Agenda item

Councillor Calum Watt, Chair of the Community Leadership Scrutiny Committee, introduced the topic of discussion which was an Introduction to Anti-Poverty Strategy Proposals.

The Committee received a collaborative presentation from Emily Holmes, Assistant Director, Strategic Development (City of Lincoln Council) and Martin Walmsley, Assistant Director Shared Revenues and Benefits (City of Lincoln Council and North Kesteven District Council). During consideration of the presentation, the following points were noted:

• In some way, the City of Lincoln Council (CoLC) dealt with every household and every business within the city. There were also opportunities to work with North Kesteven District Council (NKDC)
• Consideration had been given to what difference the CoLC could make, such as helping people into work and offering debt advice
• Revenues and Benefits had a key role in the delivery of anti-poverty support
• Covid-19 caused an increased demand to the Revenues and Benefits Service and work included:
  • The facilitation of Test & Trace Support Payments
  • An increase in Council Tax Support Claims
  • Universal Credit (UC) Documents; a significant amount of extra documents were processed for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP)
• The Cost-of-Living Crisis support included:
  • Council Tax Rebate Payments (£150)
  • Council Tax Support Fund
  • Energy Bill Support Scheme – Alternative Funding/Fuel Payment
  • Discretionary Housing Payments
  • Household Support Fund
• The title of ‘Lincoln Against Poverty’ (LAP) was important. It was agreed in 2014 by the CoLC and although partners were included, it was approved as a CoLC poverty strategy
• Covid-19 and the Cost-of-Living Crisis had resulted in closer working with the voluntary sector, even more than had occurred previously
• LAP was not led by CoLC and instead, led jointly with a group of partners such as Acts Trust, Bridge Church and LocalMotion
• LAP was a refresh of the Anti-Poverty Strategy further to significant changes experienced within the last four to five years and linked into potential CoLC Vision 2030 priorities
• Current emerging issues that had been identified included:
  • Winter Fuel Payments/Pension Credit
    • The CoLC Cost of Living Support Team had received calls prior to the Government’s recent decision to remove Winter Fuel Payment. The CoLC had a Cost-of-Living Coordinator, as part of a team of 3. However, there was not extensive resource to ensure delivery. This was something that Officers wanted to achieve, not only for CoLC but for NKDC also
  • Household Support Fund
    • Phase 5 would be concluded at the end of the month and the Household Support Fund would be extended to the end of March 2025 for Phase 6. The extension was extremely welcomed as it was likely demand would be very high. Lessons had been learnt throughout the first five phases and the CoLC had worked with many new partners (Age UK, Lincoln City Foundation, the Mosque) which ensured that as many cohorts as possible, had been reached. Delivery of Household Support Fund had received really positive outcomes for residents
  • Universal Credit Managed Migration
    • Rollout of the UC managed migration had been slow however progression would be accelerated. The CoLC had a role within the migration and offered debt/money management advice. A letter would be sent to individuals within the Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) cohort to advise that they were required to move over to UC
  • Food, Fuel and Hygiene Poverty
• Data had been collected from sources such as the Lincoln City Profile 2023 – 2024 and research had been commissioned through Lincolnshire Open Research and Innovation Centre (LORIC) and Lincoln Embracing All Nations (LEAN). LEAN considered minority groups within the city to assess if there were any gaps in support
• Lincoln Against Poverty Funding
  • Household Support Fund
    • Further guidance was awaited before the amount awarded for the district was known for phase 6
  • UKSPF
    • The Council had been very supportive of CoLC initiatives. There was a scheme in place that offered new tenants a £20.00 voucher which provided new tenants with a one-year membership and 3 free shops for the Community Grocery
• It was hoped that support could be offered for Warm Spaces through the Winter Pressures Fund

• Staffing resources included pulling teams together which included wider partners within the city, and other organisations in order for greater capacity for the initiative to be realised
• Consideration had been given to an ‘assembly’ rather than a conference. It was hoped that if communities were brought together, consideration could be given to the emerging issues that arose from the data and a strategy could be created
• LocalMotion had created a group of community commissioners; people that had real life experiences and these individuals would be heavily involved with the work
• Families that had experienced issues with supplying school uniform for their children had been supported through the ‘Ready for School Fund’ ran by the Diocese of Lincoln. Contributions had been made through the Household Support Fund
• Through UKSPF Funding, some families had been supported with the 50p required for breakfast at a nursery
• The ‘Go Gro’ scheme had been supported through the Household Support Fund. The scheme showed individuals how to cook at low cost and provided slow cookers

• Consideration had been given to the effects of poverty on older residents, some of whom had to choose between heating or eating
• The future work programme would be focused on different topics that helped shape the anti-poverty strategy such as disabilities and digital inclusion

The Chair offered his thanks to Emily Holmes and Martin Walmsley and welcomed comments and questions from Members of the Committee. As a result of discussions, the following points were made: -

Question: How much did support from Lincoln City Foundation (LCF) play within the project?

Response: There were some real opportunities for a difference to be made and work from Martin Hickerton and LCF was fantastic. The foundation had been a deliverer of Household Support Fund for us and had helped people with food and energy. Working with LCF on the Cost-of-Living had been positive.

Comment: It would be beneficial for LCF to be a part of future community events as the Foundation created networking opportunities for families.

Comment: The Community Foundation had been very good and worked with the Sincil Community Land Trust who gave people a place to meet and an officer to work with. It was also linked in with the Hermit Street Development which was an active example of how CoLC dealt with poverty from another angle.

Question: It may be the case that many individuals did not understand how to budget finances effectively and therefore, would likely benefit from support and guidance to understand how they could make best use of what they had. There were multiple different agencies that carried out various work. Had any work on what was already happening regarding the subject matter taken place to ensure there was no duplication in certain areas.

Response: Work with the Commission through LORIC had identified these issues. Sadly, there was more than enough work for all agencies and organisations. The importance was the understanding of other organisations so that signposting was effective. The CoLC took ownership where possible.

Comment: There was a leaflet that contained all of the information however it was appreciated that hard copy leaflets became outdated quickly. The Council was fortunate to have an in-house Welfare and Benefits team who were very busy. Citizens Advice was also within City Hall. Budgeting advice was also provided by Acts Trust through the Community Grocery. For vulnerable individuals that migrated onto UC and in direct receipt of large payments, budgeting advice would be very useful.

Comment: Mapping work had taken place, and the existing provision that was available had been considered. It was important to assess if individuals had accessed existing provision and what gaps there were. Consideration had been given to new support being taken into places where individuals already accessed support.

Comment: Citizens Advice had started to offer heating advice through a project with Cadent and COLC and individuals had gained a great deal from it.

Question: Did a UC application have to be made online and was there any support available to assist with completion of an application?

Response: DWP had offered reassurance that there was support available for people that struggled with an application for UC. There was a telephone number for individuals however there was no face-to-face service through the Citizens Advice Help to Claim arrangement. However, if needed, individuals would be assisted by DWP, or COLC where possible/appropriate. UC migration was immediately to be moved into the most vulnerable cohort. If a constituent struggled to apply, Officers welcomed contact whereby the Revenues and Benefits Team would aim to assist.

Question: How was the Household Support Fund applied for?

Response: The demand for Household Support Fund was high and at times, was unmanageable. Communication had taken place at the right time to the right groups in the right way. Prioritisation and a phased approach was required. There would be a period of time for an open application scheme however specific groups may be targeted, for example pensioners who were not in receipt of the Winter Fuel Payment and who had missed out marginally. Guidance from Central Government was awaited and access to fantastic referral organisations such as Age UK was positive.

Question: Had consideration been given to contacting other Churches and religious groups as part of the project?

Response: Si?n Wade, Active Faith Lead from Transform Lincoln was a fantastic contact and her presence within the group was significant. Churches and religious groups were key to the project and would be invited to the assembly.

Comment: The CoLC were involved in many different groups and Members were delighted and welcomed an assembly. There was an assumption that many organisations that worked together within the same sector often knew of each other however that was not always the case. As an institution, we were better placed to secure most organisations within the same room for discussions to be facilitated. Scoping discussions would take place in relation to poverty focus points for future meetings.

Note: Members were invited to contact Councillor Calum Watt, Chair of the Community Leadership Scrutiny Committee, with information of organisations that Members worked with.

Comment: The project was very exciting and a considerable amount of unanticipated good could come from it. Previous conversations had taken place regarding how organisations helped individuals. This was about how organisations helped and supported groups together.

RESOLVED that the content of discussions be noted with thanks.