indicative Grant Committee budgets for 2027/28 and 2028/29 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). The detailed Grants Committee budget for 2027/28 and 2028/29 can be found at Appendix C. Summary 27. This report considers the proposed budget for the Grants Scheme for 2026/27 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 2026/27 of £6.734 million, which requires borough contributions of £6.724 million (refer to Appendix B). 28. The financial year 2026/27 represents the first year of the new 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 2024. 115 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 2026/27; Appendix B – Proposed borough subscriptions 2026/27; Appendix C – Indicative revenue income and expenditure budget 2027/28 and 2028/29. 116 Background Papers Grants Committee Budget Working Papers 2025/26 to 2028/29; Grants Committee Final Accounts Working Papers 2025/26; Grants Committee Revenue Budget Forecast Working Papers 2025/26; and London Councils Consolidated Budget Working Papers 2026/27 to 2028/29. 117 Appendix A Grants Committee Income and Expenditure Budget 2026/27 Original Revised Expenditure Budget Budget 2026/27 2025/26 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 280 267 13 Members 24 23 1 Maternity provision 10 10 0 314 300 14 Discretionary Expenditure Staff training/recruitment advertising 7 7 0 Staff travel 2 2 0 9 9 0 Total Operating Expenditure 333 319 14 Central Recharges 168 159 9 Total Expenditure 6,734 6,711 23 Income Core borough subscriptions Contribution to grant payments 6,233 6,233 0 Contribution to non-grants expenditure 491 478 13 Investment Income 10 0 10 6,734 6,711 23 Transfer from Reserves 0 0 0 Total Income 6,734 6,711 23 Net Expediture 0 0 0 118 Borough Subscriptions 2026/27 2025/26 2026/27 Base ONS Mid- Base ONS Mid- Base Difference 2023 Estimate Borough 2024 Estimate Borough from of Population % Contribution of Population % Contribution 2025/26 ('000) (£) ('000) (£) (£) 222.31 2.49% 166,782 Barking and Dagenham 232.75 2.56% 172,173 5,391 395.01 4.42% 296,346 Barnet 405.05 4.46% 299,629 3,283 250.85 2.80% 188,194 Bexley 256.43 2.82% 189,690 1,496 344.52 3.85% 258,467 Brent 352.98 3.88% 261,111 2,644 331.16 3.70% 248,444 Bromley 335.32 3.69% 248,047 -397 220.90 2.47% 165,725 Camden 216.94 2.39% 160,478 -5,247 13.46 0.15% 10,098 City of London 15.11 0.17% 11,177 1,079 397.74 4.45% 298,394 Croydon 409.34 4.50% 302,803 4,408 375.34 4.20% 281,589 Ealing 385.99 4.25% 285,530 3,940 327.43 3.66% 245,646 Enfield 327.43 3.60% 242,211 -3,435 294.11 3.29% 220,649 Greenwich 299.53 3.30% 221,572 924 263.28 2.94% 197,519 Hackney 266.76 2.93% 197,331 -188 186.18 2.08% 139,677 Hammersmith and Fulham 188.69 2.08% 139,580 -97 262.90 2.94% 197,234 Haringey 263.85 2.90% 195,179 -2,055 263.45 2.95% 197,647 Harrow 270.72 2.98% 200,261 2,614 268.15 3.00% 201,173 Havering 276.27 3.04% 204,366 3,193 319.02 3.57% 239,337 Hillingdon 329.19 3.62% 243,513 4,176 295.71 3.31% 221,849 Hounslow 299.42 3.29% 221,491 -358 220.58 2.47% 165,485 Islington 223.02 2.45% 164,975 -509 147.46 1.65% 110,628 Kensington and Chelsea 144.52 1.59% 106,906 -3,722 170.45 1.91% 127,876 Kingston upon Thames 172.69 1.90% 127,745 -131 315.71 3.53% 236,853 Lambeth 316.92 3.49% 234,436 -2,417 298.71 3.34% 224,100 Lewisham 301.26 3.31% 222,852 -1,248 215.22 2.41% 161,463 Merton 218.54 2.40% 161,661 198 362.55 4.05% 271,994 Newham 374.52 4.12% 277,045 5,051 313.39 3.50% 235,113 Redbridge 321.23 3.53% 237,625 2,512 195.51 2.19% 146,676 Richmond upon Thames 196.68 2.16% 145,491 -1,186 315.52 3.53% 236,711 Southwark 314.79 3.46% 232,861 -3,850 211.12 2.36% 158,387 Sutton 214.53 2.36% 158,695 308 328.63 3.67% 246,546 Tower Hamlets 331.89 3.65% 245,510 -1,036 275.98 3.09% 207,047 Waltham Forest 279.74 3.08% 206,933 -114 331.46 3.71% 248,669 Wandsworth 337.66 3.71% 249,778 1,109 211.51 2.36% 158,680 Westminster 210.00 2.31% 155,344 -3,336 8,945.32 100.00% 6,711,000 Totals 9,089.76 100.00% 6,724,000 13,000 119 Appendix C Grants Committee Indicative Income and Expenditure Budget 2027/28 and 2028/29 Indicative Indicative Expenditure Budget Budget 2027/28 2028/29 £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 286 294 Members 24 25 Maternity provision 10 10 320 329 Discretionary Expenditure Staff training/recruitment advertising 7 7 Staff travel 2 2 9 9 Total Operating Expenditure 339 349 Central Recharges 171 171 Total Expenditure 6,743 6,753 Income Core borough subscriptions Contribution to grant payments 6,233 6,233 Contribution to non-grants expenditure 500 510 Investment income 10 10 6,743 6,753 Earmarked Reserves 0 0 Total Income 6,743 6,753 Net Expediture 0 0 120