Agenda item

Lowfield MyPlace (U-mix) Project

Report of the Executive Director, Children, Young People and Families

Minutes:

7.3

AGENDA ITEM 11: LOWFIELD MYPLACE (U- MIX CENTRE) PROJECT

 

 

7.3.1

The Executive Director, Children, Young People and Families, submitted a report containing proposals to progress the Lowfield MyPlace Project (also known as the U - mix Project) for the provision of state of the art youth facilities in the Lowfield which would be funded by the MyPlace Government Programme and other funding sources which would also be used for the operational management of the Project Centre. 

 

 

7.3.2

RESOLVED:

 

 

 

(a)

agrees the allocation of funding from the Youth budgets to the U-Mix Centre Project for the first two years of the Centre’s operation, such funding to be up to the levels set out in paragraph 6.3 of the report, and to be used to support running costs including, but not limited to, staffing and management costs referred to in this report;

 

 

 

 

(b)

notes the proposed contractual arrangements described in paragraph 5.6 of the report and delegates authority to the Executive Director, Children, Young People and Families,  in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Children, Young People and Families and the Director of Commercial Services, to appoint through, a process approved by the Director of Commercial Services, a suitable provider  by way of a formal agreement on such terms as she considers appropriate to undertake the management of the U-Mix Centre, including the appointment and provision of staff, as described in the report; and

 

 

 

 

(c)

authorises the Executive Director, Children, Young People and Families, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Children, Young People and Families, to take such further steps to progress the Lowfield project or to safeguard the City Council’s interests in relation to it as she shall consider appropriate, including entering into such agreements or arrangements with third parties on such terms as she considers appropriate, and if she considers it necessary, to vary the arrangements for the management of the U-Mix Centre proposed in this report.

 

 

 

7.3.3

Reasons for Decision

 

 

 
  • The City Council has placed significant priority on improving facilities at a local level for children, young people and the wider community. This proposal supports this commitment and provides a real opportunity to improve the local offer available.

 

 

 
  • The investment by the City Council of the revenue funding required will provide a secure basis on which to allow the income generation strategy to be realised

 

 

 
  • This proposal delivers the requirement of funding bodies that external providers to the Council have a key role in the development and operation of this facility. It also supports the Council’s commitment to working in collaboration with external organisations and ensuring that high quality activities and services and are secured and provided.

 

 

 
  • This proposal seeks to use existing resource within the Children, Young People and Families budget and is not seeking to secure any additional City Council funding.

 

 

 
  • Scarce funds need to be utilised effectively and this is best delivered through a joined up approach that engages a range of partners and draws on their expertise and access to additional, external resources.

 

 

7.3.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

 

 

 

·  The Council has considered the option of transferring the facility through

        Trust arrangements with an appropriate organisation/group. However,

        exploration of this option has concluded that this would require the

        implementation of a longer term project to establish a robust, sustainable

        arrangement. The requirements of funders also mean that the operation

        of the facility must be prioritised.  Further work in relation to this option

        could continue alongside the operational plans for the facility.

 

 

 

·  A further consideration has explored the establishment of the facility

        under direct Council management and operation. This option has been

        rejected as it will not achieve the added value provided through

        establishing the facility through an external provider. External,

        independent providers have opportunities to apply for and secure funding

        sources not accessible to local authorities and provide significant added

        value to Council services in this way. In addition, the current funding

        bodies require the engagement of external providers as key to the

        development and operation of the facility.

 

 

 
  • The proposed approach set out in paragraph 5 of this paper has therefore been established as the preferred option that will bring the most value to the establishment of the facility.

 

Supporting documents: