Vibrant Villages Final ReportPaper 1
Vibrant Villages Final Report
1. Introduction and context
This report aims to identify how the Vibrant Villages grants scheme has achieved its objectives of supporting village shops and post offices, enabling new services in community spaces, and what the impacts of the grant have been. It considers;
- how the grant has supported village shops and post offices to remain viable,
- how the grant has enabled new services to be provided in community spaces,
- the results of the programme, and,
- the lessons learnt from the programme.
Vibrant Villages was a three year Programme hosted by LCC as part of the 2009-2011 LRP Action Plan. It was funded by Leicestershire County Council and emda through the Sub-Regional Investment Plan. The programme provided £240,000 of capital grant support to retail businesses and community organisations.
The Programme, which ran from April 2008 to March 2011, provided grants between £750 and £5,000 to rural shops and post offices, and between £750 and £10,000 to existing community spaces such as village halls, rooms within places of worship and schools.
2. Review of delivery of programme
2.1 Steering group
The Steering Group (formerly Implementation Group) was established to oversee the promotion and implementation of the Programme, as well as to report progress to the LRP Management Board and Rural Strategy and Performance Group. The group consisted of members representing the Rural Community Council, Leicestershire Rural Partnership, Leicestershire County Council, Business Link, Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council and the Rural Shops Alliance. In the course of the mid-term evaluation, it was suggested that the group would benefit from representation from the Federation of Small Businesses. Maxine Aldred was invited to join the group and has attended meetings since.
The level of reporting to the group required improvement. A format for all future reports from Vibrant Villages was identified and implemented
The title of the group was changed to Steering Group to better reflect the role of the group.
Meetings were programmed in advance on a quarterly basis to ensure regularity.
2.2 Grants Panel
The Vibrant Villages Grants Panel met monthly to consider applications, and consisted of six members:
Rural Partnerships Manager (Leicestershire County Council)
Business Support Advisor Team Leader, Business Link
Programme Manager (Leicester and Leicestershire Support Unit)
Better Places Manager (Leicestershire County Council)
Team Leader for Community Consultation (Rural Community Council)
And latterly a representative from Leicester Shire Promotions
Due to members’ time limitations, in the latter part of the programme, it was decided that all members were not needed for each grants panel, and a rota was drawn up, allowing members to attend less frequently. Meetings were arranged monthly, with the option to cancel if no applications were forthcoming.
2.3 Retail consultancy
The initial programme of retail advice led to 47 shops receiving advice. Advice was based around changes that could be made by accessing the Vibrant Villages funding and 34 of these also led to a grant application.
The majority of applicants felt that the retail advice they received helped them in the grant application process.
In the late stages of Vibrant Villages, some funding was made available to provide some further retail support. This focussed on immediate changes businesses could make without capital funding, to improve their business and make it more viable. 20 businesses were visited, an action plan was agreed and the consultant would follow up in three months to check on progress. As part of this contract, the retail consultant also produced turnover calendars for all grant recipients, allowing them to track any problems on a day to day basis and take immediate action. An online toolkit was also produced, to enable retailers to carry out their own assessments. Podcasts on marketing were also made available via the Oakleaves website.
2.4 Application process
The application process began by offering applicants the opportunity to apply by printed paper form, Microsoft Word document, download and print a PDF, or complete an online form. As the programme progressed, it became clear that applicants required feedback and support in completing quality applications, and electronic Word documents became the most popular format, to enable editing and commenting. This also enabled more efficient distribution of the forms to the Grants Panel, although members preferred to receive applications in paper form.
2.5 Monitoring
Monitoring was carried out by the monitoring officer, in co-operation with the project officer, and performance information was sent quarterly to both emda and the LRP’s Management Board. However, due to a difference in reporting requirements, it was necessary to produce two different reports, which was time consuming. Also, due to inconsistencies in recording of data, several files were required to combine the information.
2.6 Promotion
The scheme was promoted via a variety of media. Local press and community magazines were sent regular press releases. Events were used as an opportunity to invite the press to attend. Local contacts such as the RCC, Association of Parish Councils, parish council contacts, diocesan contacts and LCC members were all asked to spread the word among their communities.
A mailing list of all village shops in eligible communities was created and regularly maintained. Contact was maintained with these retailers by quarterly mailings which highlighted timescales for applications and other useful information.
2.7 Events
Two events aimed at giving basic retailing advice to independent town centre and rural retailers were held in March 2009 at Coalville and at South Wigston. The South Wigston event was attended by only two retailers and the Coalville event was attended by a total of 10 people. At both events attendees received one to one support from a Business Link advisor the retail advisor and the speakers from the event. A further retailing event was held at Belvoir Brewery in September 2010 and was attended by 15 people. Most of the attendees responded to a personal invitation, welcomed the attractive venue and Sunday timing of the event.
Despite the low numbers of attendees for all the above events feedback from participants was very positive with most finding the events very useful.
Comments from attendees included;
“The opportunity to network and chat informally over coffee at the start was informative, helpful and supportive”
“Presenters and facilitators did an excellent job of information and helpful conversation.”
“Worthwhile investment of my time to attend this event.”
2.8Achievements
The table below demonstrates that excellent results have been obtained in relation to identified targets with many outputs having been significantly overachieved.
Achievements against targets
Output / Target / Achieved(as of 18/2/11)
Jobs created or safeguarded / 15 / 92.5
Businesses assisted to improve their performance / 75 / 55
Private sector leverage / £240,000 / £ 422,477
People assisted in their skills development / 40 / 70
Businesses using business support services / 24 / 31
New community facilities / 15 / 14
3. Grants Awarded
A summary of the grants awarded for each District in Leicestershire is provided by the table below.
District / Funding provided (£) / Shops / Community spacesBlaby / £17,216 / 4 / 1
Charnwood / £36,461 / 11 / 2
Harborough / £30,420 / 8 / 2
Hinckley and Bosworth / £31,140 / 4 / 2
Melton / £28,121 / 6 / 3
North West Leicestershire / £64,731 / 11 / 4
Details of individual grants offered within each district are set out on the following maps.
3.1Grants awarded in Blaby District
3.2Grants awarded in Charnwood Borough
3.3Grants awarded in Harborough District
3.4Grants awarded in Hinckley and Bosworth Borough
3.5Grants awarded in Melton Borough
3.6Grants awarded in North West Leicestershire District
9. Impacts
- Village shops which would otherwise have struggled to remain open and survive have been supported to modernise and improve their services
- Post offices, struggling to remain in business in the face of dwindling salaries and customers have been helped to find other services to provide to remain an important hub of their community
- Several communities which previously had no meeting place are now able to meet and fundraise to provide more services.
- Community spaces are now able to provide ICT training to local people and enable those without access to the internet to benefit from new skills and information access.
- A settlement with a high index of deprivation is now able to provide much needed high quality after school provision to its residents.
- Village halls are now able to provide meeting space to local businesses, supporting their community and generating revenue to enable them to remain viable.
10.Case Studies
Business name / M Garratt Bakers, CountesthorpeGrant awarded / £5,000 / Cost of project / £32,000
Description of project / Refit of shop
Impacts /
- Increase in turnover
- Increased morale of staff
- Confidence in business
- Development of specialist breads range
- Development of celebration cakes service
- Two other businesses on the row have since repainted and improved shop fronts
- Previously vacant unit next door has been let
- Business has advised other local businesses to invest in business improvements
Grant awarded / £2,231 / Cost of project / £4,462
Description of project / Equipment for after school club in church hall
Impacts /
- After school provision now available in a settlement where it was much needed
- Playscheme awarded “excellent” by development advisors
- Laptops out on loan for those who do not have access to one at home
- Have attracted several families from deprived backgrounds
- Youth Club and other hall uses also benefit from equipment
- Church hall is benefiting from income
- Article in the Sapcote News
Grant awarded / £4,900 / Cost of Project / £9,800
Description of project / Adaptation of church to provide a venue for residents to use for leisure and learning activities
Impacts /
- Residents now able to hold social events and fundraising
- Income from events being used to make further improvements to be able to provide more services
Grant awarded / £3,074 / Cost of project / £ 6,150
Description of project / Creation of computer suite for training courses
Impacts /
- Massive uptake of compuuter classes for older people
- More courses being booked
- People reporting better quality of life as a result of new skills
- Income from courses being invested back into the hall
Grant awarded / £5,000 / Cost of project / £13,900
Description of project / Move post office from postmistress’s house to adjoining building for security and viability
Impacts /
- Viability of post office ensured
- Increased security
- Supply of essential goods to settlement
- Sandwiches and snacks for visitors has proved a much needed service
Grant awarded / £1,707 / Cost of project / £3,415
Description of project / Development of delivery business
Impacts /
- Has made village shop more viable
- Enabled an organic butcher to also set up on site
- Creation of organic garden
- Employment opportunities for the future
- Has supported other local businesses
Business name / Roots and Fruits, Anstey
Grant awarded / £3,456 / Cost of project / £6,912
Description of project / Rebranding and modernisation of village greengrocers
Impacts /
- Run down greengrocer’s has become viable again and an important service for the village and surrounding communities
- Rebranded as a modern, competitive business
- Range of products greatly increased
11. Issues raised in mid-term evaluation
Review the current management structure and consider combining the Implementation Group and Grants Panel as a Steering Group with responsibility for grant approval. / It was agreed that there was a need to better co-ordinate the activities of the Implementation Group and the Grants Appraisal Panel. There was a need for the Grants Appraisal Panel to meet more frequently than the Implementation Group so combining the two was not wholly possible. The title of the Implementation Group was changed to Steering Group to better reflect the role of the group.Meetings were programmed in advance on a quarterly basis for the Steering group, and monthly basis for the grants panel to ensure regularity.
Review the terms of reference for the group and consider implementing more frequent meetings, for example on a quarterly basis in line with reporting to funders. / The Implementation Group’s Terms of References were considered as appropriate to ensure the effective delivery of the project. These were presented to the next meeting of the Steering Group and approved. Quarterly meetings were established for the remainder of the Programme.
Establish improved reporting structures – providing progress on performance and breakdown of grant enquiries and approvals etc on a more frequent basis. / More formal reporting structures were established to ensure that members of the Steering Group and Grants Appraisal Panel had access to the information they required.
Consider improved methods of engaging the Rural Retail Advisor more effectively with the Programme and to make better use of his knowledge and expertise on the ground. / As all visits originally specified in the original tender document had been undertaken by late 2010, it was decided to reassess the requirements for retail support. Applications were invited from advisors to provide practical support that was not reliant on capital funding. Applicants were also asked to provide a self assessment tool and other resources that could be used by businesses after Vibrant Villages had ceased. The successful business has continued to provide support to over 20 businesses, and has produced a range of materials such as podcasts to act as a legacy to Vibrant Villages retail support.
Maximise opportunities for linking with Vibrant Villages with the Plunkett Foundation’s Community Shops scheme – through links with the Rural Retail Advisor. / All leads regarding potential community shops were passed to the retail advisor in his role as Plunkett Advisor. None of the projects got underway. Towards the end of the programme another Plunkett advisor was identified, and he was engaged to work with Bagworth Community Centre on their plans to develop a community shop.
Consider the appropriateness of introducing deadlines for grant applications or alternatively set regular meetings for grant appraisal meetings. / The meeting dates for the Grants Appraisal Panel were set to the last Monday of every month for the second half of the programme. The deadline for receipt of applications was set to one week before the panel meeting.
Review the level of match funding available for both community spaces and retailers and consider whether it is appropriate to revise these in the light of the current economic climate. / In the mid term evaluation some stakeholders felt that opportunities had been missed through the Community Spaces element of the Programme. Consideration was given to identify, through the Steering Group, whether there was a need to reduce the intervention rate in order to bring forward projects. This was considered and it was felt to be the correct intervention rate.
Review the grant application criteria to ensure that applications being approved are contributing towards the outcomes of the Programme – with specific reference to the Community Spaces. / A review of the grant application criteria was undertaken.
Continue with the development work with potential service providers (such as adult services and children’s services) to identify opportunities for community spaces projects and delivering new services in rural villages. / Contacts were made with colleagues in other departments to promote the scheme to service providers. Links with Children and Young People’s Service led to one childcare scheme being supported
Undertake a more proactive approach to promoting the Programme on the ground directly to retailers/communities in areas that partners know would benefit. For example, those identified in the Access to Services mapping or those areas that have not been supported by Vibrant Villages to date. / Businesses in areas where uptake of grants had been low (Harborough and Melton) were directly approached in the latter stages of the programme. This did not lead to an increase in uptake, as retailers were initially interested in the grants, but were not sufficiently committed to continue the process.
Review the appraisal checklist to ensure appropriate quality applications are being submitted to the panel. / This was undertaken for both Vibrant Villages and INSPIRE Leicestershire.
Undertake action to deliver outputs which are currently below target – including businesses assisted to improve performance, skills development, use of business support services, and new community facilities/services. / Outputs that were below target at mid-term were often due to projects not yet being in a position to deliver outputs. Later in the programme, monitoring information was gathered and all outputs were met.
Undertake increased promotion of good practise case studies of successful applicants – both internally and externally. / The LRP’s Oakleaves website was used to promote case studies.
Ensure appropriate monitoring procedures for tracking long term outputs are established and adhered to as it is likely that many impacts will not be evident until the long term. / At the end of Vibrant Villages monitoring procedures were established to ensure the effective collection of additional output information, to ensure the on-going sustainability of projects supported, and to identify further opportunities to support business needs.
Review the forward strategy for the Programme and consider alternative sources of delivery and revenue funding opportunities such as the Local Area Agreement and Total Place. / Forward strategy for future access to service support in rural areas will be developed through the Steering Group.
12.Lessons Learned and Forward Strategy