Agenda of Community Investment Funding Panel

Community Investment Funding Panel

30 November 2021

Page No.

1. Apologies

Nil

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

3. Interests

3.1 Updates to the Interests Register

3.2 Identify any conflicts of interest in the agenda

4. Public Forum

5. Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 7 September 2021 4 - 6

Document number M18907

Recommendation

That the Community Investment Funding Panel

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Community Investment Funding Panel, held on 7 September 2021, as a true and correct record.

6. Community Investment Fund - Small Grant Allocation November 2021 7 - 83

Document number R26379

Recommendation

That the Community Investment Funding Panel

1. Receives the report Community Investment Fund - Small Grant Allocation November 2021 (R26379) and its attachments (A2570591, A2760186, and A2790968); and

2. Approves funding for the Community Investment Fund Grant Applications as agreed at this 30 November 2021 meeting and recorded in the tabled document (A2790968); and

3. Notes that the Community Investment Fund is insufficient to meet the total value of applications that meet the priority focus areas and that the Community Investment Funding Panel will not be able to support all worthy applications to the extent it may wish to.

Community Investment Funding Panel Minutes - 7 September 2021

Minutes of a meeting of the

Community Investment Funding Panel

Te Rōpū Pūtea Hapori

Held via Zoom on Tuesday 7 September 2021, commencing at 2.34p.m.

Present: Mr A White (Chairperson), Ms R Gordon, Ms R Grant, Mr L Katu (Kaumatua), Ms V Lock, Mr B Subba, Mr G Thomas

In Attendance: Governance Advisers (J Brandt and K McLean)

Apologies : Nil

Council Kaumatua L Katu was co-opted as a non-voting Panel member for this meeting, due to his specific knowledge and understanding of Iwi Māori aspirations and organisations in Nelson.

1. Apologies

There were no apologies.

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

The confirmation of the minutes was considered last.

3. Interests

Two Panel Members declared an interest in agenda item 5, 2021/22 Community Investment Fund Strategic Grant Funding Allocation: Rachel Gordon regarding the Brain Injury Association application and Viv Lock regarding the Beneficiaries and Unwaged Workers Trust application. Neither took part in discussion of or voting on these applications.

4. Public Forum

There was no public forum.

5. 2021/22 Community Investment Fund Strategic Grant Funding Allocation

Document number R26023, agenda pages 7 - 203 refer.

Community Contracts Adviser, Paul Prestidge, presented the report and tabled a replacement for agenda attachment 5 (A2739423).

It was noted that changes to the initial schedule of Strategic Grant Allocations were due to the available funding being insufficient to fund all applications to the level requested by applicants.

Resolved CIF/2021/003
	*That the Community Investment Funding Panel* *1. Receives the report 2021/22 Community Investment Fund Strategic Grant Funding Allocation (R26023) and its attachments (A2570591, A2654351, A2706163, A2738120 and A2739423); and* *2. Agrees to consider the late application from the White House for funding; and* *3. Approves funding for the Community Investment Fund Grant Applications as agreed at this meeting and recorded in the tabled document A2739423; and* 4. Notes that funding priorities are for communities of greatest need, funding for success, providing strategic funding and the unavailability of alternate funding for organisations; and 5. Notes that the Community Investment Fund was insufficient to meet the total value of applications that met the priority focus areas and that the Panel was not able to support all worthy applications to the extent it may wish to.
Thomas/Grant Carried
Attachments 1 A2739423 - tabled document - Final Strategic Grant Allocations 2021/22 - 7 Sep 2021

6. Confirmation of Minutes (agenda item 4)

6.1 28 June 2021

Document number M18758, agenda pages 4 - 6 refer.

Resolved CIF/2021/004

That the Community Investment Funding Panel

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Community Investment Funding Panel, held on 28 June 2021, as a true and correct record.

Grant/Lock Carried

Karakia Whakamutanga

There being no further business the meeting ended at 2.43p.m.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings by resolution on (date) 2021.

Resolved

Item 6: Community Investment Fund - Small Grant Allocation November 2021

Community Investment Funding Panel

30 November 2021

REPORT R26379

Community Investment Fund - Small Grant Allocation November 2021

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To allocate the Community Investment Fund (CIF) Small Grants first tranche for 2021/22.

2. Recommendation

That the Community Investment Funding Panel

1. Receives the report Community Investment Fund - Small Grant Allocation November 2021 (R26379) and its attachments (A2570591, A2760186, and A2790968); and

2. Approves funding for the Community Investment Fund Grant Applications as agreed at this 30 November 2021 meeting and recorded in the tabled document (A2790968); and

3. Background

3.1 The Community Investment Fund (CIF) is a contestable fund, providing grants to community organisations that, “improve the wellbeing in support Nelson ‘communities of greatest need’ as being focusing on reducing social isolation, reducing housing vulnerability, improving access to work and learning opportunities, and reducing the impact of poverty.”

3.2 The total CIF budget for 2021/22 is $342,923. 70% of the CIF funding, ($240,000), was allocated as strategic grants to 27 organisations in September 2021. The balance, $102,923, is available to allocate as small grants up to $10,000 each in two funding rounds at this meeting, and a second scheduled for May 2022.

3.3 A candidate was recommended by iwi managers for appointment to the Panel as the member who can bring a Māori perspective to the Panel. At the time of writing this report, this appointment is being finalised.

4. Discussion

Applications received

4.1 A total of 33 small grant applications were received, requesting $197,311. Application details are provided as Attachment two. Officers have reviewed the applications to assess their eligibility and alignment to the CIF priorities.

4.1.1 Nine of the applications were previously declined a strategic grant, and on the advice of officers, are resubmitted to be considered for a small grant.

4.1.2 Seven applicants whose strategic grant application was declined have submitted a new application for a small grant.

4.1.3 Three applicants for a small grant also received a strategic grant. Groups that have received strategic grants are eligible to apply for a small grant provided it is for a different project or purpose.

Funds available for allocation

4.2 The total CIF budget for 2021/22 is $342,923, $240,000 of which has been distributed as strategic grants. The balance, $102,923, is available for allocation as small grants in two funding rounds.

4.3 Staff recommend that the panel retain sufficient funds (ideally at least 40%) to provide a meaningful the second allocation round, leaving up to $60,000 to allocate in this round.

Funding Priorities

4.4 As the fund has been oversubscribed, with most applicants having some or a strong alignment to the fund purpose, many applicants must be declined or receive partial funding despite submitting worthwhile applications.

4.5 In decision making, the recommended funding allocation reflects the following principles:

4.5.1 Prioritising Communities of Greatest Need: Priority should be given to organisations that will make a tangible difference to improving community wellbeing by reducing social isolation, reducing housing vulnerability, reducing the impact of poverty, and improving access to work and learning in Nelson.

4.5.2 Funding for success: It is better to adequately fund a small number of projects and decline others, than underfund multiple projects that cannot succeed.

4.5.3 Small Grant Funding Levels: This fund is promoted as providing small grants with a maximum of $10,000 and an expectation that most grants will be between $2,000 and $5,000. Where a grant is requested as a contribution towards a larger project, the Panel should consider whether a grant will provide a meaningful contribution to the success of the project.

4.5.4 Alternative Funding Options: This involves considering whether the organisation has access to alternative funding from other sources.

Decisions on applications

4.6 The priorities and funding criteria are defined in the CIF Panel Terms of Reference (Attachment one).

4.7 At the workshops, the panel requested further information from staff regarding several applications which have been included in notes to the recommendations for allocating the funding (to be attached as attachment three).

4.8 Based on the direction provided at the workshops and the funding principles, officers have prepared a schedule with a recommended funding distribution to fully allocate the budget available.

4.9 The panel should consider each application on its merits and choose to either wholly fund, partly fund or decline the application and articulate the reasons for the decision. Rationale for declining applications are:

4.9.1 Incomplete alignment with Council’s strategic priorities and the small grant funding criteria.

4.9.2 Does not achieve sufficient community benefit to Nelson residents when considered against alternative applications.

4.9.3 Does not sufficiently demonstrate the applicant’s ability to deliver the project, service or activity when considered against other applications.

Assessments

4.10 Officers reviewed all the applications and provided advice for the Panel to consider at its workshop, and when making its decisions.

4.10.1 29 applications, requesting $162,391 were assessed as meeting the overall criteria for CIF small grants funding – with some more strongly meeting the criteria than others.

4.10.2 4 applications, requesting $34,950 were assessed as not meeting the criteria for CIF small grants funding.

4.11 Officers further reviewed the applications following the Panel workshop and provided a recommendation (Attachment three) based on the fund principles, the previous track record of the applicant, direction provided at the workshops, the financial and governance capability of the applicant, the Nelson community benefit, reach and effectiveness of the activity when considered against other applicants.

4.12 As the fund has been significantly oversubscribed, with most applicants having some, or a strong alignment to the fund purpose, many applicants must be declined or receive partial funding despite submitting worthwhile applications.

5. Options

Option 1: Allocate the Community Investment Small Grants as per attachment three (recommended option)
Advantages	· Community groups will receive Council grant funding to enable them to achieve positive community outcomes.
Risks and Disadvantages	· Unsuccessful applicants may be dissatisfied with being declined.
Option 2: Allocate the Community Investment Small Grants differently to that recommended in attachment three
Advantages	· Funding will reflect the panel’s funding priorities. · Community groups will receive Council grant funding to enable them to achieve positive community outcomes.
Disadvantages	· Unsuccessful applicants may be dissatisfied with being declined.
Option 3: Do not allocate the Community Investment Small Grants (not recommended).
Advantages	· None
Risks and Disadvantages	· Nelson community groups would miss out on funding.