Agenda item

This report provides an update on the development and support of the Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE) sector in Brent.  The report provides information on the sector, current VCSE and community grant funding and capacity building support.

Councillor Rubin (Cabinet Member for Climate Action and Community Power) was invited to introduce the report relating to the Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE) sector in Brent, which provided detailed updates on work to develop and support the VCSE sector in Brent. The report additionally provided information on the sector, current VCSE and community grant funding and capacity building support. The report also noted the initial findings from the recent VCSE Shaping the Future Summit and subsequent steps and initiatives that were planned to further develop and support the sector in line with the Council’s shared vision – ‘‘a thriving, resilient VCSE sector that has the resources, skills and confidence to deliver better outcomes for local communities – supporting individuals, grassroots groups and organisations to build skills, realise goals, and drive aspirations in their neighbourhoods’’. The report also summarised how the Council was responding to the Local Government Association’s (LGA) Corporate Peer Review recommendations in respect of reviewing and strengthening relationships and support for the VCSE sector.

In presenting the report, Councillor Rubin (Cabinet Member for Climate Action and Community Power) emphasised that maintaining a strong and vibrant Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE) sector was of significant importance in delivering many of the administration’s priorities. It was noted that numerous community organisations and charities were sometimes able to engage with residents in ways that the Council could not. It was stated that having a sector that was vibrant, well managed and effectively led was essential. It was noted that the report provided an overview of the current state of the VCSE sector within Brent. Additional context was provided regarding Brent CVS, the organisation utilised by the Council to lead engagement with the voluntary sector. It was confirmed that Brent CVS was currently undergoing a review, with recommendations expected in the near future. These recommendations would inform decisions on the future direction of the organisation.

Having thanked Councillor Rubin (Cabinet Member for Climate Action and Community Power) for introducing the report, the Chair then moved on to invite questions and comments from the Committee in relation to the Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE) sector in Brent, with the following comments and issues discussed:

• As an initial question, the Chair enquired whether there were any early indications of the recommendations expected within the forthcoming review commissioned by Brent CVS. In response, Rhodri Rowlands (Director of Strategic Commissioning Capacity Building and Engagement) clarified that Brent CVS was a separate entity from the Council. The review and associated report had been commissioned by Brent CVS, with the Council contributing a modest grant to facilitate the review. The rationale for this contribution was the Council’s recognition of the critical role played by Brent CVS and other social infrastructure organisations in advancing the shared vision of a thriving, independent, diverse and vibrant sector. It was confirmed that the full report had not yet been received, but copies were anticipated within weeks. The report was expected to include recommendations for consideration by the trustees and Board of Brent CVS. Emerging feedback suggested a need for more effective capacity building within the borough, and discussions would focus on identifying the nature of that need and determining how the Council and its partners should respond. This would inform the future commissioned offer from 2026.

• The Chair further queried the contractual arrangements, noting that the contract was due to expire in April 2026, despite an earlier anticipated end date of April 2025. The Chair requested details of the financial contribution made towards the internal review and the cost of the contract extension. In response, Rhodri Rowlands (Director of Strategic Commissioning Capacity Building and Engagement) confirmed that the Council had contributed £10,000 towards the internal review commissioned by Brent CVS. In respect of the contract, two payments had been made during the current 12-month period, totalling approximately £40,000, subject to ongoing contract monitoring.

• The Chair additionally enquired about what specifically was being delivered under the Brent CVS contract and whether contractual obligations were being fulfilled. In response, Rhodri Rowlands (Director of Strategic Commissioning Capacity Building and Engagement) advised that the Council had adopted a collaborative approach from the outset, with Brent CVS supporting the process. The Cross-Sector Steering Group, chaired on a rotating basis, had contributed to shaping the structure of the VCSE event and would oversee the resulting action plan. Brent CVS had undertaken a range of activities during the contract period, and monitoring visits were ongoing and would continue.

Tessa Awe (Specialist Project Officer) further added that a 6 month contract review was scheduled for completion by the end of November 2025. This review would assess performance over the previous 6 months, identifying areas of strength and any shortcomings.

• The Chair sought clarification on future plans for a new tendered offer, including the anticipated contract value and scope. In response, Tessa Awe (Specialist Project Officer) explained that the Council had convened an event named ‘Shaping the Future of Brent’s VCSE Sector’ to gather intelligence on sector needs. The Steering Group would develop an action plan based on this feedback, with work continuing until the end of the financial year to design a model that addressed the needs of the sector.

Rhodri Rowlands (Director of Strategic Commissioning Capacity Building and Engagement) further mentioned that emerging themes were likely to include robust information, advice and guidance, training and development opportunities, and networking support for the VCSE sector. These would align with the shared vision of a thriving, independent sector capable of supporting residents and attracting external investment. Consideration would also be given to innovative models, such as consortia of local organisations or temporary external expertise, to strengthen capacity building and financial resilience.

Councillor Rubin (Cabinet Member for Climate Action and Community Power) emphasised the importance of a thriving sector, noting that strategic investment could generate a multiplier effect by attracting additional funding into the borough. This approach would help support wider objectives, including the prevention of homelessness and community crisis.

• The Chair enquired regarding the plan for the tendering process, noting that the current contract was due to conclude in April. In response, Rhodri Rowlands (Director of Strategic Commissioning Capacity Building and Engagement) informed that arrangements for the tendering process would be developed in the new year when a definitive timetable would be been established.

• Members referred to paragraph 7.6.1 of the committee report, which stated that Brent CVS currently held the capacity building contract until April 2026 and that both the Council and Brent CVS were reviewing the model to inform a future offer. In light of this, it was questioned whether the Council had considered the potential benefits of an in-sourced or hybrid CVS offer, which could strengthen accountability and integration with other Council-led programmes. In response, Rhodri Rowlands (Director of Strategic Commissioning Capacity Building and Engagement) noted that the approach could be explored further. It was confirmed that best practice models from other areas would be examined and applied to the review findings. A common theme emerging from feedback was the principle that the sector, being closest to residents and communities was best placed to understand their needs. Consideration would be given to an in-house model for capacity building, alongside an assessment of the Council’s internal capacity and resources to ensure the most effective service delivery. This could include enhanced contract management and collaborative initiatives.

• Details were sought around whether targeted in-sourcing of services could be explored to reduce duplication and alleviate pressure on the voluntary sector, given that the Council was already undertaking related work. In response, Councillor Rubin (Cabinet Member for Climate Action and Community Power) confirmed that this could be considered with potential areas of overlap recognised during the review period.

Rachel Crossley (Corporate Director Service Reform and Strategy) additionally mentioned that training was an example where the Council could extend its existing provision to the voluntary sector rather than commissioning additional services. Similarly, events organised by the Council could be opened to the sector. It was acknowledged that the Council should identify what could be delivered internally and adopt a targeted approach to commissioning services that required specialist skills and sector-specific expertise, such as trustee and charity support.

• Further details were sought around whether the review would examine the frequency of updates to the Brent CVS website. In response, Tessa Awe (Specialist Project Officer) confirmed that the review was assessing the overall strategy and operations of Brent CVS, including organisational functioning. It was therefore likely that website management would be considered within the scope of the review.

• Reference was made to the detail provided within committee report around market rent reduction pilots and social value, which referred to three new lettings and an approach for reduced market rent. Members enquired to what extent the review would consider existing lettings. In response, Rhodri Rowlands (Director of Strategic Commissioning Capacity Building and Engagement) advised that the three properties currently operating under the pilot scheme were intended to enable collective learning and inform future practice. Lessons drawn from the pilot would potentially be applied to new community spaces using the same principles. It was noted that further consideration was required regarding the implications for existing properties and spaces, and this would be explored in collaboration with colleagues in the Property Team. It was confirmed that this matter was recognised within the context of the social value policy work. It was emphasised that the approach sought to acknowledge the inherent value contributed by community organisations and VCSE groups through their presence, long-standing relationships and impact on residents’ lives, which could not be quantified solely in financial terms. Incorporating these principles into procurement processes was identified as a priority. Rhodri Rowlands undertook to follow up with the Director of Property & Assets on this matter.

• Members queried the position regarding existing organisations renting from Brent and expressed concern that some were being priced out. Members questioned what discussions were taking place with the Property Team to ensure that the priorities and concerns of the voluntary sector were considered. Members further asked whether the pilot would influence existing lettings or apply solely to new lettings. In response, Rhodri Rowlands (Director of Strategic Commissioning Capacity Building and Engagement) confirmed that discussions were ongoing and that Property Team colleagues were engaged in groups receiving initial findings and feedback from the VCSE event. It was noted that this issue had been raised as a significant concern by many organisations during the engagement event held on 30 September 2025. The next step would involve determining an appropriate response and considering how the market rent reduction framework, which incorporated social value, could inform this work. It was acknowledged that a forward-looking approach to the pilot applying to existing buildings would be taken under consideration, although no final position had been reached. Rhodri Rowlands undertook to review this further and assured the Committee that the matter was being actively addressed.

The Chair requested information on the number of organisations currently renting from Brent, noting that this would assist in assessing the potential impact of an ethical lettings policy. The Chair also requested details of the number of organisations expected to occupy reduced rent spaces.

• Members further suggested that consideration be given to proactively incorporating social value within procurement processes to ensure that VCSE organisations benefited from this approach. In response, Rhodri Rowlands (Director of Strategic Commissioning Capacity Building and Engagement) assured that one of the proposed priorities within the social value policy was to strengthen and build VCSE sector capacity, giving this objective prominence within the framework. A shift towards a more flexible approach was promoted, moving away from rigid performance measures to negotiated social value commitments that reflected community needs. This would support VCSE organisations through property arrangements and other mechanisms.

• Member expressed concern regarding the absence of a clear policy underpinning the pilots, noting the risk of inconsistency and potential discrimination between organisations. The need for a transparent policy to ensure equitable treatment of all voluntary sector organisations was emphasised. In response, Rachel Crossley (Corporate Director Service Reform and Strategy) confirmed that the pilots were consistent with the Property Strategy agreed 18 months previously. The framework applied was the same as that used for existing leases, which began at market rent but allowed for requests for reduced rates under defined principles. The difference in this instance was that the properties were designated exclusively for community use, rather than private rental. It was further noted that the pilots would inform future practice, including consideration of the capacity of voluntary sector organisations to manage buildings. This learning would inform discussions with the sector regarding potential models for council involvement in property management going forward.

• In response to further questioning around how organisations would be selected to benefit from the available spaces, Rachel Crossley (Corporate Director Service Reform and Strategy) confirmed that the process had been conducted through a tendering exercise. Organisations had submitted applications and were assessed on their ability to manage the space and the outcomes they proposed to deliver.

• The Chair expressed concern that there appeared to have been limited support for smaller organisations lacking national lobbying capacity or parliamentary connections to understand legislative changes and how they might benefit from them. In response, Rachel Crossley (Corporate Director Service Reform and Strategy) acknowledged that this represented a gap in current provision.

• The Chair further asked what other gaps had been identified over the past three years that should be prioritised for future investment. In response, Tessa Awe (Specialist Project Officer) highlighted areas including partnerships, fundraising, networking and representation as priorities requiring attention.

Rhodri Rowlands (Director of Strategic Commissioning Capacity Building and Engagement) further added that previous initiatives, such as Brandiun, had supported local businesses and organisations to bid for procured contracts. Reference was made to training programmes delivered by an external organisation, which had enabled over 60 organisations to participate in ‘ready to bid’ sessions. Brent CVS had contributed to early work undertaken by the Council on social value approaches, but it was acknowledged that further and stronger support would be expected in future.

• Details were sought on the Brent CVS budget and the level of Council contribution towards its running costs. In response, Rhodri Rowlands (Director of Strategic Commissioning Capacity Building and Engagement) advised that a well-functioning social infrastructure organisation would typically secure funding from multiple sources. Brent CVS had accessed alternative funding streams, and the review was expected to identify historic funding patterns and future opportunities. It was noted that the Council’s funding allocation for the current contract period was approximately £140,000, which was comparatively smaller when benchmarked against other London boroughs. The Chair suggested that benchmarking data be obtained to determine whether other London boroughs provided higher levels of funding. The Chair also requested confirmation of the proposed contract value for the tender scheduled for January 2026, in order to assess whether the amount would be sufficient to deliver the required outcomes.

• The Chair also took the opportunity to query the quality monitoring information received from funded organisations, given that many organisations routinely provided reports to multiple funders and how this related to the Council’s monitoring requirements. In response, Rhodri Rowlands (Director of Strategic Commissioning Capacity Building and Engagement) acknowledged that the position was mixed and confirmed that the grants review was seeking to adopt a proportionate approach to monitoring requirements. It was noted that very small grants, sometimes as low as £1,000, created a disproportionate administrative burden for organisations. Feedback had indicated that the Council’s processes were not sufficiently streamlined. For higher-value grants, appropriate monitoring arrangements were necessary. It was expected that capacity building organisations such as Brent CVS would provide support to funded organisations in meeting monitoring requirements. It was acknowledged that the Council’s historically rigorous approach had sometimes resulted in onerous expectations, leading to incomplete or inadequate data returns. The aim was to develop a more balanced approach that worked effectively for both the Council and funded organisations.

In seeking to bring consideration of the item to a close, the Chair thanked officers and members for their contributions towards scrutiny of the Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE) sector in Brent. As a result of the outcome of the discussion, the following information requests and suggestions for improvement identified were AGREED:

INFORMATION REQUESTS

(1)  Provide a breakdown of Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) organisations currently renting assets from Brent, including use type where possible, grouped as follows:

a)    Post-Property Strategy: paying full market rent

b)    Post-Property Strategy: paying below market rent – renegotiated and adjusted to reflect organisational financial circumstances

c)    Post-Property Strategy: paying below market rent under the Market Reduction Framework Pilot

d)    Pre-Property Strategy: historical, unexpired rent arrangements

(2)  Provide the percentage of historical leases held by VCS organisations, with unexpired rent arrangements (pre-property strategy), that are due for renewal within the next 5 years and within the next 10 years.

(3)  Outline the joint work of Strategic Commissioning, Capacity Building and Engagement, and Property and Assets teams to support VCS organisations renting council-owned assets in sustaining their premises and addressing affordability concerns.

(4)  Provide a detailed analysis of the strengths, challenges, and opportunities within current council commissioning arrangements.

(5)  Provide an overview of all VCS-commissioned services across the council, including details on scope, objectives, key outcomes, funding levels, contract duration, and how these services align with Borough Plan priorities.

(6)  Provide detailed information on the current Voluntary Community Infrastructure Support (VCIS) contract, including its scope, objectives, expected outcomes, funding levels, duration, performance measures, monitoring arrangements, and evidence of value and impact delivered to the VCS.

(7)  Provide benchmarking data on VCSE capacity building contracts commissioned by other London authorities, covering:

a)    Value and scope

b)    Duration

c)    Priority themes

d)    Delivery models (e.g., direct delivery vs. commissioned providers; single provider vs. consortium)

e)    Performance and impact measures.

(8)  Provide information on the anticipated value and scope of the forthcoming VCSE capacity building contract.

(9)  Provide an update on the Market Rent Reduction Pilot for the three new lettings (Harmony Kitchen, Brent Civic Centre, Roy Smith House, and Picture Palace), detailing the communities each organisation will support, the agreed measures to deliver community value, and how these commitments will be monitored.

(10)                 Provide a detailed overview of VCS grant programmes, focusing on grant operations and outcomes. This should include eligibility criteria, key dates (such as application windows, decision timelines, and funding start/end dates), a summary of awards over the past three years, and the time taken to disburse funds to recipient organisations, highlighting any significant delays.

SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT

(1)  Integrate employment and climate goals into the forthcoming VCSE capacity building offer.

(2)  Implement a strengthened, comprehensive, and transparent monitoring framework for the forthcoming VCSE Capacity-Building Contract, drawing on lessons learned from existing practices.

(3)  Leverage the forthcoming VCSE capacity-building contract to strengthen local VCSE organisations’ ability to engage effectively in council-led social value negotiations and procurement processes.

Please note that the specific wording of the information requests and suggestions for improvement were subject to refinement following the meeting, with the agreement of the Chair.