Q.

A.

There are a number of ways to address this concern and it's really up to you to decide which is the most appropriate way to tackle it locally.  However, here are some ways that other areas have dealt with it and that we suggest when asked.

We have, in fact written a page about this very issue on our website, which you can find in the organisers section - 'the issue of representation'. 

I think we would just like to say up front that we find this tends to be much more of a concern or risk that doesn't tend to be born out in reality.  We tend to find that whilst people may turn up at a PB decision making event with a particular view or thinking they will vote in a particular way but through the process of finding out about other projects and meeting and talking to people in their community that they may not have met before, they end up changing their minds and voting more in line with the needs of the community as a whole rather than their needs as individuals or supporters.  Although, this doesn't necessarily always happen and there's no guarantee of this.

Firstly, if you're concerned about ensuring projects match community priorities, the steering group could decide to include the community priorities as part of the criteria in the application process.  That way, all projects will need to demonstrate that they meet one or more of the community's priorities in order to be considered for the PB allocation.  Then, it matters less if the NGOs do manage to sway the voting through their supporters because the community priorities will still be met.

Secondly, you could limit the number of supporters each project is allowed to bring to a decision making event - say, for example, to six people per project.  You can also prevent projects themselves from voting at all or from voting for themselves.  That way no one project can pack the room with their supporters, and should allow for more balanced deliberations and voting.

Thirdly, put some good community development in place.  Have workers engage with all areas of the community and promote the process widely so everyone knows about it and can get involved, particularly those from minority or traditionally marginalised groups.  Organisers should think about some of the barriers these people have in getting involved and do their best to resolve them.  For example, time of day and date of the events/meetings, dietary requirements, childcare needs, transport needs etc.  That way, even if there are supporters of particular projects, there will also be a wide range of representation from across the community.

Finally, if you feel that after you've considered all these measures and none will be effective, you could look at setting minumum and maximum spending limits.  This could be done by area - for example, each area must have a minimum spend, or a maximum spend.  Or it could be done by theme - so each community priority must have a minumum amount spent against it or a maximum.  That way, spend is perceived to be 'fair' across all areas or themes or whatever you choose to set limits against and limits the influence of any one particular group for a particular area or theme.  We would suggest this an option of last resort for those particularly tricky situations as this does take away some of the choice from local people and limits how they can allocate the money.  

If you feel that you're still concerned about this issue and would like to discuss it further with us personally, please phone us on 0161 236 9321 and we'd be happy to chat through any aspect of your PB process with you.