Archived decisions

Contact: Kevin Ings, ext 6986 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 This report makes recommendations regarding the future funding of Yelabus, a voluntary organisation in Hart. The scheme currently faces closure due to a shortage of funds. The proposed support is aimed at providing the organisation with sufficient time to revise the way in which the scheme is financed in the longer term so that a more sustainable service can be secured for the future. This support will ensure that the current community transport services provided by Yelabus continue in the short term and contribute towards maximising well-being in the district of Hart.

1.2 A previous report to the Executive Member for Environment outlined the changes which needed to be made to the financial arrangements for supporting community transport schemes in the future in order to ensure that the County Council meets procurement regulations and the Council's Standing Orders. These changes are currently being implemented and this report identifies where further decisions are required to assist this process.

1.3 The Local Transport Plan Capital Programme has an allocation for community transport of £175,000 in 2007/08. This report proposes how this allocation should be used.

2. Recommendations

2.1 That a grant of up to £11,500 be awarded to Yelabus, subject to a matching contribution from Hart District Council.

2.2 That this grant should be subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 3.8 of the report.

2.3 That the Basingstoke Community Transport Scheme should be tendered as part of the framework contract which is being developed for Dial-A-Ride and Call and Go services.

2.4 That single tender negotiations, using the criteria already agreed, take place with Test Valley Community Services for the operation of an area-wide community transport scheme in the Test Valley and that a new two-year contract be awarded from 1 April 2008.

2.5 That the revised approach for utilising the community transport allocation in the Local Transport Plan Capital Programme be approved.

2.6 That an additional payment of £4,500 be made to Community First, New Forest for the replacement of existing mopeds.

2.7 That an additional payment of £6,000 be made to Test Valley Community Services for the replacement of existing mopeds.

3. Yelabus

Funding

3.1 Yelabus is a voluntary organisation based in Yateley. It owns and operates three minibuses which are available for use in the local community. The organisation previously received a grant from the Lottery Fund and this has been used to pay for drivers and some administration time. When the lottery grant came to an end Yelabus approached the County Council and Hart District Council for funding to continue employing drivers and cover the costs of the scheme administration.

3.2 Several meetings took place with Yelabus and this involved an analysis of the work undertaken by the scheme. Given the activity of Yelabus the resulting report concluded that the scheme should move towards the operating model adopted by most community transport group hire schemes in Hampshire which the County Council supports. These schemes make vehicles available for group hire to local organisations. The operating costs of these vehicles, with the exception of office costs, are generally self-financing. Vehicles are usually driven by volunteer drivers; where a paid driver is used then the cost of this is normally covered from the hiring organisation.

3.3 In order to assist the scheme in this the County and Hart District Councils jointly offered a tapering payment over 12 months to provide the scheme with the opportunity to make this transition. The Executive Member for Environment subsequently agreed a grant of £5,625 at his decision day on 20 March 2007 and this amount was eventually matched by Hart District Council. Despite this the scheme faces closure due to a lack of funds, partly because the organisation's reserves have been used to continue employing drivers. If Yelabus were to close then a valuable resource to the community would be lost and many local organisations and people would be left without transport.

3.4 Further financial support is therefore proposed in order to provide the organisation with sufficient time to revise the way in which it is operated and financed in the future. This support would come in the form of a grant, and would be dependent on the organisation meeting certain grant conditions.

Proposal

3.5 A more recent visit to the scheme has confirmed that the situation has not changed from the previous work undertaken, eg the activity of Yelabus is similar to other Hampshire minibus schemes. It is proposed therefore that grant support should be provided for a further 12-month period to enable the scheme to either move towards using volunteer drivers or recharge hiring organisations the cost of a driver, or use a hybrid of these two approaches.

3.6 This grant support could be provided in one of two ways. In each case the amounts provided by the County Council would be conditional upon Hart District Council agreeing a matching grant.

(i) A grant of up to £9,200, which if matched by Hart District Council would provide a total grant of £18,400. This would cover approximately half of the annual cost of employing paid drivers for one year.

(ii) A transitional tapering grant for one year of up to £11,500, which if matched by Hart District Council would amount to £23,000. This would cover the full costs of employing drivers for the first quarter of the year, 75% for the second quarter, 50% for the third quarter and 25% for the final quarter.

3.7 Discussions are currently under way with Yelabus to confirm which funding approach would be most acceptable to the organisation.

3.8 In both cases the grant would be payable on a quarterly basis and the release of each payment would be dependent on the following conditions being met:

(i) that an activity report on the work undertaken by the scheme is provided prior to each of the final three payments in a format to be agreed with County Council officers;

(ii) that an income and expenditure report for the scheme is provided prior to each of the final three payments showing the level of grant requested in order to fulfil audit purposes;

(iii) that the scheme provides evidence that the necessary steps are being taken to address the longer term financing of Yelabus. This would include moving to a position where hirers are either provided with a volunteer driver or where the costs of a paid driver are recovered from the hiring group or a hybrid of these; and

(iv) that Yelabus agrees to attend a meeting arranged by officers with Rushmoor Voluntary Services to explore how the two schemes may help each other and work more closely together in the future.

3.9 Officers from the County Council will also meet with Yelabus to consider what other assistance could be offered to help secure the longer term viability of the scheme. This could include:

(i) assisting in recruiting volunteer drivers and funding the costs of any MiDAS training;

(ii) looking at options for replacing the existing minibuses to help reduce the overall running costs of the scheme; and

(iii) investigating what role Yelabus could play in the rural areas when the Hart Call and Go service is reviewed.

4. Community Transport Contracts

4.1 A report to the Executive Member for Environment on 9 October 2007 outlined the changes which needed to be made to the financial arrangements for supporting community transport schemes in the future in order to ensure that the County Council meets procurement regulations and the Council's Standing Orders. These changes are currently being implemented and this report identifies the following areas where further decisions are required to assist this process.

4.2 At the October meeting a decision on the tendering process for the support of an area-wide community transport scheme in Basingstoke was deferred pending further consideration of the options available. These area-wide community transport schemes provide a pool of accessible minibuses, available for hire by local voluntary and community groups.

4.3 Basingstoke Community Transport was the only area-wide community transport scheme in the county which did not immediately fulfil the criteria for single tender negotiation as set out in the report of 9 October 2007. Primarily this was because Basingstoke Community Transport is an independent organisation and not part of a Council for Voluntary Services (CVS) which were regarded as specialist suppliers and the only organisations able to meet the single tender criteria.

4.4 A decision therefore needs to be made on how the Basingstoke Community Transport scheme should be tendered. There would seem to be two options:

(i) as part of the framework contract which is being developed to procure Dial-A-Ride and Call and Go Services in Hampshire; and

(ii) on its own as part of a separate tender.

After considering both of these options it is proposed that the Basingstoke Community Transport Scheme should be tendered as part of the framework contract. This could then allow potential providers to submit a joint proposal for operating both the Dial-A-Ride and Community Transport Service operating in Basingstoke and some benefits could accrue from this arrangement.

4.5 Competitively tendering the Basingstoke scheme does have some risks attached to it. The payment made by the County Council under the current service agreement only covers a proportion of the scheme's staff and infrastructure costs and a number of the vehicles are directly owned by the scheme. Consequently, if the scheme did not win the contract it could potentially continue to operate if existing user groups do not transfer to the new provider. This could result in two community transport schemes operating in Basingstoke along with the dial-a-ride provider. If this service is to be competitively tendered then the framework contract offers one way of reducing the number of providers in Basingstoke in the future.

4.6 Test Valley Community Services, the local CVS, operate the district-wide community transport scheme in Test Valley. The cost of supporting this scheme in the current financial year through a service agreement is £41,846. Whilst the scheme was omitted from the previous report it does meet the criteria for single tender negotiation already agreed. Approval is therefore sought to enter into a single tender negotiation with this operator. A contract will be issued for a two-year period, with the option of a further year's extension, to be effective from 1 April 2008.

5. Vehicle Grants

5.1 A sum of £175,000 is currently available from the Local Transport Capital Programme for community transport in 2007/08. It is proposed that this should be utilised in the following way:

(i) A sum of £10,500 be made available to existing operators of the Wheels to Work schemes to enable the replacement of seven existing mopeds. This will help to ensure that the stock of mopeds inherited by the successful contractor following the current tendering process should be of a good standard, thus removing the need to replace existing mopeds during the first year of the new contract. Additional payments are proposed to Community First, New Forest (£4,500) and Test Valley Community Services (£6,000).

(ii) An initial sum of £80,000 be made available to provide grants for vehicle purchase which would support and develop the work of existing community transport schemes. The availability of this grant money would need to be advertised on the County Council's funding website. Two schemes have already indicated that they would submit applications if grants were made available. In addition, this process could also include the replacement of one of the minibuses operated by Yelabus. Grant applications could be considered by the Executive Member for Environment at his decision day in February.

(iii) Any remaining monies which are left following the assessment of the above grant applications could be used to contribute towards the replacement of Dial-A-Ride vehicles at Fareham, Gosport, Rushmoor and Winchester. Under the current funding arrangements dial-a-ride schemes receive an element of funding for vehicle depreciation which they set aside in a replacement fund. By making an additional contribution towards replacing these in 2007/08 this would release money from their replacement funds in 2008/09 to support the running costs of the scheme. This could, in turn, reduce the County Council's contribution to these schemes for 2008/09 only, thus making available additional monies which could be used to support the costs of the rural transport pilots. A further paper is being prepared which will identify how this money will be used to support the rural transport pilots.

6. Impact Assessments

6.1 Many of the services operated by these schemes will be available to all bona fide voluntary and community groups in their area of operation. Where services are available to individuals they are often targeted at members of the community who are disadvantaged in some way.

7. Conclusion

7.1 This report sets out the arrangements for providing grant support to Yelabus for a further 12 months. This support will enable the existing transport provided by the organisation to continue whilst the scheme is revised in the way in which it is operated and financed in the future. It also identifies where further decisions are required to assist this process of moving from service agreements to contracts under the new financial arrangements for supporting community transport schemes. A revised allocation for the community transport allocation in the Local Transport Plan Capital Programme is also proposed.

1548Rpt/KI