Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 16
16
The National Audit Office found that the information available on the geographical distribution of funding...
Conclusion
The National Audit Office found that the information available on the geographical distribution of funding was at times inconsistent or missing, making it difficult to determine the geographical spread of funding awarded. At 19 February 2021, the Department held no information on where funds were being used for 18% of awards. This accounted for £101 million of taxpayer’s money and 2,882 funding awards. To the extent that information is available, analysis showed that London had received the most funding (£47 million) and the North East the least (£14 million).51 The Department told us that it wanted the funding to be demand led “rather than a predetermined equal regional distribution”.52 It explained that for some funds, such as TNLCF, it offered indicative regional allocations, but that it did not make these formal because it did not think it would be appropriate. Additionally, it told us that while it asked all those receiving grants to tell it about the location of beneficiaries, it said that “sometimes that does not give us all the information 49 Qq 93, 99; C&AG’s Report, figure 4 50 Qq 54–55, 93 51 C&AG’s Report, para 3.2, figure 10 52 Q 52 COVID-19: Government Support for Charities 15 we would like about regional distribution” because a charity’s headquarters might be located in a different place to where the funds are actually spent. It committed to using its upcoming evaluation to determine the regional distribution of funding.53 The financial health of the charity sector going forwards
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
4.8 CCSF grant funding was distributed to every region and almost every local authority in England. Indicative regional funding allocations were identified at the outset to ensure appropriate distribution of funding by geography.