Changes to Grant Making in Districts under Team Focus 2008 RMO Forum Workshop, Chris Sissons and Martin Attfield

Background Ground Clearing Project 12 JSG report to Council/Conference Grants Implementation Group

Conference Report 2007 Instead of a plethora of grant-making systems and approvals of grants at many places in the connexion, a major streamlining is proposed. Most grant requests for local church and circuit developments will be best evaluated, and grants made, in one place – the District. Resources available to district advance funds from connexional funds will consequently be increased. The roles of the Team, in support of the Connexional Grants Committee, will be to ensure: that the total grant-making capacity in each District is fair, bearing in mind existing district advance funds, the levies from circuit advance funds in the District, and allocations of connexional funds; and that guidelines for good practice are drawn up and applied fully in all the Districts.

Grants for projects of connexional significance will be dealt with through a single process, whose criteria will be widely advertised, under the oversight of the Methodist Council and managed by the Team. This principle will apply both to grants for work in Britain and for work outside Britain. Clear criteria will be developed for evaluating the added value or usefulness of grants made; and the outcomes of the evaluation will be freely available.

Where does the DAF money come from? Circuit Advance Funds 1% up to £100K 2% over £100K Connexional Advance and Priority Fund 50% of Property Sales Levies District Advance Funds

How is the CAPF distribution calculated? 1. Divide up total pot available using formula (CAF levies and CAPF) 2. Compare with actual CAF levies received in each District 3. Use CAPF to top-up between CAF levies and total distribution due

Distribution to DAFs 2007

2. Designated Funds (1) Connexional Grants Committee Districts Apply SRC or Council allocate funds to specific activities

2. Designated Funds (2) EXAMPLES Fresh Expressions workers Chaplaincy Development workers

3. Restricted Funds Where funds must be used for a particular purpose … EXAMPLE Annesley House Fund for work with vulnerable women Available until it runs out

4. Connexional Significance (1) Consistency with Our Calling and the Priorities, direct improvement for the life or work of the Methodist Church, and demonstrates it is exceptional by: Criteria

time-bound work must: –be mission focused and target an aspect of society outside of church culture, or; –demonstrate good practice and be reasonably replicable, or; –provide and disseminates new information, or; –demonstrate strategic ecumenical partnership, or; –be of strategic importance to the Connexion, or; –supports a Methodist heritage site which is an effective resource for mission. Criteria 4. Connexional Significance (1)

Ongoing work must be highly significant to the Connexion. Property Schemes will not be required to meet these criteria. Criteria 4. Connexional Significance (1)

4. Connexional Significance (2) evidence of the criteria for connexional significance; clear objectives, outcomes, delivery and an exit strategy: background research, including an appropriate risk assessment; Expectations

evidence of good relationships with key stakeholders; management and accountability arrangements; quality standards, plans for monitoring and evaluation Expectations 4. Connexional Significance (2)

4. Connexional Significance (3) Connexional Grants Committee Recognition as Connexionally Significant Example to other projects through mentoring, website, etc. Methodology Districts identify likely project(s) District Officers, project and Connexional Officers develop application

What happens to the smaller pots? Smaller pots such as the multi-racial projects fund will be administered through the same procedures as other ministry and mission grants

Transitional Arrangements Current connexional top-up grants phased out over two years. New criteria will be phased in over the same two year period.