I’m half way through the lessons learned from the January 2012 evaluation of Burngreave New Deal for Communities. This time: project management! So far I have covered:
Here’s what the evaluation report says:
‘sound project management is vital in ensuring that objectives are met: this means not only ensuring financial probity but also that business planning is based on solid and legally binding contractual agreements; BNDfC was optimistic in its assumptions around support from government and statutory agencies which was not subsequently forthcoming and this resulted, ultimately, in the early end of the programme’
So, what happened? This is why you never ever throw £50 million at a community! Actually you can’t throw £50 million at a community because it is always mediated by other interests. Why? Because it is £50 million and responsible people are hardly going to let go of it, are they?
Potential Sources of Continuation Funding
Partnerships (at least in the fevered imagination of government ministers) were supposed to form between statutory, private, voluntary and community sectors. They would plan together the best ways of spending the money, always with an eye to the end of the programme when funding would continue to be either mainstreamed or funded from assets.
So, this funding was to come from two sources:
- local government, including the health authority and police
- through capital assets that would guarantee ongoing revenue funding for community projects
Mainstreaming
The NDC money ran out about a year before the end of the 10 year programme and all the partners disappeared apart from the community members of the board and the accountable body who had to stay with it whether they wanted to or not . As the lesson learned states, there were no binding contractual agreements to continue to mainstream the revenue funded work under New Deal.
We have to face it, the partners were on board out of self-interest. They needed funding and NDC was a source of funding. When it dried up, they had to move on in pursuit of other sources of funding. No-one blames them for this, as the lesson states there were no contractual obligations to continue with mainstream funding. If mainstream funding was available it could be deployed from the beginning of the programme, enhanced with New Deal money. Maybe this happened to some degree. But it was hardly going to miraculously appear at the end!
Assets
Burngreave NDC had assets, oh yes. There were 3:
- Forum House became available and New Deal took it on because otherwise it would be demolished. It was in use for a period but largely surplus to requirements.
- The Vestry Hall is a landmark building and its refurbishment, from a derelict state, funded by New Deal. But it could never be viable and it still isn’t. So New Deal subsidised it with the only asset that had any chance of being viable …
- … Sorby House. This was the old DHSS offices and was fully refurbished into office space. The idea was rental income from these offices would generate revenue for community projects.
So, what happened? Two things did for Sorby House.
- with the 2008 recession, demand for office space was much reduced across the city.
- political control of the council changed. Under Labour, one floor was to be occupied by a local government department who would act as an anchor tenant. Guess what! There was no binding contract. The Lib Dems decided not to honour what was presumably a gentleman’s agreement.
So, we ended up with 3 white elephants. The only option at the end of NDC was to hand ownership over to the accountable body. There were vague promises that they might be handed back to the community should they ever become viable. Personally, I wouldn’t touch them with a bargepole.
Not one of these buildings offers a viable community space. There are no unstructured meeting spaces in Burngreave whatsoever. There are rooms for meetings but nowhere where people meet casually.
What Happened?
And now with the cuts, we’re seeing council departments move into Sorby House. This was inevitable because if the council sold Sorby House, national government would claw back the proceeds of the sale. The plans are to close Burngreave Library because the council has to make cuts. If the campaign to save the library succeeds, it is likely to move to Sorby House because the council can sell the library building and retain the proceeds of sale. Under the circumstances it makes sense to do this but it is hard to see how exactly Burngreave has benefited from the New Deal investment.
