Archived decisions

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

Decision Report

1. Executive Summary

1.1. The purpose of this paper is to consider the continued funding of the YelaBus service in Yateley.

1.2. This paper seeks to provide:

(i) background and funding history;

(ii) current situation;

(iii) options for the future; and

(iv) a proposed course of action which includes making a grant of £5,750 towards the costs of operating YelaBus for the period 1 January to 30 June 2010.

2. Contextual information

2.1. YelaBus is an established organisation providing minibuses for groups in Yateley and is well regarded locally. YelaBus received substantial Lottery grant funding from 2000-2006 enabling the employment of paid drivers without the need to pass the costs on to hirers. Other schemes in Hampshire use volunteer drivers or charge a premium to recover the extra cost of providing a paid driver.

2.2. It is this distinction which puts YelaBus at odds with all other such schemes in Hampshire and has led to the demand for subsidy funding which is not provided to schemes elsewhere in the county. Community Transport Group Hire schemes across Hampshire are very successful with 290,000 passenger trips provided in 2007/08, mainly using volunteer drivers. Where this is not the case, driver costs are recovered from the hirer. One scheme, Havant, makes significant use of paid drivers and provided over 50,000 passenger trips in 2007/08.

2.3. Since 2006 the County Council and Hart District Council have provided grants to enable YelaBus to make the transition to working as other schemes do with greater use of volunteers or full recovery of paid driver costs. Grants from the County Council were made for 2006/07 of £14,062, 2008 of £11,500 and more recently for 2009 of £11,500.

2.4. More recently the HAT has supported this approach although in its submission dated September 2008 to the Executive Member it sought funding for a further three years in order to allow YelaBus more time to fulfil the conditions of the grant.

3. Current Situation

3.1. The current grant provides YelaBus with funding until 31 December 2009. The grant was awarded with the following conditions attached:

(i) that an activity report on the work undertaken by the scheme is provided prior to the release of payments;

(ii) that an income and expenditure report for the scheme was provided with each activity report;

(iii) that the scheme provides evidence that the necessary steps are being taken to address the longer term financing of YelaBus. This should include increased hire charges to encourage organisations to provide their own drivers and to reduce the reliance on paid drivers;

(iv) that the scheme continue to work with the County Council and Rushmoor Voluntary Services to endeavour to recruit more volunteers with a view to reducing/eliminating the reliance on paid drivers by the end of 2009. A minimum target of 75:25 in favour of volunteers was agreed with the scheme; and

(v) that the scheme continue to have regular meetings with Rushmoor Voluntary Services to discuss common issues and how the two organisations can work more closely together.

3.2. The activity reports which have been provided by the scheme allow a comparison to be made between 2008 and 2009 (until 31 August 2009).

	2008 12 months	2009 8 months to 31 August	2009 Projected (12 months pro-rata)
Number of minibus hires	497	293	439
Hires with paid drivers	413 (83%)	211 (72%)	-
Hires with volunteer drivers	84 (17%)	82 (28%)	-
Hired out sessions	844	515	772
Passenger Trips	11,618	6,642	9,963
Newly recruited volunteers	5	13	-

3.3. The following observations are made on the activity of the scheme during the current funding period (2009) to date:

(i) Based on the part-year figures the projected level of activity looks likely to be lower in 2009 and this is being attributed to less occasional use by member organisations.

(ii) Hires with volunteer drivers have increased in percentage terms as have the number of newly recruited drivers. In the last quarter for which information is available, 33% of the hires were driven by volunteers. This is directly as a result of the volunteer driver recruitment campaign which the Community Transport Team at Hampshire County Council has coordinated with Rushmoor Voluntary Services and YelaBus.

(iii) Hire charges were increased to a minimum charge of £15 plus £1.00 per mile. This would seem to be broadly comparable with charges levied by other similar schemes. A direct comparison is difficult given the variations which exist in the pricing regimes used by different schemes.

(iv) There is evidence of a closer working relationship between YelaBus and Rushmoor Voluntary Services and the loaning of vehicles from Rushmoor Voluntary Services to YelaBus is now common.

(v) In this current financial year YelaBus are also reliant on funding from Yateley Town Council (£11,500) and Hart District Council (£5,000). Whilst the grant from Yateley Town Council seems likely to continue, no funding is expected from Hart District Council given that Council's notice to withdraw from funding community transport services.

3.4. A meeting took place on 8 October between officers and representatives of Yelabus, at which Yelabus requested additional funding.

4. Outline of Options

4.1. The current funding arrangement with YelaBus comes to an end on 31 December 2009. There would seem to be a number of ways in which the County Council could respond to the YelaBus funding situation beyond this period.

4.2. Option 1: Provide no further funding for YelaBus. YelaBus have indicated that without further funding they will be forced to close the operation. Negotiations would then need to take place with Rushmoor Voluntary Services, which operates a similar scheme, to identify how much of the YelaBus work they could take over.

a) Risk Assessment: This would provide uncertainty for users and a potential loss of service until or unless alternative facilities were found.

4.3. Option 2: Provide further funding of up to £11,500, on a tapered basis for 2010, subject to matching funding from Yateley Town Council and satisfactory negotiation of agreed milestones with YelaBus. The actual grant amount would be agreed with YelaBus based on financial information provided.

a) Risk Assessment: This approach may lead to claims of unfairness and demands for similar funding from other Community Transport schemes.

4.4. Option 3: Award a grant payment to YelaBus which is consistent with the way in which the County Council supports other similar schemes in Hampshire. This approach was proposed by the consultants undertaking the Community Transport Review in respect of the YelaBus situation. The consultants have also been reviewing the rationale for providing funding to schemes with a number of options being considered. If longer term support is to be provided to YelaBus then applying the same rationale which will eventually be applied to other Community Transport schemes would seem prudent and defensible. How YelaBus then provides its service, for example either using volunteers or paid drivers, no longer becomes an issue for the County Council. The arrangements would need to be consistent within our approach for grant support.

a) Risk Assessment: This option carries a risk if the funds provided through this means are still insufficient to bridge the financial gap which YelaBus has for maintaining its service.

5. Options Analysis/Comparison

5.1. Option 3 is seen as the preferred option. The consultants' review work is currently being finalised and will then need to be the subject of consultation with the Community Transport Sector in order to comply with the Compact. It is therefore proposed that a six month grant for the period 1 January to 30 June 2010 be awarded to YelaBus. This will enable the operation to continue whilst the future funding rationale for schemes is consulted upon and agreed. The agreed rationale can then be applied to the YelaBus situation.

6. Finance

6.1. The grant payment to YelaBus of £5,750 can be met from the existing Community Transport budget.

7. Conclusion

7.1. The current funding arrangement with YelaBus comes to an end on 31 December 2009. Consultants undertaking the Community Transport review for the County Council have concluded that future support to YelaBus should be consistent with the way in which the County Council supports other similar schemes in Hampshire.

7.2. The consultants have also been reviewing the rationale for providing funding to schemes with a number of options being considered. If longer term support is to be provided to YelaBus then applying the rationale which is eventually agreed for other Community Transport schemes for YelaBus would seem prudent and defensible.

7.3. This work is currently being finalised by the consultants and will then need to be the subject of consultation with the Community Transport Sector in order to comply with the Compact. It is therefore proposed that a six month grant for the period 1 January to 30 June 2010 be awarded to YelaBus subject to the satisfactory negotiation of agreed milestones with YelaBus. This would encourage the continued transition from paid to volunteer drivers in order to stimulate the longer term sustainability of the scheme.

8. Recommendation

8.1. That a grant of £5,750 be awarded to YelaBus for a six month period from 1 January to 30 June 2010 subject to the satisfactory negotiation of agreed milestones with YelaBus.

2201Rpt/1039/KI

CORPORATE OR LEGAL INFORMATION:

Links to the Corporate Strategy

IMPACT ASSESSMENTS:

1. Equalities Impact Assessment:

1.1. Community Transport provides transport for those unable to use the public transport network and so improves access to services.

2. Impact on Crime and Disorder:

2.1. No impact.

3. Climate Change:

a) How does what is being proposed impact on our carbon footprint / energy consumption?

The provision of this service provides an alternative to the use of the private car.

b) How does what is being proposed consider the need to adapt to climate change, and be resilient to its longer term impacts?

The service contributes to a sustainable transport system by using small vehicles which operate according to demand.