Agenda item

The UK Shared Prosperity Fund Manager presented the UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) 2025 – 2026 report for the consideration of Cabinet.

In doing so, the background to the UKSPF was explained to Members and that previously the funding had been for three years from 2022 to 2025. The scheme had been extended for one year (2025 to 2026) and the funding allocated to the Council for this period was £917,878.

The UKSPF would continue to focus on three investment priorities of Communities and Place, Supporting Local Businesses and People and Skills. Previously there had been more than fifty interventions which described the intention of the investment priorities. These interventions had been replaced with five themes and twelve sub-themes. Any scheme that had previously been eligible for funding would remain so under the new guidelines.

Potential areas of investment had been discussed by Members at the Cabinet Advisory Group (CAG) meeting held in December 2024. The Investment Plan was then developed with these discussions in mind. It was also reported that the Investment Plan aligned with the Council’s priorities as detailed within the Bromsgrove District Council Plan approved in July 2024. The results of the recent Community Survey had also been considered when shaping the Investment Plan.

The areas included within the Investment Plan included infrastructure, buildings, open spaces, cost of living (including fuel poverty) and local centres. There was also support for local businesses and for the upskilling of young people and provision of support in order for them to enter the workforce.

The Bromsgrove Partnership, in its role as Local Partnership Group, for the UKSPF had been consulted on the strategic fit and deliverability of the Investment Plan. For the most part, the Partnership was supportive of the Plan, however there had been some recommendations made following discussions at a meeting held on 12^th March 2025.

The Partnership expressed some concern in respect of the allocation of funding for the subtheme ‘bringing communities together'. They recommended that the funding should be a forty to fifty per cent revenue allocation rather than a capital allocation. However, it was noted by Officers that there was some flexibility for revenue funding to be used as capital funding under the grant conditions, however capital must be spent on capital expenditure. This meant that the funding as detailed within the Investment Plan for this sub theme could be varied depending on demand and who was likely to need it.

A further recommendation was suggested by the Partnership that capital funding for high streets and town centre improvements should not include Bromsgrove Town Centre as there was already funding available for this location. Officers were not supportive of this recommendation.

The third recommendation was in respect of the funding of County wide projects to avoid a ‘postcode lottery’ of support. It was confirmed that this was already the approach taken as part of the Investment Plan. However, Members were assured that in taking this approach value for money for Bromsgrove residents had been considered and that all funding allocations benefitted Bromsgrove residents only.

The final recommendation from the Partnership had been in relation to organisations that delivered support across a common theme, such as skills, be encouraged to work in a joined-up way in order to avoid duplication of services. This was already the approach taken when the Investment Plan was developed to ensure cohesion.

Finally, the UK Prosperity Fund Manager advised Members that the second Officer recommendation contained within the report was in order to ensure greater flexibility to re-allocate any outstanding funding that had not been spent towards the end of the scheme.

Members considered the recommendations made by the Bromsgrove Partnership and felt that with the potential exception of the recommendation made in respect of the public realm funding, the Investment Plan as presented captured priority areas of investment effectively and appropriately.

There were some discussions in respect of Economic Development following the Local Government Reorganisation. At this stage there was a significant number of unknowns in this area and that it would need to be considered when decisions were made as part of the Local Government Reorganisation process going forward.

Members queried access to the support for local businesses. It was felt that the Worcestershire Growth Hub website was difficult to navigate and that businesses might not be able to ascertain where to find information on support that was available. The UK Shared Prosperity Fund Manager explained that this had been raised previously. There was an advisor, with specific local knowledge, available who could consult with businesses to provide advice on this matter. Businesses could either contact the advisor directly or contact the UK Shared Prosperity Fund Manager for further information. 

RESOLVED that

1)       The Investment Plan be approved.

2)       Authority to vary the Investment Plan, in order to maximise the use of the grant, be delegated to the Assistant Director Regeneration & Property following consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Economic Development and Regeneration.