Guidelines on seeking funding from the BA
Executive Summary
The essence is:
a) an expectation that many issues will be funded by the affected groups on their own account:
b) applications for funding on behalf of affected residents who are not themselves making a meaningful contribution are unlikely to be successful:
c) where costs are disproportionate in relation to reasonable levels of financial contributions from applicant groups, then the BA might be disposed to help
d) Where an issue is predominantly local but might have wider resonance, then the BA might consider, say, a topping up contribution
The BA has always used its funds when it thinks it necessary to seek professional advice, and the General Council thought it would be useful to draw up some principles to guide both applicants and the council in making decisions on requests.
These guidelines apply only to requests for financial help. The BA is always more than willing to provide its members with non-financial advice and support, and in its general council members it has a wealth of experience of planning, licensing, environmental and other issues that affect residents.
We encourage residents or house groups who are affected by a local issue to let us know about it as soon as possible. We may be able to help, and if there’s a possibility of a request for financial help, the earlier we are involved the better.
Barbican Association Funding Guidelines
To help the Barbican Association General Council consider requests for financial assistance from house groups or smaller groups on matters not likely to affect the estate as a whole or significant parts of it
Introduction
The BA exists to provide support, representation, and lobbying to its members on matters that affect them as residents. On occasion it will seek – and pay for – expert advice to support those activities, but most of its work is done on a non-cost basis (especially when problems are brought to its attention sufficiently early).
This paper suggest some tests or process to help fair, proportionate, and consistent decision making both for those considering seeking financial help and the BA.
The BA’s funds are limited and could be quickly dissipated, and any local funding needs to be balanced against the future needs of the Association as a whole. The BA should be the funder of last resort (on the solidarity principle) after all other avenues have been explored.
The first step should be to determine whether the issue is one likely, directly or indirectly, to affect the estate generally or a significant part thereof. In the absence of a consensus that an issue is potentially of general significance (precedent setting for instance), then the issue should fall to be treated as a “local” issue. Some local issues might appear primarily local but it could be argued that there is some potential albeit limited indirect wider implication.
Self help and proportionality
In general Barbican residents are capable of looking after themselves. If a group is collectively facing an issue needing eg professional help, then the first call should be on their own resources, only having recourse to the BA if the costs were disproportionate.
This suggests some ground rules around:
a) an expectation that many issues will be funded by the affected groups on their own account:
b) applications for funding on behalf of affected residents who are not themselves making a meaningful contribution are unlikely to be successful:
c) where costs are disproportionate in relation to reasonable levels of financial contributions from applicant groups, then the BA might be disposed to help typically via matched funding, although in exceptional cases (eg a very small number of affected residents), the BA’s contribution might be higher.
d) Where an issue is predominantly local but might have wider resonance, then the BA might consider, say, a topping up contribution
House group support
Normally house group endorsement should be a pre-requisite for a funding application to be considered. House group support should carry more weight if house group funding is being put towards the issue and/or the house group is prepared to solicit contributions from house group residents as first step.
Where it is argued that a local funding application should be supported because it has some wider implications, then the normal expectation should be that at least two house groups support the application.
Expert opinions
Particular weight should be given to expert opinions available to the BA. Applications for funding are likely to be about planning, licensing, the environment or some other aspect of local government. The BA has experts in all these fields. Such experts will have opinions on the validity of cases and the prospects of getting good outcomes.
The process of applying
If residents or house groups think they may need to call on the BA for financial help they should raise the issue that concerns them through their house group representative or with the chair of the BA as early as possible. The BA can often provide help in ways that do not involve the expenditure of its funds. If the issue then involves a request for funds applicants should put their request in writing. They should comment on as many of the following questions as is practicable:
There is not a “pass mark” as such. The above questions provide a structure and information base around which the BAGC can make consistent decisions capable of being explained and justified and being helpful as reference points in future cases.
There may be issues from time to time which some residents might want to seek professional help with the primary aim of securing financial compensation rather than preventing an unwelcome change or compelling restraint. Such cases are less likely to qualify for BA financial help.
The guidelines were drawn up by a small group of BAGC members, headed by Nigel Walmsley helped by Angela Starling, Phil Sharples, and Randall Anderson, and approved by the BAGC at its meeting on 12 November 2009.