Agenda item

To consider a presentation on progress with the delivery of the Anti-Poverty Strategy after one year in operation.

RESOLVED: That the People Overview and Scrutiny Committee requested a response to the question of why the distribution of Household Support Fund 4 funding needed to be determined by an individual decision by the Leader of the Council rather than by the Cabinet.

The Executive Director People Services presented an overview of progress with the delivery of the Anti-Poverty Strategy in the year following its adoption, highlighting the following points:

·         The experience so far of implementing the Strategy validated the cross-party, multi-agency approach that had been used to develop it.  However, there were further opportunities to broaden engagement that still needed to be taken. 

·         The Strategy identified three priorities: supporting people who were already in poverty; preventing people from falling into poverty; and influencing the government and national bodies to get a better deal for communities in West Northamptonshire.  Performance so far against the first priority had been good but was not matched by that against the second.  Work in the first year had been more reactive than proactive.

·         The principle of establishing a true partnership between WNC, voluntary and community sector (VCS) organisations and other relevant bodies had been key to the progress made in the past year.  So far the resources supporting the Strategy had come from the Household Support Fund, Public Health grant and VCS goodwill.  This needed to be augmented in future to reduce reliance on WNC.

·         Supporting people to get out of poverty was a long term process but work under the Strategy still needed to move to a more proactive approach.  The provision of immigration support and advice would be one of the first areas of proactive work that should make a difference.

·         The Household Support Fund (HSF) had worked well in West Northamptonshire, with good engagement in shaping schemes before decisions on implementation were taken.  The relatively short previous schemes had been challenging and it was positive that the latest scheme HSF-4 allocated funding for a year.

·         More work needed to be done to analysis previous HSF schemes to understand, for example, why people who had received food vouchers from VCS organisations under HSF-3 had needed them.

·         The change to an annual funding allocation for HSF-4 would require a more sophisticated approach to communications and marketing, including to ensure that funding was not all used before the winter.  This would be supported by the Community Training Partnership to provide training for frontline workers and volunteers on the key social welfare issues in West Northamptonshire.

·         The 52,932 attendances at Warm Welcoming Spaces provided during January – March 2023 represented a massive number.  This data needed to be properly understood and used to inform future work.  However, it should also be recognised that this provision had enabled 3,371 people who might otherwise have been missed to be referred on to wrap around services.

·         The implementation of an emergency debt and money advice service from early summer 2023 was another example of more proactive work under the Strategy.

·         The development of immigration support and advice was a key area for the future, as people with no recourse to public funds were at higher risk of experiencing poverty.  A hub and spoke delivery model would be used to enhance capacity.  There would also be a focus on maximising resources available to the local area, for example, by addressing the situation that undocumented children did not receive the pupil premium.

·         The Strategy now required a revised action plan setting out how partners could better deliver the priority to prevent people from falling into poverty.  Overview and Scrutiny could contribute to this by providing constructive challenge about whether the collective resources of West Northamptonshire were being mobilised as fully as possible. 

The Committee considered the presentation and members made the following points during the course of discussion:

·         The Executive Director was thanked for the honest picture given.  WNC had so far been able to support the Strategy using significant funding received from the government, although the WNC staff and VCS partners involved deserved credit for the way this had been deployed.

·         Consideration should be given to staggering the use of HSF-4 funding.  This could also be the last scheme to provide holiday food support and WNC might need to build funding into the base budget in future.

·         It would be useful to have more information breaking down the 52,932 attendances at Warm Welcoming Spaces and whether any of these Spaces had evolved from an emergency provision into more permanent community hubs or facilities.

·         The size and purpose of the Anti-Poverty Strategy oversight group could be reviewed with a view to maximising its effectiveness.

·         The work done so far under the Anti-Poverty Strategy and the approach taken by the WNC Cabinet Member for Adult Care, Wellbeing and Health Integration were generally welcome.

In response to a question the Executive Director People Services advised that the distribution of HSF-4 funding would be the subject of an individual decision by the Leader of the Council due to the cancellation of the Cabinet meeting in May.  Members expressed concern at this approach, given that £5.19m funding was involved.

RESOLVED: That the People Overview and Scrutiny Committee requested a response to the question of why the distribution of Household Support Fund 4 funding needed to be determined by an individual decision by the Leader of the Council rather than by the Cabinet.