Agenda item

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submits a report providing an overview of the Community Asset Transfer policy, a summary of the work undertaken as part of the Transforming Neighbourhood Services project and noting lessons learned from early experiences.  The Commission is recommended to note and comment on the progress made to date, feedback and lessons learned regarding Community Asset Transfer.

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submitted a report providing an overview of the Community Asset Transfer (CAT) policy, a summary of the work undertaken as part of the Transforming Neighbourhood Services project and information on lessons learned from early experiences.

The Head of Neighbourhood Services introduced the report, explaining that:

·           The process used enabled community groups to make an early offer to lease community premises before firm options for those premises were developed.  This gave such groups time to develop an understanding of what was involved in managing community premises before they made a commitment;

·           This was followed by a six-week consultation period and early consultation was undertaken with Ward Councillors;

·           The Council procured assistance for groups through the organisation Locality.  This assistance was optional, but could include things such as helping groups write business cases, so helping provide groups with an understanding of what was involved in managing a building;

·           Bids received were assessed by Property Services officers against the criteria specified for each transfer and Ward Councillors were consulted again before a decision was taken;

·           The business case provided by the successful bidder was written in to the lease for the building they would manage; and

·           It was recognised that some asset transfers had been more successful than others.  For example, some organisations had increased hire charges significantly, and access to transferred buildings had become difficult for some groups.  Work to resolve these issues was ongoing.

The Assistant City Mayor for Neighbourhood Services noted that every time a CAT was undertaken, the Council learned something, as all transfers were different.  Great care was taken throughout the transfer process to ensure that the organisations leasing premises were able to take on this role, as it was important that assets did not become liabilities for the groups managing them.

The following comments were then made during discussion on the report:

o    The report was welcomed and the process by which organisations acquired a lease of community building was noted;

o    It could be useful for a handbook, or guidance, to be provided on how to prepare a business plan for a community asset transfer, in order to reduce the challenges faced by organisations interested in taking on the lease of a building;

o    The Council was very aware that voluntary groups often relied on a few key individuals to manage or maintain the group, but if those individuals were no longer able to continue in this role, the group could find it difficult to function efficiently.  The criteria for CAT therefore included the need for assurance from a group that its proposals were financially viable and that it had strong governance.  However, leases under CAT contained terms under which a group could terminate a lease before it ended;

o    Locality recommended that groups undertook their own risk analysis as part of the business case they prepared and some groups now did this;

o    The criteria that groups or organisations needed to fulfil to be considered for taking on the lease of community building were set out in the Council’s CAT policy.  The CAT process was designed to ensure that community assets remained in use for the community, so the heaviest weighting was given to the community benefit of the transfer that bidding groups anticipated;

o    Information on the building being considered for transfer was available to interested organisations at the start of the CAT process, such as its size and current running costs;

o    Workshops were held when a proposed transfer was advertised, which also gave groups an indication of whether they would be considered suitable to take on a lease;

o    Information was set out in the Council’s CAT policy on how a community-led group was defined for the purposes of CAT;

o    A standard lease for transferred buildings was not used, as the terms for each transfer were different, to reflect the different opportunities identified and timescales preferred or required for each transfer.  For example, an organisation could lease a building for a few years, to see whether it worked for them, but others could take on a longer lease;

o    When considering the future of a building, a range of disposal options were considered;

o    Once a group had taken on a lease for a building, assistance was available on an on-going basis from the council’s Neighbourhood Services officers; and

o    A key fob entry system had been introduced for various community buildings in the city, with the Council retaining management of these buildings.  This meant that access to these buildings was increased, as staff did not need to be on the premises.  Most of the buildings included in this scheme had been identified through the Transforming Neighbourhood Services programme.

Some concern as expressed over whether adequate assistance was available for groups and organisations leasing community buildings after they had taken on a lease, but Members felt that the effectiveness of assistance provided could be monitored as the Transforming Neighbourhood Services programme developed.

AGREED:

1)    That the undertaking of the Transforming Neighbourhood Services programme in stages be welcomed;

2)    That the Head of Neighbourhood Services be asked to provide Members with any additional information available to that provided in Appendix 1 to the report on the Council’s Community Asset Transfer policy, in particular on the criteria used against which an organisation’s suitability for Community Asset Transfer is considered and, if available, information on any criteria used by the Locality organisation;

3)    That the Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services be asked to report to the Commission on the success, or otherwise, of the key fob system used to provide access to some community buildings;

4)    That representatives of some groups who have taken on leases for community buildings be invited to advise the Commission of the success, or otherwise, of Community Asset Transfers; and

5)    That the Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services and the Head of Neighbourhood Services be asked to consider the comments recorded above when considering future Community Asset Transfers.