Greater London Authority Community Renewal Fund Programme

The Greater London Authority (GLA) had 52 applications submitted for funding through the Community Renewal Fund (CRF). After an extensive review, 20 applications were shortlisted and submitted to government, with only one failing the gateway criteria review. Despite not being identified as one of the government’s 100 “priority places”, six were successfully awarded Community Renewal Funding.

The six successful projects include:

• Greater London Authority: no wrong door - integration skills and employment to help Londoners into good work.
• LB Newham: unlocking opportunities in the south of Newham.
• LB Camden: good work Camden.
• LB Barking & Dagenham: green skills, green jobs (expanding employment support into green industries).
• LB Lewisham: creative futures.
• Launch It Trust: next generation enterprise hub and start up bootcamp.

This case study has been developed with contributions from both the GLA and Launch it Trust to understand the perspectives from both lead authority and a bidding partner.

The CRF announcement was made in the middle of the London Mayoral elections, which meant that communications surrounding the fund were delayed due to the politically restricted period. Once the mayoral elections were complete, the GLA was able to launch the fund, share the government guidance along with local London priorities. Due to the short timescales, the GLA team worked with partners to advise them on the robustness of applications but were not able to provide detailed feedback.

Two members of staff carried out the gateway assessment, which was outlined by government criteria. Projects were assessed by bringing together the guidelines from the government and scoring each project application accordingly. The questions in the document that were used to assess each project referred to the particular priorities of London and the Mayor, which ensured confidence that the projects submitted would meet local demand. The scoring of these applications allowed the GLA to rank projects in order for them to produce a shortlist.

After the appraisal, the GLA set up a Q&A with the bidders and revised the shortlist of applications that were “definite”, and those that were on the “borderline”. The GLA then set up an external appraisal panel with members of different areas of London, including voluntary sectors and businesses, which was diverse and independent of the GLA. This panel went through each application and helped the GLA to decide on the final shortlist of 20 projects to be submitted to government.

Launch It, an enterprise charity that applied for the funding, was awarded £899,069 for the “Next Generation: Youth enterprise hub and start up bootcamp” project. The charity was made aware of the CRF opportunity after it was launched on the GLA website and was encouraged to apply as it is a member of the Youth Employment Group. The charity runs an enterprise centre called the “639 Centre” which is supported by the GLA. They also offer one-to-one enterprise advice, training and workshops alongside incubation space in London.

After the CRF was announced, Launch Its CEO and leadership team met to discuss whether to apply for the funding, and decided to do so largely on the basis they had already been developing a project six-months prior, which fit the criteria. The successful project proposal had a focus on skills, community and place, employment and aligned well with the priorities of the fund. This meant that the opportunity to be awarded a significant amount of funding, that had not been available previously, was worth the investment in time and planning. They were able to draw on the earlier scoping and feasibility work to develop a project which served the needs of the local youth population. As the CRF positively encouraged partnerships and large projects, Launch It reached out to Enterprise Nation, with whom they already had a relationship to partner on the project. Enterprise Nation is a company that represents a community of small businesses that offers business support through business advisers and business events. Their partnership with Launch It enabled a bigger and more impactful project.

Lessons learned from the process

Throughout the process, the GLA learnt that existing relationships and good communications with partners, despite the short timescales helped to achieve a solid portfolio of projects. The GLA also felt that improvements can be made with future funding such as the UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF), by delivering events to attract potential bids and build in time to work with applicants to further ensure bids meet London priorities and policies.

After deciding to apply for the CRF, Launch It found the GLA were helpful in supporting the process. They were encouraged by the GLA to seek legal advice to understand issues around subsidies and the partnership structure, which did delay the process, but the GLA were accommodating, supportive, and flexible with them in meeting the deadlines. It also meant that the project started on a firm footing with clear arrangements and a robust plan. In general, Launch It found the experience positive and worth the challenges they faced along the way.

The delivery partner Launch IT had a particular challenge in their project set up with clauses in the funding agreement around the level of subsidies received. As the detail of the funding agreement was received late in the process, the partner had to seek additional legal support which was not budgeted for at the application stage. There was also a delay to the publication of Annex A: UKCRF Indicator Guidance, containing the detail of the outputs and outcomes. This impacted the early tracking of participants to the programme of works and caused the delivery partner to alter monitoring arrangements. The GLA also took a detailed approach to gathering evidence for claims, which slowed down the delivery partner’s ability to manage cashflow for the project.   

Lessons learned from the process

Aside from having more time to develop a robust project plan at the beginning of the CRF process and understanding the requirements of the fund up front, the delivery team would also consider being more specific on the participant target group. This would have supported the delivery and the requirements of the fund more centrally in line with the outputs and outcomes of the fund.

The way in which Launch It interacts with its own delivery partner (Enterprise Nation) may also have been set up in a different way. All project communications are directed via government to the GLA, onto Launch It and then to Enterprise Nation. This could be set up in a more streamlined way. 

• Although the GLA experienced and overcame some issues, they ultimately found the application process to be more straightforward than other funding streams which helped to ensure they met the tight timescales.
• Pre-existing relationships with partners improved the process, as it supported the communication and dissemination of information. This is a useful building block on which to build for the forthcoming UKSPF.
• In comparison to the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), rules and regulations for the CRF have not been as prescriptive and afford applicants greater responsibility in deciding how to carry out and manage a project.
• The GLA found the process caused some duplication, as the process of assessing applications was repeated by government, creating delay and impact to project delivery and timeframes.
• There was limited time to process complicated information, and this may impact on the overall outcomes delivered by the project.
• The recent extensions given to projects are welcome however, setting out a realistic timeframe at the beginning of the process would have support better planning and set up.