Agenda item

The Panel received a presentation from the Deputy Chief Executive of the Doncaster Cultural Leisure Trust and Well North Manager from the Health Improvement Team - Public Health (DMBC), which updated Members on progress made by the Social Isolation and Loneliness Alliance since November 2019.

The presentation covered the following areas;

·         Factors Affecting Loneliness and Social Isolation

·         SIA Support in Tackling Social Isolation and Loneliness

·         Governance/Strategic Framework 2021

·         Financial Precis

·         Financial Overview 2019-2024

·         Precis of Programmes Funded

·         Gaps and Moving Forward

·         Programme Updates

There was a discussion held and the following areas were highlighted.

Funding – there was a brief conversation around funding, how it had been broken down and what could be made available

Action:  A Member requested information on what other projects were being undertaken by Ward.  The Senior Governance Officer offered to circulate the presentation and information provided to the Panel.

Success of work undertaken by SIA – Members were informed that based on the measure of sustainability and support from local voluntary groups, communities and faith groups, that the work had been deemed a success, particularly during the lockdown.  It was recognised that more work needed to be done about raising advocacy about the work undertaken.

It was added that it would be what was learnt from the research being carried out that would demonstrate other measures of success.  Members were informed that such research was taking place with academics from Manchester Metropolitan University as an additional resource to analyse all the data being collated. 

It was explained that the Social Inclusion Alliance, was an alliance with around 60 organisations involved that all reported on their work in different ways, which could be a challenge.  It was commented that further work was also being undertaken around the social return from the investment that had been made (for example, reduction made in prescriptions). 

It was stated that successful engagement had been undertaken with local voluntary community and faith sector groups.   It was explained that the research would be able to identify who had been helped and how social inclusion had been addressed. It was acknowledged that loneliness and social isolation was difficult to analyse as it was a subjective issue and this was where the academic research would be beneficial.

Safeguarding – A Member enquired about what safeguards were in place to make sure that those deemed vulnerable had been suitably protected.  Members were informed that safeguarding was in place with the Trust from a due diligence perspective, as well as supporting those organisations involved to do so as well.  It was added that a number of groups had started up during the pandemic and that the Trust had introduced safeguarding protocols to help embed this as a priority especially in light of issuing certain funding.  It was acknowledged that some groups would not have their own procedures in place and the Trust recognised that improvements could also be made in ensuring that this area could be made more robust.

Accessibility of Information - Assurances were also sought that steps were being taken to ensure that questionnaires were available in the appropriate format such as easy read, picture format or appropriate languages.  It was recognised that specialist groups were involved within the alliance and the assumption was made that those groups had the appropriate measures in place when communicating with such cohorts.

It was clarified that as part of the alliance, the group was only a member if constituted.  Members were informed that other smaller unconstituted organisations or individuals were directed to the Voluntary Action Group and supported through that process.  Reference was made to community connectors whose role and expertise also helped to support the best ways to communicate.

Structure – It was explained that in view of the challenging logistics of having 60 members within the alliance, that it had been agreed to form a consortium, which had undertaken one meeting to date.  It was added that sub-groups boards were still under development

Governance - Regarding the scrutiny of the alliance, Members were informed that the Trust had to ensure that there was due diligence in place.  It was outlined as part of the Trust’s lead organisation role, they carry out financial checks and through the applications (in addition to safeguarding checks and sustainability).  This was in addition to a further check through the Panel, which had representation from across the different organsations involved.  It was continued that where there was uncertainty, further checks would then be made with the applicant.  It was acknowledged that although some bids were rejected, a layer of support was provided through the process with certain mechanisms and controls in place.   Finally, it was noted that the Council had a role itself in ensuring that the Trust as the lead organisation was compliant.

Transparency – A Member asked whether there was a public register regarding the details of funded amounts so that the public could see what works was being undertaken and amounts being provided.  It was explained that it was not currently available, although a Freedom of information (FOI) request could be activated to access such information.  Members were assured that once funding had been allocated, there would be a report (which would be made publically available) on the work that had taken place and the amount of funding that had been allocated.

RESOLVED that the Panel note the progress made by the Third Sector Provider Alliance and support the approach going forward.