·        

the Shared Prosperity Fund replaced European funding however the allocation received didn’t match previous investments; Plymouth had been allocated £3m which was a third of that previously allocated. It was considered that the formula the Government had used to allocate money disadvantaged Plymouth and this had been flagged with local MPs;

·        

the Council had to produce an investment plan as part of the requirements of the fund setting out how to approach how the money was to be spent. The £3.14m would be spread out over three years with the majority of the money back-loaded into the final 18 months. Officers considered it would be better to undertake a fewer number of better projects, due to the small sums involved, other than a larger amount of cheaper projects, in order to achieve best impact;

·        

currently ‘net zero’ was a cross cutting theme for projects to be considered as a result of discussions with local businesses and organisations.

·        

in terms of the percentage decrease in funding received in comparison to previous allocations, Plymouth was now categorised in a less favoured area due to being joined with Devon and Somerset. Because Plymouth was in a larger block with wealthier places within it the calculation and funding formula wasn’t as sensitive. Approximately £9m worth of projects were sent in as part of the expression of interest however approximately £6m was lost from the local economy because the UK Government had not funded schemes to the same level;

·        

the loss of funding received by Plymouth could be reconciled by bidding for other funds; Plymouth had done exceptionally well over the past few years by successfully bidding for over £185m;

·        

Officers considered the best approach for the fund was to undertake a smaller number of larger projects; only 4% of the fund was to be spent on the administration of it therefore, due to the small allocation received, more money would be available for the project itself if it was approached in such a way;

·        

the business communities reaction to the funding allocation was pragmatic; the Council would continue to work together with local businesses and communities to successfully move projects forward where possible. It was highlighted that the Council didn’t rely on one pot of funding for success and that a proportionate amount of time would be spent on the fund;

·        

Officers considered all projects received and on occasion melded projects together to make them viable; a rules based approach was directed by Government therefore the Council was limited in what actions it could take. Officers were disappointed in the amount of funding received and the opportunities available however would prepare for other funding in the future.