Yes - the waffle's even

bigger than this

If you think that this looks like a lot of waffle, can we refer you to the report to tonight’s performance Review Committee of Boston Borough Council –about the Placecheck scheme?
You’ll remember that on Monday we mentioned calls for proof that value for money had been achieved by this £100,000 project.
Well, the answer is purportedly in the report.
There are 1.68 full time equivalent employees in post to deliver Placecheck on the ground. Between 2008/9 and 2010/11, they were paid by the windfall funding the Council received - but from 2011/12, will be funded through the mainstream revenue account.
That’s just as well, since the full time post in the project has already been made permanent.
The impression we got was that Placecheck was a one-off project - something that would get the community organised along the right lines and then become self reliant – something that the word “windfall” implies.
But not only are we taking on more staff to keep the work going, the report tells us that the Council is currently carrying a full time Principal Officer vacancy in its Communities team and that this “is not sustainable in the long run.” Stand by to stick another £42,000 a year on the council’s wages bill.
Add to this the cost of a Neighbourhood Projects Officer at £25,288, a Local Communities Officer costing £18,496 and charges pro rata for the time of the Head of Service – a meagre £15,154 - and you have a grand total of £101,081.
Apparently, when not involved with Placecheck duties the staff have other vital tasks as well – such as “attending and contributing to the Boston Disability Forum, attending and contributing to Tension monitoring meetings, attending and contributing to ASBAG* meetings – don’t you just love that acronym? - coordinating the national “11 million Take Over” days, supporting the Boston Showcase steering group, attending and contributing to Boston Youth Council meetings, representing the council on the Lincolnshire Capital Grant assessment panel, coordinating the BTAC grant programme, contributing to bids for external funding – such as the Migration Impact Fund, and last – and quite probably by all means least - representing the council as an observer on the Bicker Trust Panel.
It’s a dirty job but – as they say, someone’s go to do it.
Or have they?
The benefits from Placecheck are claimed to be manifold and far reaching - ranging from a reduction in crime to residents getting a “warm fuzzy feeling” from the scheme.
You need to read the report in full and come to your own conclusions about whether of not the scheme provides value for money – which is the object of the exercise.
Placecheck organisers went out to local communities, sat them down and asked them what was good and bad about the areas where they lived and then drew up scheme that in some cases involved little more than planting a bulb or two.
In the old days, communities that shared concerns about the state of their neighbourhood got up on their hind legs and did something about it.
Placecheck made them look for problems where in some cases, we are sure that none existed, and then made them feel good and involved.
The real need that it met was to feed the BBI’s obsession with nannying us all – but at a considerable – and ongoing cost.
Accounting for the money spent is not the same as demonstrating whether value has been achieved – and in the case of Placecheck, we do not believe that it has.

*ASBAG – anti social behaviour action group … not to be confused with GASBAG!

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.