Minutes:
The representative from SNARL introduced their bid application. In response to questions and queries raised by the Board the representative highlighted the following:
· The leaflets were designed to warn the local residents and to inform them what to do when dealing with an incident. It was important to inform local residents that the remains of an animal was considered as evidence to the police and should not be destroyed.
· The leaflets were expensive and approximately 500,000 had been distributed by volunteers in the past two years.
· The incidents were ongoing and there were approximately five cats, foxes and/or rabbits reported to be killed each week.
· The Croydon Cat Killers’ approach was to hurt humans emotionally and SNARL offered emotional support to the animal owners.
· If the Croydon Cat Killer was caught then SNARL would continue to run as an animal rescue centre.
The representative from Lives Not Knives introduced their bid application and showed a video that interviewed victims and their families that had been effected by knife crime. In response to questions and queries raised by the Board the representative highlighted the following:
· The funding would provide six week teaching packs for teachers to use during PSHE lessons and give relevant training.
· Lives Not Knives have not received funding from the Safer Neighbourhood Board previously.
· The organisation had run roadshows in the majority of primary schools within the Borough.
· The resources being create would be suitable from years 5 – 9.
· The charity was different to other local charities within the Borough as the material was created and presented by young people, through apprenticeships, who had been affected by knife crime.
· Lives Not Knives were happy to be approached by other charities and organisations to establish a collaborative approach.
· Feedback received through surveys after previous training had been positive from both students and teachers.
· In previous years schools had paid an upfront fee to contribute to the training sessions; however, as funding had been cut schools were requesting costing relief.
· If the Safer Neighbourhood Board agreed to fund less than the applied amount then they would not be able to provide as much as stated in the application form.
The representative from Growing Against Violence (GAV) introduced their bid application. In response to questions and queries raised by the Board the representative highlighted the following:
· Gang recruitment often started during the primary to secondary school transition period; therefore, the sessions were suitable from years 6 – 10.
· It was important to de-myth that joining a gang would gain safety, money and glamour.
· GAV were granted a bid by the SNB in 2017/18, have been funded by Croydon Council for four years and had recently received funding from the Evening Standard.
· The organisation worked with third sector parties but had not linked with the smaller providers in the Borough.
· GAV would ideally like long-term funding to deliver the program to all schools within the Borough.
· If the applied for bid was fully granted the training would be provided to approximately 600 students and would work in a minimum of 10 primary schools.
· Currently 95% of the cost is funded through bids and 5% was paid by the schools.
· The feedback received from students had been positive.
The representative from Generation F introduced their bid application. In response to questions and queries raised by the Board the representative highlighted the following:
· Generation F organised bespoke training days for schools by inviting different organisations to deliver collaboratively.
· Different sessions would be held in classrooms within the schools and groups of students would move throughout the day and meet all the providers. Each session is approximately 40 minutes.
· Feedback received from teaching staff and pupils had been positive.
· Family life had dramatically changed in recent years and young people were experiencing pressure from social media.
The representative from Palace for Life Foundation introduced their bid application. In response to questions and queries raised by the Board the representative highlighted the following:
· The final programme would be a rapid response session and a workshop could be organised within two weeks if an incident happened.
· The organisation had engaged with over 300 females in the past year.
· A similar programme was run in Sutton and had received a 92% success rate.
· The sessions would be 1.5 hours and would be run by female trainers the majority of the time. It was added that the staff received continuous training.
· The premiership funded some of the organisation’s work.
· The organisation sat on a number of boards with Croydon Council, the BME Forum and the Leaving Care team.
· The original bid had been reduced, due to the overspend, and it had been agreed to remove the self-defence classes and the engagement fair.
· The intention of the pilot programme was to write a comprehensive report and evaluation; therefore, had the addition of £1600 for line management.
· The removal of the self-defence classes and engagement fair had not had a retrospective effect on the admin and line management cost.
The representative from the Croydon BME Forum introduced their bid application. In response to questions and queries raised by the Board the representative highlighted the following:
· 12 themed workshops would be held over one year and would focus six for parents and six for young people within the Borough.
· The workshops would be held in different areas within the Borough at different times to be accessible to as many people as possible.
· There would be a variation of topics and these would be tailored to the area and residents’ needs.
· The BME Forum would utilise social media and work with Croydon Council and the police to promote the workshops.
· The Forum currently worked with 23 local organisations.
· The BME Forum were currently funded by Croydon Council and the NHS and had received additional funding through the lottery and MOPAC.
The meeting became inquorate and therefore the submitted bids were not formally agreed by the Safer Neighbourhood Board. The SNB Administrator agreed to distribute further information to the Members via email at a later date outlining how the decision could be formally made.