immerging issues and for close consultation between the new PCC and CSPs to allow for any shift in priorities. All feedback from Hinckley and Blaby CSP members is clearly and strongly against only awarding 6 months of PLF funding. The CSP feel this change would negatively affect service, resources, outcomes for service users and negatively impact on our delivery of local initiatives that contribute to the PCC Plan. The CSP feel that it is crucial that funding is allocated for the full 12 months. Gradual change in relation to the new PCC’s priorities can then be introduced prior to the 2017-2018 planning year where the new priorities can be fully embedded in to the provision. We are opposed to the 6 month funding proposal for the following reasons: It is extremely difficult to manage short term funding and change priorities • mid-stream It makes it very difficult for partnerships to plan and secure resources for such • a short period particularly where funding may be for officer roles e.g. children’s worker etc. The current PCC priorities went out to consultation and are supported by • partners/stakeholders so these should not dramatically change regardless of a change in personnel. It is unlikely that our local priorities will change significantly part way through • the year to warrant this and only 6 months’ funding is too short to achieve significant outcomes. Local priorities are set annually to fit in with the current annual PLF commissioning framework. In terms of the new PCC’s priorities the PLF is about meeting local • – needs/gaps which we will have identified locally increased time and associated costs with extra consultation, project • planning, bidding etc other areas of PCC funding will be in place for the full year regardless of • personnel change Q2. How do you feel the From looking at the plan the VCS appears to only related to Leicester City for OPCC can best provide VCS a value of £5’000, I am confident in the belief that OPCC staff plus local CSP infrastructure support? staff can support the process through BIK support.
immerging issues and for close consultation between the new PCC and CSPs to allow for any shift in priorities. All feedback from Hinckley and Blaby CSP members is clearly and strongly against only awarding 6 months of PLF funding. The CSP feel this change would negatively affect service, resources, outcomes for service users and negatively impact on our delivery of local initiatives that contribute to the PCC Plan. The CSP feel that it is crucial that funding is allocated for the full 12 months. Gradual change in relation to the new PCC’s priorities can then be introduced prior to the 2017-2018 planning year where the new priorities can be fully embedded in to the provision. We are opposed to the 6 month funding proposal for the following reasons: • It is extremely difficult to manage short term funding and change priorities mid-stream • It makes it very difficult for partnerships to plan and secure resources for such a short period particularly where funding may be for officer roles e.g. children’s worker etc. • The current PCC priorities went out to consultation and are supported by partners/stakeholders so these should not dramatically change regardless of a change in personnel. • It is unlikely that our local priorities will change significantly part way through the year to warrant this and only 6 months’ funding is too short to achieve significant outcomes. Local priorities are set annually to fit in with the current annual PLF commissioning framework. • In terms of the new PCC’s priorities – the PLF is about meeting local needs/gaps which we will have identified locally • increased time and associated costs with extra consultation, project planning, bidding etc • other areas of PCC funding will be in place for the full year regardless of personnel change Q2. How do you feel the OPCC can best provide VCS infrastructure support? From looking at the plan the VCS appears to only related to Leicester City for a value of £5’000, I am confident in the belief that OPCC staff plus local CSP staff can support the process through BIK support.
Paper-F-Partnerships-and-Commissioning-Update.docx