Agenda item

To receive a presentation from Gloucestershire Rural Community Council (GRCC) to understand how it fulfils the requirements of the service level agreement. 

83.1          Attention was drawn to the Gloucestershire Rural Community Council (GRCC) presentation, circulated separately.  The Community and Economic Development Manager advised that Tewkesbury Borough Council had a service level agreement with GRCC and the two organisations had a positive relationship.  He introduced the GRCC Chief Executive and the Head of Operations and Business Development who would be giving a short presentation about the work undertaken and would be happy to answer any questions.

83.2          A Member suggested that it would be useful for Members to receive more regular information from the Community Development team in relation to work which was being undertaken with GRCC as this would give Overview and Scrutiny Committee Members a greater understanding and enable them to scrutinise the partnership more effectively.  The Community and Economic Development Manager advised that, following the last meeting of the Committee when Members had received a similar presentation from Active Gloucestershire, he had circulated information about that organisation to the Committee and produced a Member Update for the wider Membership which included contact details etc.  It was intended that today’s presentation would start the conversation about the services GRCC offered; if there were individual schemes in the borough which GRCC could help with, they could be passed on when appropriate.  He took on board the point about greater sharing of information and advised that GRCC produced a newsletter which he would ensure Members received going forward.

83.3                 The following key points were made during the presentation:

·     GRCC (1) – Independent, local charity with rural specialism, established in 1932; countywide coverage with offices in Cheltenham and Gloucester; mission to build strong, healthy, sustainable communities in Gloucestershire using its knowledge, experience and networks; working with individuals, communities of interest and geography, and across themes, in partnership with the statutory, voluntary and private sector; involved in direct delivery e.g. Tewkesbury Community and Flood Resilience Scheme (2014) including 38 Flood Wardens and Employment Support Hub Outreach project.

·     GRCC (2) – Infrastructure support – facilitation of training and networks to support and upskill the voluntary and community sector alongside the VCS Alliance; Independence Trust merged with GRCC in 2020 and offers individual countywide mental health support to adults via: Community Advice, Links and Mental Health Support (CALMHS); Community Autism Support and Advice (CASA); Community Wellbeing Service – Social Prescribing (CWS); and other bespoke projects.

·     Our USP – Countywide, independent, neutral VCS organisation – wealth of knowledge, experience and understanding of the bigger picture and wider learning, 100 years of connecting through ‘twinning’ and peer support; part of a national network – one of 38 Rural Community Councils operating under the umbrella of Action with Communities in Rural England (ACRE) providing examples of best practice and success; translator of policy – sharing and translating policy change from central government and other agencies with communities i.e. what does this mean and how does it affect us e.g. COVID guidance, GDPR, Localism Act 2011.

·     Empowering and Enabling – Helping communities to identify what is important to them; helping communities to identify projects, support start-up, establish a legal entity and fund and build a business plan – dovetails with Tewkesbury Borough Council’s Community Development team; providing communities with the right tools to succeed through templates, resources and knowledge e.g. Community Approaches to Road Safety (CARS) toolkit and emergency planning toolkit; empowering and enabling communities to take action for themselves.

·     Community Consultation – Community-led planning - Parish Plans/Green Plans, Village Design Statements, emergency and resilience planning, Neighbourhood Development Plans, Parish Priorities – Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), household surveys.

·     Facilitation – Networks – VCS network, the ‘go-to’ network for support to the voluntary sector including ‘Know Your Patch’ cross-sector learning networks, Service Village Forum; public consultation events – identifying housing need and enabling affordable housing including community-led, bespoke events e.g. levelling-up.

·     Supporting Volunteer Recruitment and Retention – Flood Wardens; trustees; village and community halls; community asset transfer projects including community shops and pubs; business planning, project planning, fundraising strategies, funding advice; project initiation and legal entity; grant programmes; development of children’s centres.

·     GRCC Commissioned Activity in Tewkesbury Borough – Rotational VCS networks (quarterly); training for trustees; growth agenda including one to one support e.g. community assets; community buildings advice and support; community-led planning; community and flood resilience.

·     Current and Future Plans – Enhanced Affordable Housing Officer; digital inclusion; health and wellbeing; food poverty; climate change; traffic and transport.

83.4          A Member noted that GRCC had merged with the Independence Trust and he raised concern that many organisations were trying to do the same things but did not link together which was made more difficult when organisations changed their identity.  The GRCC Chief Executive clarified that the Independence Trust was part of GRCC but maintained its identity externally to clients.  She agreed it felt there was duplication across the county, and COVID had created a lot of new things, but the sector was now being assembled in a cohesive way – partnerships were key for GRCC and there were enough people in need for the various different organisations to offer their services so it was about who was best placed to deliver the support and being brave enough to pass this on if it was not an area of expertise.  The GRCC Head of Operations and Business Development explained that the commissioning process exacerbated the problem so it was about education as well.  The Member agreed there was a lot of duplication in the area, and in-fighting as a result of trying to increase numbers and retain funding, which was frustrating for Councillors.  The GRCC Head of Operations and Business Development advised that organisations had to navigate a number of hoops and barriers to get commissioning in the first place which automatically blocked a lot of excellent local providers who could do a job but were left out as a result of the risk-averse approach.  Despite the difficulties with duplication etc. the GRCC Chief Executive advised that data from the cohort of clients GRCC worked with showed that the organisation did make a difference and that could be seen from the wider picture as well as speaking to individuals.  The GRCC Head of Operations and Business Development felt that community was key as, where areas had been brave and created a framework based on individual skill sets, things were much clearer, otherwise, it could seem clunky so she accepted that a lot of honest conversations were needed.

83.5          A Member sought clarification on the definition of “rural” as she had assumed GRCC would not be relevant to her Ward in Bishop’s Cleeve.  In response, the GRCC Chief Executive advised that GRCC had worked in Bishop’s Cleeve – rural could be defined based on size but it depended on the particular lens being looked through, for instance, Bishop’s Cleeve would be an urban settlement in planning terms but would be rural within the NHS community.  GRCC was countywide and any issues would be addressed in the most appropriate manner. 

83.6          A Member asked how people should make contact with GRCC to access services, whether that was an individual or a Parish Council, and was advised that the Community Development team had all of the relevant contact information and could pass on details.  GRCC also had a website and social media accounts and any queries made via those methods could be triaged to the right person.  Another Member noted that GRCC offered community buildings advice and he pointed out that buildings were fine when they were new as little maintenance was required and there was funding for upgrades through Section 106; however, buildings became costly to maintain over the longer term when that money had run out.  The GRCC Head of Operations and Business Development advised the community buildings network held meetings in the borough which could be attended by those who managed community buildings.  She pointed out that Tewkesbury Borough had the first carbon neutral community building in the south-west, Toddington Village Hall, and that still received support from GRCC.  GRCC also offered one to one support and had an expert in specialist charity law advice.  The Member understood that Tewkesbury Borough Council had a pool of Section 106 money which had not been spent and he asked what was going to be done to ensure that was allocated to Parish Councils to ensure GRCC could use the money.  In response, the GRCC Head of Operations and Business Development clarified that GRCC could not access Section 106 but could advise communities on how to prioritise needs and make decisions on how that money could be spent. 

83.7          A Member asked for more information on the CARS toolkit and was informed that a Parish survey had been undertaken in 2021 to identify what communities wanted from GRCC post-COVID and speeding and traffic was the primary concern across the county.  Community approaches had been found to be as effective as statutory elements such as Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) and the CARS toolkit had been launched in four districts starting in Tewkesbury Borough which had been attended by the County Council, Road Safety Forum and the Community Safety Partnership – the toolkit would be on GRCC’s website shortly and covered everything from using flowers on verges to distraction techniques to slow down traffic which had been shown to be effective.

83.8          With reference to the digital inclusion work, a Member asked what GRCC did in relation to hidden disabilities such as dyslexia and dyspraxia and was informed that a wealth of resources were available for those who were digitally excluded for those reasons as that was the purpose of the project.  The GRCC Chief Executive would be happy to share the relevant information with Members and it was agreed that GRCC would provide information to the Community Development team on matters that had been discussed for circulation to the Committee.

83.9          The Head of Corporate Services indicated that there was a lot of important work being done but many Members did not know the role of organisations like GRCC.   As such, it was proposed to arrange an external partners seminar for all Members following the elections in May where GRCC, Active Gloucestershire and any other relevant organisations, would be invited to give a short presentation and Members would have an opportunity to ask questions rather than this being done through the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

83.10        It was

RESOLVED           That the Gloucestershire Rural Community Council presentation be NOTED.