Northern Ireland Community Relations Council - About Us - Council Minutes - Minutes of the Pobal/CRC Peace III Steering Committee Theme 1.2

29 October 2009

29th October 2009

Meeting: 10amThursday 29^th October 2009

Venue: Pobal Offices, Monaghan

Present: Brendan Mackin (Chairperson), Tony O’Callaghan, Breege Lenihan, William Redpath (OFMDFM), Deaglán O’Briain (DCGRA), Jim Deery, Tony McCusker.

In attendance: Pobal:Denis Leamy, Paddy McGinn, Colette Nulty, Donnacha McSorley, Pauline Perry, and Ailish Quinn (Minutes).

Community Relations Council:Duncan Morrow, Jim Dennison, Gordon Walker, Patricia Armstrong.

SEUPB:Shaun Henry.

DFP: Martin Tyrell.

Apologies: Helen Johnston, Eileen Gallagher.

1. Minutes from Previous Meeting and Matters Arising.

The minutes of the meeting of 2^nd September were agreed as presented.

2. PEACE III Overview Report – Applications and Allocations

§ Strand 1:

26 applications were received in the April call, with 8 subsequently withdrawn by promoter. 17 of the remaining 18 will be considered at this meeting.

§ Strand 2:

29 projects have been approved, with €10.5m allocated to date. A further 4 projects to the value of €825,000 which were previously deferred will be considered today.

§ Strand 3:

28 projects have been approved worth €13.4m and all LOOs have been issued, accepted and returned.

In summary a total of €23.9m of the €50m indicative budget for Theme 1.2 has been allocated to date.

3. Assessments for consideration

§ Strand 2:

Decisions and associated comments on the four projects presented are recorded on the Decision Grid.

§ Strand 1:

(i) The committee noted that Strand 1 applications were of a lesser quality/standard than anticipated, with none of the promoters appearing to deliver projects to the exact specifications of the call for applications. There is duplication amongst the proposed activities, target groups and subject matter. Partnership approaches to delivering projects had been encouraged by the Consortium but in the main had not materialised; it was recognised that some projects could be measurably strengthened if the lead collaborated with other promoters.

(ii) It was noted that some projects in their entirety did not appear to meet the strategic nature of this call, however elements of these, if further developed may have merit for consideration in the overall context of this Theme in a future call.

(iii) The committee reviewed each of the 17 applications against the advertised criteria and the agreed strategic approach, noting weaknesses and points of concern. The strategic approach was discussed and clarified as follows before consideration of the Strand 1 applications:

§ Work throughout the entire eligible area, demonstrating extensive reach and engagement with all issues across communities – should be evident in all applications of a broadcasting, archiving or storytelling nature;

§ Engage and reach all sections of society and maximise the number of people engaged in the process of reconciliation and healing – should be evident in all applications of a broadcasting, archiving or storytelling nature;

§ Demonstrate experience and capacity to collect memory – should be evident in all applications of a broadcasting, archiving or storytelling nature; experience desirable, capacity essential;

§ Have a proven track record in broadcasting : it will be essential the proposals clearly demonstrate that they have the ability to broadcast to a large audience within the timeframe of project – should be evident in all applications of a broadcasting nature;

§ Demonstrate an understanding of the complex nature of the conflict – should be evident in all applications of a broadcasting, archiving or storytelling nature;

§ Clearly demonstrate a bottom up approach within their proposal - should be evident in all applications of storytelling nature; desirable in broadcasting and archiving applications; and

§ Demonstrate how the project will meet the appropriate technology standards for broadcasting or media usage – should be evident in all applications of a broadcasting or archiving nature.

(iv) The committee recommended that staff:

§ Seek further specific clarifications from the project promoters – comments on each of the applications are detailed on the Decision Grid.

§ Review all applications against the key core criteria and reconsider the indicative scores for each application

(v) The committee will reconsider all applications at the meeting in December and recommend the applications for economic appraisal or rejection. It was noted that the SEUPB had indicated at the September Steering Committee meeting that in relation to the 26 week turnaround schedule, additional weeks could be allowed to ensure that good, solid applications could be brought forward.

(vi) It was noted that when proposals are recommended for Economic Appraisal at the December meeting, these appraisals should be undertaken by people with relevant expertise in the media field.

(vii) For the December meeting projects will be banded together into the categories of archiving, broadcasting or storytelling so they can be competitively assessed and ranked against similar proposals.

(viii) In respect of archiving, it was suggested that individual archiving projects be funded to collect and collate material only, with a view to feeding into a central archive platform to avoid a plethora of archive sites and locations.

(ix) Conflicts of Interest

§ Brendan Mackin declared a conflict of interest in relation to the ICTU proposal (Ref 003112) and absented himself for discussion on this project.

§ Tony McCusker declared a conflict of interest in relation to the CFNI proposal (Ref: 003056) and absented himself for discussion on this project.

4. AOB

Date of next meeting:

The next meeting was originally scheduled for 3^rd December at CRC offices in Moygashel. However, it was agreed to put this back by a few weeks to facilitate staff liaisons with projects and rescoring of applications. Availability of committee members will be ascertained by the Consortium and a date set later in December to suit the majority of the panel.

SUMMARY GRID

Consortium Steering Committee Theme 1.2

Thursday 29^th October 2009

		Ref	Applicant	Project Title	Team Recommendation		STEERING COMMITTEE DECISION
					Score	Amount £/€	DECISION	COMMENTS	SCORE	AMOUNT £/€
STRAND 2 – (Previously deferred)
1	001461		WAVE	Back to The Future – Building the Peace Programme	139.5 69.75%	up to £379,282	Approved	The panel approved the project subject to the following: · All conditions outlined in the assessment report. · All general conditions endorsed by the committee. · Further conditions as follows: 1. Participant recruitment strategy to be submitted and agreed with Consortium. This should detail the demographics and the methodology for recruitment; 2. Promoter to submit details of how participants are victims and survivors to ensure the project complements and not duplicate existing youth work in the area; 3. All psychotherapy and trauma counselling must be undertaken by suitable qualified personnel.	139.5 69.75%	up to £379,282
2	001446		Co-operation Ireland	The Effective Choices Helping Ourselves	132.5 66.25%	up to £445,728	Rejected	Clarifications received from promoter were not sufficient. The panel deducted a score in each of the following categories: programme specific objectives, priority and theme specific objectives, and need. The panel rejected the project as it failed to meet the criteria for Programme specific objectives and efficiency and effectiveness.	129.5 64.75%	NIL
3	000813		WAVE	Continuum of WAVE Key Services to Support Participation	125.5 62.75%	NIL	Deferred	Additional clarifications required: § Clarification on WAVE core funding from other sources to be provided to the Consortium. § Clarification on exact programme of activity to be funded under PEACE III to be submitted to Consortium.
4	001020		F.A.I.R.	Bobcat	123 61.5%	NIL	Rejected	Clarifications received from promoter were not sufficient. The panel deducted a score from both priority and theme objectives and efficiency and effectiveness, and rejected it on the basis that it had failed on both of these grounds.	121 60.5%	NIL

Ref		Applicant	Project Title	Team Recommendation			STEERING COMMITTEE CONCERNS / COMMENTS
				Score	Amount £/€
STRAND 1							CLARIFICATIONS ARE REQUIRED AS FOLLOWS:
5	003051	RTE	RTE Peace III Project	146 73%	€1.8m-€2m,		1. Demonstrate more clearly how project will maximise reach in Northern Ireland, particularly in relation to the television broadcasts proposed 2. Demonstrate more clearly how project will engage 1200 participants in the Digital Van action; 3. Demonstrate partnership approaches with the community sector; 4. Demonstrate Value For Money – including clarification around income generation; 5. Voices from the Grave action – clarify if this action is likely to proceed without Peace III funding.
6	002590	Queen Mary University of London	The Irish Peace Process – Layers of Reconciliation and Meaning	144 72%	£864,279		1. Demonstrate VFM – particularly the T&S and rental charges 2. Demonstrate how number of people engaged will be maximised 3. Demonstrate the degree to which this research project meets the overarching criteria of the Strand 1 and will create a legacy for future generations, 4. Explain exactly how the project impacts on the area of benefit.
7	003042	University of Ulster - ARK/CAIN	Legacy of Loss	142 71%	£899,299.70		1. Clarify the reach of the project – is it confined to archiving of Strand 1 material only; 2.Demonstrate more clearly VFM.
8	002964	Commission for Victims Survivors	Living History	140.5 70.25%	£2,277,304		1. Demonstrate more clearly how project will maximise reach in the eligible region; 2. Demonstrate how number of people engaged will be maximised; 3. Clarify the experience and capacity credentials of lead partner and partnership organisations. 4. Demonstrate VFM and clarify if this project is eligible for funding under OFMDFM?
9	002632	BBC	A State Apart	136 68%	£544,499		1. The project budget to be presented in the agreed Consortium format. 2. BBC and RTE proposals both include archiving elements – promoter must provide evidence that these projects avoid duplication.
Ref		Applicant	Project Title	Team Recommendation			STEERING COMMITTEE CONCERNS / COMMENTS
				Score	Amount £/€
10	002853	National Museums	Facing the Past	125.5 62.75%	NIL		1. Demonstrate VFM – particularly in relation to staffing levels; the cost of digitising the BBC archives and the proposed capital costs 2. Demonstrate the commitment of the museum to run the project over extended period of time. 3. Demonstrate how number of people engaged will be maximised; 4. Demonstrate more clearly a bottom up approach in the proposal– plural voices required. 5. Demonstrate more clearly how project will maximise reach - could exhibition travel? 6. Clarify partnership arrangements, particularly in relation to value being added by WAVE. 7. Clarify links with the BBC State Apart application under this Strand
11	003013	University of Ulster	Sharing Memories: Acknowledging the Past, Living with the Present & Negotiating the Future	123.5 61.75%	NIL		1. Demonstrate VFM, considering if a smaller scale, more strategic project could have equal impact.
12	002799	Dept. Social Development NI	The People’s Archive Project (PAP)	122.5 61.25%	NIL		1. Clearly demonstrate VFM, considering potential duplication with existing provision and the high cost s salaries and overheads requested 2. Is the partnership outlined the most cost effective approach to the delivery of this type o f initiative?
13	002792	Nerve Centre	Conflict Digital Archiving Centre	122.5 61.25%	NIL		1. Demonstrate more clearly the regional aspect of this project; 2. Demonstrate the extent of engagement with memory projects; 3. Demonstrate more clearly VFM.
14	003112	ICTU	Trade Unions in the Northern Ireland Conflict	122 61%	NIL		1. Demonstrate more clearly how project will maximise reach across the eligible region 2. Demonstrate VFM, particularly proportionality; 3. Demonstrate the capacity of project to extract stories and get them out into wider domain. 4. Demonstrate how number of people engaged will be maximised; 5. Clarify the projects technical capacity to archive material.
15	003056	CFNI	Archiving without Borders	122 61%	NIL		1. Demonstrate a collaborative approach – how this project can fit with/contribute to wider archives; 2. Demonstrate more clearly VFM; 3. Demonstrate more clearly how project will maximise reach; 4. Demonstrate how number of people engaged will be maximised; 5. Clarify where the archive will be held and how will it be sustained and managed appropriately over the next 25+ years.
16	003068	Imeall Trá	Glórtha Aduaidh (Northern Voices)	121 60.5%	NIL		1. Demonstrate more clearly how project will maximise reach; 2. Demonstrate how the project will achieve the number of people to be engaged ; 3. Demonstrate the management capacity of project to deliver on its objectives. 4. Indicate how plural stories will be collected and broadcast.
Ref		Applicant	Project Title	Team Recommendation			STEERING COMMITTEE CONCERNS / COMMENTS
				Score	Amount £/€
17	000991	North West Lifelong Learning Assoc.	Defining Lives	120 60%	NIL		1. Demonstrate VFM, clarifying core funding arrangements. 2. Demonstrate capacity of project to deliver on its objectives, particularly the 12 documentaries 3. Demonstrate more clearly how project will maximise reach and impact across the entire eligible region.
18	003104	Calipo	Sharp Focus-Crossing The Divide	119.5 59.75%	NIL	No further information requested
19	002399	Tyrone Donegal Partnership	The Untold Stories of “The Troubles”	117.5 58.5%	NIL	No further information requested
20	003094	Kairos Communications Ltd.	Viewfinder	112 56%	NIL	No further information requested
21	003071	University of Limerick	Looking Back, Moving Forward: Peace and Reconciliation through Participatory Action Research	98.5 49.25%	NIL	No further information requested