Participatory budgeting southampton s experience
Download
1 / 22

Participatory Budgeting – Southampton’s experience - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 114 Views
  • Uploaded on

Participatory Budgeting – Southampton’s experience. ‘Your Health, Your Community, Your Vote’ 28 th June 2008. The context. Southampton’s New Deal for Communities programme £48.7m to spend over 10 years Led by a partnership board Delivered according to themes .

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Participatory Budgeting – Southampton’s experience' - tobit


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Participatory budgeting southampton s experience

Participatory Budgeting – Southampton’s experience

‘Your Health, Your Community, Your Vote’

28th June 2008


The context
The context

  • Southampton’s New Deal for Communities programme

  • £48.7m to spend over 10 years

  • Led by a partnership board

  • Delivered according to themes


Thornhill community health group funding
Thornhill Community Health Group funding

  • Joint initiative with Southampton City PCT to build a new health clinic in Thornhill



Participatory budgeting timescales
Participatory budgeting - timescales for 10 years

  • December 2006 – idea first discussed in Thornhill

  • February 2007 – agreement from Community Health Group to develop PB

  • June 2007 – PB planning day with representative from the PB Unit



Stakeholders
Stakeholders Southampton City PCT to go ahead

  • SCC and local PCT, Thornhill Plus You, residents

  • Staff time, resources for the event, approval for spending money this way

  • Some suspicion at first

  • Public involvement agenda used as leverage

  • Named by Hazel Blears – no going back!


Objectives for the pilot
Objectives for the pilot Southampton City PCT to go ahead

  • Empower local groups to bid for money for and manage health related projects

  • Increase resident participation in decision making which should be both engaging and enjoyable

  • Establish processes and accountability lines that are clear, concise and productive



The process
The process (e.g. monitoring, establishment of criteria and use of qualitative feedback from residents)

  • Applications invited for projects bidding from £1,000-£10,000, which have health objectives

  • 22 applications received, totalling £134,168.00

  • Applications subject to a brief appraisal


The event
The event (e.g. monitoring, establishment of criteria and use of qualitative feedback from residents)

  • 18 presentations, 3 minutes long

  • Projects on the day totalled £93,559

  • Transport and childcare provided

  • Lunch and entertainment

  • Prize draw linked to evaluation forms

  • 60 residents attended

  • Local dignitaries – Councillors, local Sergeant, John Denham MP

  • Media coverage


Resources
Resources (e.g. monitoring, establishment of criteria and use of qualitative feedback from residents)

  • £10,000 provided to fund the event

  • Task group set up to oversee organisation of the day

  • Appraisal team

  • Support for applicants

  • Approximately 500 hours involved


Evaluation residents responses
Evaluation – residents responses (e.g. monitoring, establishment of criteria and use of qualitative feedback from residents)

‘I think it was good for the Thornhill community. I wish I had it when I was young, I have lived here for 44 years.’

‘well done, do it again’

‘ I think it’s important for the general public to have a say in these projects’

‘Big thanks for making my vote count’


Resident s responses
Resident’s responses… (e.g. monitoring, establishment of criteria and use of qualitative feedback from residents)

‘We need more of this type of event’

‘It was good to see the faces behind the projects’

‘A good day for everyone who attended’

‘More events like this please!’

‘Why has it taken us so long to hit on this way of doing things??!! Well done – a great success!!’


Applicants responses
Applicants responses (e.g. monitoring, establishment of criteria and use of qualitative feedback from residents)

‘It was a privilege to participate. We got to speak to real people. Now we know the community are keen on the idea, it has given us confidence.’

Action for Blind People

‘A very fair approach that fits into the NHS vision of people having a say. It was fair and transparent.’

Sun Safety


‘Not a fair way to allocate funding. Process is open to abuse, especially if large amounts of funding are at stake.’ Unsuccessful project

‘Really good fun, would definitely do it again. It was nerve-wracking but a very friendly atmosphere.’

Water Walkers

‘It was a remarkable experience, I enjoyed the challenge. I can’t express how impressed I was, this is the first time I’ve seen a community participation project that was successful.’

YMCA


My evaluation of the day
My evaluation of the day abuse, especially if large amounts of funding are at stake.’ Unsuccessful project

  • People are generally suspicious of this approach

  • Good organisation is crucial to the success of the day

  • Don’t forget about having fun!

  • Don’t get too bogged down with issues around representation – what is the alternative?

  • Transparency of the process


ad