Author: Magic Torch

Common Good Comics

Glasgow Caledonian University and Magic Torch Comics CIC have secured £76,300 funding from The National Lottery Heritage Fund, for a two year project which will share stories of social enterprise and community action.

Common Good Comics will work with organisations from across Scotland to record oral histories and explore community archives and then present the material in two comic collections which will be shared in schools, online and at comicons and other national events.

Magic Torch Comics director, Paul Bristow, explains

“I’ve worked in and around social enterprises for most of my life, Magic Torch Comics CIC was developed as a social enterprise – our focus is generally history and literacy. A few years back, we were asked by Professor Michael Roy at GCU to adapt a case study in comic form, and it just seemed a great way of sharing stories about the good work of organisations. We’ve been working on getting this project off the ground since then.”

The project also wants to help groups tell their own story and maintain their own archives more effectively. Dr Gillian Murray from Glasgow Caledonian University Yunus Centre for Social Business is part of the project team, recording and sharing oral histories.

“The opportunity to collaborate with social enterprises and community groups to tell their stories in a way that supports them to take ownership of their history and heritage is really exciting. The current crisis means this is a particularly challenging time for the social enterprise and community sector, we hope that sharing stories of how people came together in the past will be uplifting and empowering for groups and organisations today.”

The project builds on the work already undertaken by GCU Archive team in pulling together a Social Enterprise Collection as GCU Archivist Carole McCallum explains.

“Archives are peoples’ stories and the social enterprise and labour history strands of this project will be inspired by the material we already hold in GCU Archive Centre. Giving voice and vision to these stories opens up our heritage to new audiences and allows people to better understand and take pride in their own story. As well as a hands on connection with the material we will be sharing our skills, offering basic training in caring for and digitising records to the communities involved. We are delighted to be part of this cross domain team and look forward to learning from the project as much as giving to it.”

Caroline Clark, Director Scotland of The National Lottery Heritage Fund, said:

“The appeal of comics span the generations so what better way of telling the stories of one generation to another. Thanks to funding from the National Lottery, communities will be inspired to record their diverse social histories for others to learn from and enjoy.”

Work on the project has just started, with a number of organisations already signed up to tell their story, but the team is looking for more groups and organisations from across Scotland to get involved.

“We are ideally looking to work with groups who have a bit of history behind them, who have been around for a while, maybe forming to deal with unemployment during the 1980s or who took part in a specific piece of community action – there are lots of stories out there and we are ready to listen.”

The Common Good Comics Project can be contacted via CommonGood@magictorchcomics.co.uk

Magic Torch Comics CIC work with schools, community groups and organisations to tell stories using comics. The group were named as one of Big Issue’s Top 100 Change Makers for 2020 for their schools literacy work.

Glasgow Caledonian University (GCU) is a vibrant, innovative and multi-award winning University for the Common Good. We aim to contribute to society in a manner that embraces yet goes beyond the traditional role of a university. GCU’s For the Common Good commitment is brought to life and delivered by students and staff across academic schools and departments.

Notes

Contact

Paul Bristow / 07757112332 / paul@magictorchcomics.co.uk / @pjbristow

Magic Torch Comics

Glasgow Caledonian University Archive Collection

 

 

Author: Bureau Local

The Bureau Local is a people-powered network setting the news agenda and sparking change, from the ground up.

Over the past three years we have set out to make sure news is working for everyone and to do so, we’ve been changing the way it’s done. Whether it is austerity or Brexit, health or education, people across the UK experience inequality in their treatment and how their stories are told, if told at all.

That’s why we focus our journalism on shining a light on the power, decisions and policies that threaten the public interest of all people across the UK.

We have worked together with a network of people across the country, those who want to build a bright future for news, and have co-created an open manifesto for collaborative news.

At the Bureau Local, our collective promise is:

We will report on inequality and the communities, institutions and services under pressure in the UK – those harmed, ignored and under-represented.

We will do this by making our journalism open, inclusive and human-centred from start to finish.

We will collaborate, co-create and share space, resources and experience with active members of a community – journalists, storytellers, experts and engaged citizens.

We will harness data and evidence and use innovative techniques to find and tell stories so they are accessible for everyone.

We are just one solution to the challenges facing local news and so we will focus our resources on stories where collaboration can make a difference.

We will tell stories that matter to local people but are also part of a bigger picture in order to reveal threats to the public interest and challenge power at the highest level.

We will do all of this to ensure that our journalism is useful to society and improves access to information – locally and nationally – on underreported issues.

We will work to ensure that our reporting lifts off the page, and then returns to our communities – and those with power – to spark change.

Does this sound like something you want to be part of? Join the Bureau Local network, here.

 

Author: Health and Care

GPs working in the most deprived communities in Scotland are calling for more practices to have community workers and money advisors in their teams in preparation for the economic and mental health shocks of covid-19.

The Deep End Group, which brings together family doctors in the most deprived communities in Scotland, says major changes are needed as part of a “a once in a generation opportunity to reset the NHS in Scotland”.

A new report has highlighted the impact of the pandemic, with one GP warning of increased drug use and giving out more emergency kits to reverse drug overdoses “than I care to count”.

Another doctor revealed that despite the move to holding more consultations online, only around 30% of video appointments worked due to technology issues and language barriers.

Dr Anne Mullin, a GP in Govan, who is chair of the Group and a contributor to the report, told healthandcare.scot: “We cannot leave behind our patients who struggle to access IT systems, patients who live in poverty and financial insecurity who will disproportionately account for ‘Years of Life Lost’ during the pandemic.

“Child poverty is increasing and we must do more than pay lip service to that and other adverse consequences of the pandemic.”

Practitioners in Glasgow and Edinburgh were asked to report and reflect on their experience of the covid-19 pandemic during May 2020.

One of the key points of the report is a call to double the number of community link workers, who can refer patients on to support in communities.

In 2016 the SNP promised to recruit 250 more to work in practices in the most deprived areas.

But currently only half of practices in the least well-off areas have one, according to the report.

One GP quoted in the report said their link worker had been “invaluable” and had helped a “huge range” of patients, including by referring people on to welfare advice.

“I really worry about the financial impact of the pandemic and feel there will be an increasing need for Deep End populations across Glasgow and Scotland to have a practice-based Financial Support Worker,” the GP added.

Meanwhile just 17 of Glasgow’s 75 most deprived practices have money advice workers who can encourage and support patients to apply for benefits they are entitled to.

This is despite evidence that suggests the average gain per claimant can be more than £7000, while a previous evaluation found patients received the equivalent of £27 in financial gains for every £1 invested.

General practice moved “overnight” to a new way of working with less bureaucracy, the report says, and consultations increasingly done by phone or video.

But there are concerns about “missing patients” who are being left behind.

One doctor quoted in the report said: “Only 30 percent of my attempted video consultations worked, often due to older smart phones that did not have new technology and thus couldn’t be accessed.

“They had to be seen face to face or by phone. I gave up on trying to do video consulting for patients who require translators.”

Others warned of the effects lockdown was having on wider wellbeing, with a rise in mental health problems and drug use.

One medic said “almost every substance misuse consultation” in the last three weeks had revealed increased drug use.

“I have given out more emergency opiate reversal kits than I care to count. Some of these patients have young children,” they added.

The report says many of the people experiencing mental health problems because of covid-19 will be seen by their GPs, often because they will not meet the threshold for referral to specialist services.

Dr Mullin added: “General practice has emerged from this first phase of the covid pandemic by adapting to new ways of working and many of the changes will be permanent.

“Deep End GPs have outlined in [the report] how practices strengthened connections within GP clusters, with other professional colleagues in the community and  the 3rd sector, such as Links Workers, to blur the boundaries of working and provide optimal patient care.

“The importance of leadership, communication, coordination and teamwork in general practice is emphasised in the report with practical solutions to the ‘what next’

Author: Calum Ross, Press and Journal

The north’s longest serving MP is calling for Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE) to be scrapped and replaced with a body that can better respond to the economic damage caused by the pandemic.

Former Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael claims the Inverness-based agency is now a “shadow of its former self” and there is an urgent need for an organisation with the “reach and influence” required.

Writing exclusively in The P&J today, the Liberal Democrat MP for Orkney and Shetland says he would support a return to the model of HIE’s predecessor agency, the Highlands and Islands Development Board (HIDB).

Mr Carmichael makes the call amid concern that the severe economic impact of the coronavirus crisis on tourism-dependent rural areas could hasten a return to the “Highland problem” of depopulation.

HIE’s property portfolio includes its £13million headquarters in Inverness.

HIE has recently faced cuts to its budget while also attempting to repair the Cairngorm funicular railway and create the UK’s first vertical-launching spaceport near Tongue.

The Lib Dem chief whip writes: “There is an urgent need now for a Highlands and Islands Development Board for the 21st century.

“We do not need to re-invent the wheel here. The history of the last 55 years can tell us what will work.

“We need a body with the reach and influence that characterised the HIDB – the reach in our business communities and the influence in government to deliver for them.

“Highlands and Islands Enterprise as we currently know it has had its day. It needs to be replaced with a body that can do what we need.

In 1965, the HIDB was created to try to stem a trend of depopulation that had begun with the Highland Clearances.

The board, which was well funded and had operational freedom, was replaced by HIE in 1991, including 10 local enterprise companies, which were subsequently axed by the SNP government in 2008.

In 2016, the Scottish Government faced heavy criticism after announcing plans to scrap HIE’s dedicated board and replace it with a new panel overseeing all of Scotland’s skills and enterprise agencies.

Opposition parties united against the move and a series of former bosses of the agency backed the Press and Journal’s “Keep HIE Local” campaign, which eventually forced a U-turn.

But Mr Carmichael says: “Today the economic fallout of the Covid pandemic risks taking us back to the same ‘Highland Problem’ identified by Russell Johnston and Willie Ross in the 1960s.

“The need for a renewed vision of economic development with a political and social purpose is every bit as great today as it was then.

“The people who know best what will help business to thrive are the people who run the businesses themselves.

“The people who know best what is good for the community in places as diverse as Shetland, Orkney, Tain, Portree or Islay (to pick a few at random) are the people who live there.

“Remote control from Edinburgh (or even from Inverness) has failed these communities for years. Continue to do that and we shall continue to fail. The only difference will be the speed at which we decline.”

However, a spokesman for Rural Economy Secretary Fergus Ewing said: “Other than expressing general criticism it’s not at all clear what Mr Carmichael is suggesting by way of reform.

“Through its area offices across the Highlands and Islands, HIE continues to play a critical role in helping businesses, creating economic opportunities and supporting communities as we emerge from the global coronavirus pandemic.

“The Scottish Government has targeted funding at businesses in the tourism, hospitality and culture sectors which are so important to the economy of the Highlands and Islands, part of a support package worth over £2.3 billion.

“We are investing up to £135 million in the Inverness and Highland City Region Deal, £25 million in the Argyll and Bute Deal and £32.5 million in the Moray Growth Deal and are also committed to a deal for the Islands.”

Own The Future – A Guide for Local Economies

There can be little doubt that the Covid-19 pandemic has served as a stark reminder that our economic model has failed us.

Far from delivering on the promise of prosperity for all, it has left too many less secure and worse off, enriched the already wealthy few and propelled us further down the road to ecological disaster. In the face of unprecedented economic challenge, we need to reset and build a new economy: one in which wellbeing stands above economic growth. To date, such a commitment has been absent at the UK level. Whilst statements about building back better have been made, at the time of writing we are yet to see how this is to be achieved.

This guide aims to give much-needed substance to these ambitions. It sets out an achievable vision for the just recovery and social, democratic and economic reform of localities, led by local authorities. To do so, it uses the framework of community wealth building – a people-centred approach to local economic development that CLES and others have advanced in the UK and internationally over the last 10 years.

Despite the catastrophic funding shortfalls that have beset local authorities for the last decade, and now look set to grow, there is much that they can do to mobilise a community wealth building approach. This document provides a practical guide for the willing. It sets out two roles for local authorities which, taken together, constitute a powerful model for progressive local economic development:

• The analyst

By developing and maintaining a deep understanding of the local economy and the impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic in their area, local authorities will be critical to creating a local economy which addresses the interconnected priorities of poverty, ill health, social isolation and inequality.

• The anchor and agent of change

By realising the potential of their role as an anchor institution for their place, local authorities – and other large, locally rooted institutions – will be key sources of the purchasing power, assets and employment with which economies can be recovered and reformed. By using these levers, local authorities will exercise strong, confident intervention in local economies to advance the cause of social and economic justice for all.

In setting out these actions, we recognise that they go against some of the prevailing winds of the policy and financial framework of the UK. That is why, throughout this guide, we supplement our practical prescriptions for action with information on national policy changes which are needed to truly realise reform.

The proposals set out in this guide will not be easy. They run part-counter to the prevailing orthodoxy and the thrust of much UK-wide national policy and are hamstrung without a comprehensive and just financial settlement for local government. But if we are to build new economies that work for communities, that work to address climate change and create resilience where there is risk and precarity, then this is the approach we must take.

There is no alternative. This must be the new mainstream.

Author: Carnegie UK

Guiding principles for recovery

Over the past decade, governments in the UK have been engaged in a process of transformation, a slow-moving paradigm shift away from a ‘top-down’ and ‘one size fits all’ approach, towards what we have called the Enabling State. An Enabling State is one that supports people and communities to achieve positive change for themselves, and in doing so, ensures that the most vulnerable are not left behind.

We already knew from undertaking this work across the UK that people believe most strongly in the power of local community organisations to improve their area, and that volunteering is considered the most effective form of public engagement. The same research found that many people (44%) feel they have too little control over the public services they receive. Standard public sector approaches of inviting people to make a complaint or to attend a public meeting were seen as largely ineffective avenues to realising change. Qualitative research has consistently shown that people using public services want to be seen as individuals, not as statistics, demographic boxes, or user categories.

Many of the immediate responses to COVID-19 from communities and from public services show that there is a different way of working together. Early evidence supports anecdotal claims that community spirit and mutual aid are being reignited during the crisis. Statutory Authorities have worked with community organisations and locally-based charities to help with the crisis response. New partnerships have emerged, and long-standing barriers to agility and flexibility have apparently been overcome.

What will happen next? Community groups may fade out of the sightlines of the statutory bodies again, or they may make the most of their new-found status and press to retain their agency and access to funding. Voluntary organisations may make new gains based on the up-to-date evidence of their flexibility and responsiveness, but we know that charities of all sizes are being hit hard by the crisis, with many reaching into reserves and furloughing staff. Others are struggling to survive, with key sources of income such as trading and fundraising being significantly impacted.

It is important not to assume that the positive energy generated by the crisis can be easily harnessed and retained without significant effort and resource. However, we have seen many of the enabling state principles in action since the beginning of the pandemic. We have re-visited our route map to an enabling state – originally published in 2014 – to take account of what we have learnt so far from the COVID-19 emergency, and to help those working in the public sector and with communities across the UK.

We have articulated 7 steps for public services to take as they move into recovery mode, which could accelerate their progress towards an enabling state model.

Put wellbeing at the centre The COVID-19 crisis has affected all dimensions of our lives and reminded us about what it takes to live a good life. As they recover, those responsible for shaping places and providing services should focus on this holistic understanding of the conditions in which people and communities can flourish. Organisational models of service design should be based on evidence of what will improve wellbeing ‘in the round’, rather than limiting their view according to professional or departmental boundaries.

Give people permission to take control Too often the implicit message from public services is that people should not take the lead in improving their own outcomes. Those with long-term conditions have long advocated for personal budgets and control over their assessments and plans. Co-design and co-production of legislation, policy and services should be the norm, not the exception. During the crisis there have been signs that people have been let into decision-making, with mutual aid groups working alongside clinical commissioners and the council, and the voice of local membership organisations being heard in discussions about opening town centres.

Help people to help each other In the COVID-19 emergency we saw many examples of mutual support, with people helping their neighbours in need; local WhatsApp groups being established, and small businesses repurposing themselves to help with the crisis effort. In the recovery, governments and services should take care not to step back into a ‘command and control’ role, instead viewing their role as being to facilitate community-based action. The factors that impede such community action should be reviewed as part of the post-COVID recovery, now we have a better sense of the opportunity cost of excessive risk management, inflexible and limited funding of community activities, and the outcomes that were delivered through taking a different approach.

Support people to participate fully Not everyone who wishes to play a more active role in improving their own or their community’s wellbeing has an equal opportunity to do so. One key role of the enabling state is to level the playing field, but it should do so by supporting community capacity to self-organise, not by replacing community efforts with more professional services. In some contexts, the crisis has seen a different demographic of people attending meetings about the issues that have an impact on their community, with increased attendance and higher engagement. Although digital inclusion remains a significant issue, attending meetings online has offered a renewed, more comfortable and convenient opportunity to participate.

Move upstream There are strong social and economic arguments for moving to more preventative approaches, particularly for children and young people, in public health, and within justice to reduce re-offending. These issues – of inequalities of outcome and societal resilience – have been highlighted by the COVID-19 crisis. At a time when there will be demand for spending on acute services, governments and service managers should be encouraged and supported to protect the budgets for activities that stop harm from occurring, and to deploy these in a way that recognises the effectiveness of work done by grassroots and community organisations. 7 Revisiting the Route Map to an Enabling State

Build in radical kindness Many have commented on the salience of kindness to the national effort to cope with COVID-19. We know that kindness can provide the building blocks for community empowerment through positive relationships and values. Radical kindness goes further than individual efforts, and asks us to consider how we can build a society that treats everyone with kindness. But we know that in “normal times” there are significant factors that get in the way of encouraging kindness, including a lack of time on the part of individuals, and a transactional approach to delivering public services. As services enter the recovery phase, governments must ensure that the right balance is struck between values of accountability, fairness, and kindness in service design and provision so that people’s true needs are met, in all their complexity.

Tell an authentic story of change Transforming the relationship between the state and citizens is a ‘hearts and minds’ issue, as well as a structural challenge for public services. Telling stories of change from within and outwith public services matters. In particular, governments and service providers should urgently seek out and listen to the stories of how their communities have experienced the COVID-19 crisis, and use these perspectives to challenge existing orthodoxy.

Author: Dunblane Community Website

Local reaction to the recent unilateral actions of the Glassingall Estate owned by Ann Gloag to demolish and burn the remains of Glassingall House without any of the necessary permissions or before consulting with the local community.

See letter to Glassingall Estate from local residents

More information from Dunblane Community website

Author: Coastal Communities Network

Communities can now survey Scotland’s seabed and coastlines from the comfort of home with the launch of innovative virtual training.

From the critically endangered flapper skate to vast kelp forests, basking shark feeding grounds to delicate maerl and flame shell beds, Scotland’s seas and shores support an estimated 8,000 species of plants and animals

In Scotland’s Year of Coasts and Waters, Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) wants to encourage more people to get involved in recording and monitoring their local marine life. The Community-led Marine Biodiversity Monitoring Handbook – Scotland’s first “how to” guide – has been developed including comprehensive information and resources for planning and carrying out surveying and monitoring.

While coronavirus restrictions mean that surveying in the field may be on hold for the foreseeable future, SNH is launching new online training to accompany the handbook that will help those interested get started right away.

The training allows people to learn about different habitats and species and improve their survey skills by taking a virtual dive, to experience and practice those skills on real survey footage of a variety of locations around Scotland.

It is aimed at a wide range of users, including coastal communities, local environment groups and those who use the sea for work or recreation.

SNH project officer Caitlin Orr said: “We developed the handbook in response to the clear message we hear from people all around Scotland that they want to get more involved with their local coasts and waters and the decisions that affect them.

“The ongoing coronavirus restrictions inevitably mean that people won’t be able to get out and about using the handbook as we had hoped, but we wanted to develop a way for people to get started and begin to boost their skills right away.

“We hope that together with the handbook, this online training will inspire and support more people to get involved in monitoring our seas and shorelines when it is safe to do so.”

Community-led monitoring can play a valuable role in boosting our knowledge of marine species and habitat distribution around Scotland. The ultimate aim is to increase participation in marine biodiversity survey and provide resources and support to allow this to be done efficiently, safely and enjoyably. SNH is also working to ensure the data collected by communities is of the highest quality so that it can make a valuable contribution to future research.

The Community-led Marine Biodiversity Monitoring Project is a partnership between SNH, Fauna & Flora International (FFI), communities, local groups and individuals, with funding support from the William Grant Foundation.

Kerri Whiteside, FFI’s marine community support officer, said: “Those who live along Scotland’s breath-taking coastline are incredibly motivated to explore, and look after, the marine life that exists in their nearby waters.

“FFI is delighted to be working with SNH to enable better access to biodiversity monitoring tools and practices – pooling knowledge and skills together through collaborative initiatives like this will ultimately ensure that we have healthier seas into the future.”

Nick Addington, Chief Executive of the William Grant Foundation, said: “The William Grant Foundation is delighted to support this partnership between Scottish Natural Heritage and Scotland’s coastal communities.

“No-one has more of a stake in the health of our marine environment than the people who live and work in and around our coasts. We hope this initiative will empower local volunteers and community groups to play a greater role in efforts to understand and protect marine habitats and species.”

Author: Emma Cooper, SCA

Research into Community response to COVID-19

CONTENTS

1. Introduction
2. Key findings
3. Preconditions for an effective local response
4. Role of community anchor organisations
5. Ability of anchor organisations to respond
6. Working with local authorities
7. Impact on community anchor organisations
8. Recommendations
9. Conclusion

——————————————————————————————————————————–

1. INTRODUCTION

During May 2020, Scottish Community Alliance interviewed nine community led organisations, each based in different parts of the country, facing different challenges,  and each having played a pivotal role in their community’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic.  The purpose was to identify any common themes and lessons that could be learned from their experiences, which might inform the collective approach of government, local government and communities during the continuing response, recovery phase and beyond.

2. KEY FINDINGS

Community anchor organisations have been able to react to the COVID-19 pandemic in ways that have ensured local needs were assessed and responded to quickly while simultaneously adapting their operations to cope with a fast changing environment. The particular role that anchor organisations play within their communities, coupled with their ability to adapt quickly, has enabled them to develop specific responses which are tailored to local needs and provide an effective means of  ensuring that the emergency resources have reached where they are most needed. They have leveraged additional support for their community during the crisis both by drawing on their deep-rooted connections with the myriad local groups in their area and by drawing on the support of wider, regional networks through which they have been able to funnel national funding down to the local level.

1. Preconditions for an effective local response

The research suggests that the most effective and efficient responses were:

• where there was a well established local anchor organisation with confident leadership and governance, experience in tackling a broad range of local issues, strong connections to wider local networks, access to resources, and widespread recognition as the local anchor;
• where the local authority recognised the role of the anchor organisations, trusted them to respond to changing needs quickly and offered support to make best use of the available resources;
• where each organisation/agency that was involved in the response understood their role clearly and acted within their remit, whilst supporting and enabling others to respond within their respective remits;
• where the funding bodies in the public, private and charitable sectors understood and utilised existing national and regional networks, and trusted these relationships to distribute funding effectively to where it was most needed;
• where the myriad local groups – many informal, unconstituted, unfunded, and operating below the radar of public bodies but well known locally – were supported by local anchor organisations to access the necessary resources at an appropriate level.

1. Role of community anchor organisations
2. i) Direct service provision

Anchor organisations quickly responded to the pandemic and provided a wide-range of direct support to households within their communities. The support they provided included food parcels, prescription deliveries, wellbeing packs,  information and advice, online activities and hotlines for those in need.

“We were able to respond instantly. We already had good partnerships in place. We’re already known and trusted by our community.”

Leah Black, WHALE Arts Centre

Anchor organisations reported that the pandemic exacerbated existing problems in their community, deepening the issues faced by those already affected and increasing the numbers impacted. Anchor organisations were already aware of and addressing their community’s needs – including access to food, social isolation and wellbeing – which meant they were well placed to quickly respond.

“We were already focused on the key needs of our community which have been exacerbated by COVID-19, but which existed beforehand – food, wellbeing, local connections.”

Martin Avila, Kinning Park Complex

In the first couple of weeks of lockdown, demand for services rose very quickly. Bute Oasis food bank reported a 500% increase in demand for food parcels in the first couple of weeks, which has steadily reduced as friends, family and neighbours have stepped in to help.

“That first week I thought I was living in a nightmare. Need increased dramatically almost overnight.”

Angela Callahan, Bute Oasis

As the initial demand for food-related services gradually eased, concern rose about the impact of the pandemic on loneliness and wellbeing. These issues are starting to be addressed through community activities, distributing wellbeing packs, signposting those in need onto professional support services, providing befriending and youth work services remotely, conducting welfare calls, and moving activities such as choirs and art classes online.

“Mental health is the next challenge… Some of our staff are vulnerable anyway and ….now they’re dealing with difficult situations on top of their personal response to coronavirus. They are doing phone calls and video calls, supporting the mental health of many who are really suffering, e.g. carers.”

Bridie Ashrowan, The Broomhouse Centre

1. ii) Coordinating local provision

In addition to providing services directly, some anchor organisations have been coordinating and supporting the activities of a wide range of hyper-local groups, many of which are informal and unconstituted,  utilising their local knowledge and connections to avoid duplication and gaps in provision and thereby maximising the use of scarce resources.  In some cases, existing networks have extended their geographical reach or brought new organisations in, and new networks have been formed where needed. This has enabled effective coordination of a localised response.

“This pandemic has been an opportunity to discover how we should be working together and confirms that we can do so. We know what we’re good at, and we can do that, whereas others are good at other things, and can do those. We can meet as much of the need as possible, as effectively as possible.”

Fatima Uygun, Govanhill Baths

Anchor organisations have also been able to help bridge the gap between groups that find it difficult to coordinate with others, or where they are struggling to make progress alone. For example, Tannahill Centre provided guidance on social distancing to volunteers and introduced a one-way system to improve the flow of people around their housing estate, thereby reducing the potential for unintended close physical contact with others. Providing this local leadership has made everyone safer whilst leaving space for self-organising, hyper-local groups to continue to meet other needs within their community.

“We divided the building up so that each section has one volunteer group working within it, and the new pathways around the building reduce physical contact between people. Everyone’s been really positive and helpful with this approach!”

Jamie Mallan, Tannahill Centre

The coordination of activity clearly needs to sit at a very local level. All communities have different needs and require different responses. For example, Galson Estate in the Western Isles tackled the complex issue of ensuring that deliveries reach the right place in a community where houses are not numbered at a time when deliveries have become much more important, whereas other communities have focused on food parcels or isolation. The needs of communities cannot be assumed and need to be grounded in the reality of life for that place with the engagement of local people.

“It is important to still engage and consult with your community… rather than assuming need that might not be there. We want to add value and support people to be independent rather than stepping in to rescue those who maybe don’t need rescuing.”

Lisa Maclean, Galson Estate

Anchor organisations have seen this as an opportunity to strengthen their own networks and levels of cohesion across and within neighbourhoods. Groups who may traditionally operate within different networks to one another are being pulled together, finding common ground and offering mutual support which it is hoped will outlast the pandemic.

“New groups have joined our network who we wouldn’t normally reach, such as church groups. It’s exciting to think what this group can deliver long-term. Some areas have less provision and this group is allowing us to build capacity rather than stepping in, which wouldn’t be sustainable.”

Leah Black, WHALE Arts Centre

     iii)      Connecting upwards and accessing resources

Anchor organisations have provided a key connection between the many formal and informal community groups and those with greater resources, such as network organisations and public bodies. This connectivity that community anchors have been able to provide between the hyper-local and local networks, and the regional and national efforts has ensured that resources have been effectively distributed and the specific needs of local areas are addressed.

“The good working relationships we already have in place means we’re able to connect local groups with each other and with other organisations, such as HIE or the Highland Council. That helps everyone deliver more and information reaches the right people.”

Joanna Wawrzyczek, Kyle and Lochalsh Community Trust

One example is regarding the distribution of funding. Scottish Government and other funding agencies have, in most cases, been able to quickly distribute funding to trusted national partners such as DTAS and SCVO, who in turn have been able to quickly distribute funding to key anchor and community organisations that they trust. These organisations have then been able to further distribute funding to a wide range of hyper-local groups, who may not have bank accounts or legal status, ensuring that funding gets to where it is most needed within a community.

“These groups have a great reach into the community and contact with people we don’t otherwise know, but they can’t access funding and were finding it difficult to coordinate services effectively between them.”

Jamie Mallan, Tannahill Centre

A degree of mutual trust has been the key to this effective delivery of funding with minimal  bureaucracy being attached to the process. The cascading of funds through existing and trusted relationships means that not only has it been distributed quickly, but also that the people most in touch with what is needed on the ground have been empowered to make decisions about where to use the funds.

“We’ve received funding from the Scottish Government which we can use in ways that we think is most useful during this emergency. We’ve set up a local helpline, are doing food collection points, food distribution, food vouchers, a range of online and telephone events, community newsletter and much more.”

Joanna Wawrzyczek, Kyle and Lochalsh Community Trust

Unfortunately not all funding has been as well delivered and there have been issues of duplication. Several organisations reported frustrating efforts to apply for the Third Sector Resilience fund, which contrasted starkly with the ease of applying for other funds.

“The Third Sector Resilience Fund has been a challenge, we had to apply three times to get £20k. Other’s gave up. Look at who is distributing the money – do they really have the community links to do it well?”

Fatima Uygun, Govanhill Community Baths Trust

Some organisations also reported information overload, where several networking organisations and public bodies had sent out emails containing the same information.

 “The amount of emails from various sources containing the same information was quite overwhelming. I can understand that every organisation was trying to be useful but as a coordinator of a grassroot community response to Covid I was already extremely busy setting up measures to support our community. The time it took to wade through the emails from various organisations could have been used more usefully doing something else.”

Joanna Wawrzyczek, Kyle and Lochalsh Community Trust

1. Ability of community anchor organisations to respond

A number of factors were consistently referenced in the interviews as to why community anchors have been able to respond effectively to this crisis :

• Organisational capacity. Organisations with strong networks and trusted relationships were able to quickly self-organise and access resources. Those with experience in dealing successfully with social issues understood how to address the crisis and benefitted from competent leadership and strong governance built up over years.

 

• Financial capacity. Organisations with reasonable reserves did not need to wait for additional external funding to take action. Those with self-generating income sources and proven ability to fundraise were most able to respond and had greatest confidence in their ability to recover from the financial impact.

 

• Anchor organisations are able to be flexible and adapt their operations quickly and easily, especially if they possess reasonable levels of earned income. This allowed them to redeploy staff to where they were most needed and change services to meet needs quickly.
• Anchor organisations are relied upon to provide information and leadership at a community level and are experienced in meeting the needs of communities during the pandemic, which were predominantly an exacerbation of existing needs rather than new needs.
• Trusted organisations. Anchor organisations enjoyed high levels of trust and credibility within their communities and individual members of staff had already established relationships with some of the most vulnerable people. The organisations felt trusted by funders and other partners which gave them confidence to adapt their approach and operations in whatever way they felt was required.
• Access to resources. Their pre-established networks and trusted relationships enabled them to access the necessary resources such as PPE, buildings, funding and food donations.

 

1. Working with local authorities

The experience of working with local authorities during the emergency response has been varied. Where there was a pre-existing positive relationship, communication was strong and the anchor organisations felt they were being trusted to deliver a response, there were many reports of highly successful collaboration.

“The council applied for FareShare food delivery, they receive the delivery and their volunteers divide it up with our input to ensure the right items get to the right people, such as baby food going to the mother and baby group”.

Jamie Mallan, Tannahill Centre

“The council responded to a request for £60k to refurb old computers within a week! It can be done that quickly. Now children can do schoolwork at home. Why can’t that happen normally?”

Fatima Uygun, Govanhill Community Baths Trust

Some local authorities have been able to adapt their services and provide additional support to communities, coordinating effectively with local anchor organisations. For example, the Tannahill Centre worked with the local authority to coordinate delivery of a new service. The local authority, as a trusted and highly visible partner organisation, provided the local helpline and then passed on information about newly identified needs to the Tannahill Centre. They in turn coordinated with a number of smaller groups in the area to decide who best should meet those needs.

“The local authority set up a helpline and they pass down needs to local groups, which has been helpful. We’ve taken on more staff but couldn’t do more than we are.”

Martin Avila, Kinning Park Complex

However, It was also widely acknowledged that staff within some local authorities have had difficulty in adapting to remote working practices and have been under significant pressure to deliver core services.  In these cases there are lessons to be learnt about how local authorities engage with community anchors and other grassroot organisations.

“We need to develop much more localised ways of working, bringing public bodies and communities together, so that when we need it we have the relationships, trust and ways of working we need in place already.”

Martin Avila, Kinning Park Complex

Other local authorities have made decisions without engaging with communities which have had unintended impacts. For example, public buildings could have been used by community groups rather than being closed.

“Public bodies were encouraging but slow to respond. They can’t meet needs the way we can. We’re able to be agile, from staffing to how we use facilities.”

Bridie Ashrowan, Broomhouse Centre

1. Impact on community anchor organisations

The pandemic has placed significant additional pressures on local anchors and other community organisations through an increase in demand for services and a concomitant reduction in income. Consequently there is an increased level of uncertainty amongst anchor organisations about the future and their ability to continue meeting local needs in the longer-term.

“Other needs haven’t stopped because of this happening. We have the potential to lose £58k of income across the year because the building isn’t open to the public. We need to ensure we have funding in place for when we can get back to normal.”

Leah Black, WHALE Arts Centre

Although they have been able to access new sources of funding in the short term, and there has been great flexibility from most existing funders, there are few opportunities to apply for funding which is unrelated to the pandemic. Funding for projects to be delivered later this year or in future years would normally be in the development phase at the moment, but that has not been possible due to these funding streams being diverted, paused or closed, and because of reduced internal capacity. Self-generated income sources have been necessarily reduced or closed, such as building rental or training programmes.

“We usually fund the need through the [charity] shop, but obviously it’s closed. I’m very worried about money now. The community has been amazing and donated loads, but they’re not wealthy.”

Angela Callaghan, Bute Oasis

Another significant impact has been on the mental health and wellbeing of frontline staff. They are dealing with the impact of the pandemic upon themselves and with the emotional impact of the pandemic on those they support. Many have been redeployed to areas of work they are less familiar with and where they are putting their own health at some risk. In many cases their jobs have also become less secure due to the financial pressures facing their organisations.

“Mental health is the next challenge, both in the community and with our staff who have been… dealing with difficult situations on top of their personal response to coronavirus.”

Bridie Ashrowan, Broomhouse Centre

One benefit of coordination at a local level has been to ensure those working at grassroots have themselves been to some extent supported emotionally and practically to cope with the pandemic and the impact of the work they are doing, but this requires ongoing consideration.

“We have great networks locally through a new network we set up in SW Edinburgh, called Go Beyond, and that’s been essential… for getting advice and support from each other. We’ve used a distributed leadership model and as a result, we don’t feel alone.”

Bridie Ashrown, Broomhouse Centre

3. RECOMMENDATIONS

In order to move forward and capitalise on the role that community anchors have played thus far, key themes/asks to come out of the interviews are:

• Provide anchor organisations with secure and sufficient operational core funding.

Funding bodies across the public and charitable sectors should continue being flexible with existing funding allocations and should identify how they can best support these key organisations in the immediate and longer term future, including the reopening of non-pandemic related funding streams. The impact of the pandemic upon the ability of anchor organisations to generate their own income as well as on their financial reserves needs to be recognised and addressed.

• Work with communities to make decisions and allocate resources.

Communities should be enabled during the recovery phase to make their own decisions and develop tailored responses which meet their needs and enable local economic and social recovery. It is important that those involved in responding to the crisis, including public bodies and funding organisations, are seen to be working with, and not doing to, communities.

• Continue building trust and working in partnership at a local level.

The recovery phase response should build on the current localised decision-making approach, led by anchor organisations with public bodies playing an enabling role. Trusting and understanding the mutual benefits that this approach brings will ensure an effective response as well as contributing to increased social cohesion, local capacity and greater resilience for the future.

• Devolve decision making and resource allocation to the lowest practicable level.

Decisions should be taken and activities coordinated at the most local level practicable.  The pandemic has demonstrated that decisions taken by those who understand the needs of their communities lead to better outcomes. For the same reason, responsibility for allocating resources should be as close to communities as possible. This requires relationships based on trust between national government and local authorities and between government at all levels and community organisations.

• Continue to build resilience at a local level.

Community anchor organisations and other local groups need to be trusted to make decisions, take risks and manage failure in order to build the experience and resilience needed in times of crisis. Communities can respond to difficult issues if they are properly resourced and trusted to do so. They need to be financially secure enough to employ skilled long-term staff who can develop the personal relationships and local experience needed to address serious issues.

4. CONCLUSION

Anchor organisations appear well placed to play a leading role in the recovery phase of the pandemic if they are given the appropriate resources, trust and support. They can and do meet the needs of their communities beyond the immediacy of food and heating including growing mental health needs, promoting wellbeing, providing access to trusted information, tackling social isolation and building social cohesion. However, many are currently at some financial risk as we move beyond the crisis phase because their sources of income have significantly reduced.  At the same time, local needs have increased in scale and complexity. Providing the appropriate support for anchor organisations at this point means we will not only support the pandemic recovery efforts but build resilience and capacity for the future.

 

June 2020

Appendix 1

With thanks to the following organisations who gave their time to be interviewed :

Broomhouse Centre

WHALE Arts Centre

Kinning Park Complex

Bute Oasis

Galson Estate

Govanhill Community Baths Trust

Tannahill Centre

Kyle and Lochalsh Community Trust

Author: Gareth Hart, The Pioneers Post

Pushing for an economy that works for all is a cause we can all get behind. But is it time for the social enterprise movement to move on from trying to influence from the inside, and start fighting harder from the outside?

There is lots of rhetoric around right now about rebuilding post Covid-19 with a better economy. We all hope for kinder, fairer, more inclusive, environmentally enhancing policies for the future.

How might we achieve this? For many of us working at the sharp end of local economic policymaking with local government, local enterprise partnerships and others, this is a vexed question as we already experience countless frustrations around the lack of, or slow pace of, change – or, sometimes, even willingness to listen.

In my experience, in Plymouth and the wider south west, engagement with economic policymaking spheres has had mixed results. There have been some notable successes – Plymouth’s Social Enterprise Investment Fund, levering inclusive growth into local strategy and developing the Heart of the South West’s social enterprise business support scheme. But there have also been many frustrations, with policymakers apparently paying lip-service to inclusive economic and social enterprise concepts while all too easily slipping back to a business as usual, ‘growth’-focussed mindset and supporting only high-productivity sectors.

“If we are overly confrontational, we risk alienating the very people we want to influence”

So, should we be angrier? Should we beat our fists on boardroom tables and rage about the lack of social and environmental justice in economic policy?

Just before the coronavirus broke across the UK, I attended the New Economy Conference in Oldham. There was a beautiful moment where the co-operative, community business and social enterprise planets aligned, and I felt a surge of optimism about working collaboratively to make a difference. There was also talk of needing to be more hostile, belligerent or muscular about our interactions with policymakers.

At this I hesitated. A sentiment of being bolder resonates with me but the idea of outright hostility made me wince and think: if we are overly confrontational, we risk alienating the very people we want to influence. And all this in the context of a Conservative government not exactly known for their pro-social and environmental credentials.

On the inside or the outside?

There is the old argument about whether it is better to be in the tent, at the table, shaping the agenda – or outside the tent waving placards, shouting and getting protesty.

I recently read Yanis Varoufakis’ excellent political memoir Adults in the Room. There is a telling passage early on, where the former Greek Minister of Finance describes meeting Larry Summers – a previous Secretary of the US Treasury, Harvard president and chief economist to the World Bank. Summers challenges Varoufakis on whether he is an ‘insider’ or an ‘outsider’. Varoufakis reports Summers as saying:

“The outsiders prioritise their freedom to speak their version of the truth. The price of their freedom is that they are ignored by the insiders, who make the important decisions. The insiders, for their part, follow a sacrosanct rule: never turn against other insiders and never talk to outsiders about what insiders say or do. Their reward? Access to inside information and a chance, though no guarantee, of influencing powerful people and outcomes.”

This chimed with my experiences. I am the elected chair of the Plymouth Social Enterprise Network. Through this role I have a seat on the Plymouth Growth Board. This board oversees economic strategy and policy and is made up of institutions such as the City Council, Chamber of Commerce, Federation of Small Business, universities, other trade bodies and even individuals deemed to have something to say about our great city’s economy. We discuss current economic activities and strategise about the future. So, on the face of it, we have a seat on the ‘inside’, at the table of influence, right at the heart of local economic policymaking. This was hard won and there were years of preceding work promoting social enterprise in the public affairs of Plymouth.

“I was once criticised for attempting to engage with the Local Enterprise Partnership who were seen, by some, as the epitome of business as usual”

But ‘at the table’ I feel I have to moderate my language if I want to work collegiately with organisations that are not the natural bedfellows of the social enterprise movement. Almost by default, what I say could be seen as a criticism of organisations which represent business as usual.

On the outside at least you can say your piece more openly and angrily, but there is a risk that this is batted away by those on the inside as extremism or too alternative. Then you do not get any change at all. I was once criticised for attempting to engage with the Local Enterprise Partnership who were seen, by some, as the epitome of business as usual. I was shocked – to me at least trying to engage with them was important, otherwise we effect no change in their thinking at all, no matter how gradual or small scale.

The simple answer is probably that there is a time and a place for both methods. The militancy of the suffragettes seemingly achieved more than the painstaking years of suffragists working within the system. Extinction Rebellion has catapulted the climate crisis into the news with its confrontational tactics – although it has also alienated some who deem them too extreme.

I know I am not a militant at heart. Sure, I feel passionate about social enterprise and creating a fairer system but getting overly combative and confrontational is not in my nature. But I do also have a nagging feeling that I – and we, as a movement – need to be stronger and bolder about the changes we feel are necessary to bring about a better economy.

So, judgment – the essential leadership skill in my view ¬– is needed. We need to carefully consider when to act, when to be bold or even to be angry. Pick our battles, be savvy in our relationship building and win the arguments and hopefully we can: ‘build back better’.