Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 – Participation Requests: Consultation on Draft Regulations

No, a statutory form should not be required. Rather, a suggested template or a checklist should be used, but it should not be too prescriptive. Creative approaches should be allowed. Often, disadvantaged communities are dissuaded by forms, especially if there are difficulties with written English. Forms can make some communities feel excluded and out-of-place.
Word limits should also be given, as this provides a context for groups, but groups should be able to submit additional reports/information outside of this limit.

N/A

For any form, template or checklist, the Scottish Government should ensure that any jargon used is explained, in particular ‘community body,’ ‘outcome,’ ‘outcome improvement’ and ‘provision of public service’. The way the form is drafted currently is very inaccessible to many communities (especially the application form notes) and will discourage them from making a request. A plain English guidance document should be provided along with any form, template or checklist, with translations available upon request.

An additional public service authority should be allowed 21 days to respond to a participation request, as shorter timescales may cause some public bodies to reject a participation request due to time pressure and requests may not be fully considered and discussed. Furthermore, the lead public service authority may not have enough time to form their response after hearing back from the additional public service authorities.
If a request involves additional public service authorities, then they additional public service authority should have 21 days (3 weeks) to respond and the lead public service authority should have 42 days (6 weeks) to respond. If the request only involves one public service authority, the public service authority should have 28 days (4 weeks) to respond.

Public service authorities should promote the use of participation requests through mass media (including radio advertisements, newspaper stories etc.) and social media. They should also hold meetings with community groups themselves, at accessible times and locations and with childcare available. Buildings where public service authorities operate (e.g. GP surgeries, police stations, council offices etc.) should display information about participation requests, with leaflets and website information. Authorities should also have to display text about participation requests clearly on their websites.
It is also important to channel information through grassroots communities to ensure all groups know about participation requests. Workshops could also be held throughout communities to talk groups through the details of the process.

Plain English guidance should be available that describes the process of participation requests and gives examples as to how it may be used. It should also list all the public authorities who could be involved. This should also be available in other languages. This guidance should be available on an authority’s website and paper copies should also be available. Once participation requests have been in effect a few years, authorities should promote successful case studies in the guidance.
There should be designated support staff available at each authority who are available for groups who have questions or need assistance (it should not be only one person, as request could be delayed if this person was on annual leave, maternity leave etc.). Authorities or the Scottish Government should also provide designated mentors to help groups through the process of making a request.
Authorities should also continue to hold meetings, workshops etc. to inform groups and build their capacity to make requests. It is important that these are accessible, especially for people who need childcare or who may not be able to afford transportation.
Authorities should not only inform community groups about this, they should also education people about why it is important to participate in these outcomes and processes. It is key to reach disadvantaged groups.
There should be a duty on authorities to have an engagement plan with an obligation to encourage participation requests. There should also be a requirement for authorities to demonstrate how they have engaged community bodies directly, and through third sector groups and other networks and voluntary groups.
If possible, authorities should provide the support that is necessary for groups to participate, such as travel expenses, childcare and meeting space.

Groups which need additional support could include all minority groups with protected characteristics. In particular, we note BME groups, groups whose first language is not English, disabled groups, groups with mental health conditions, asylum seekers and refugees.
Authorities should perform an audit of communities and community groups to determine where participation is low, and target those groups. If not, the success of participation request will be weighted towards well-resourced groups who may already be very engaged and empowered.

As with Question Four, if a request involves additional public service authorities, then they additional public service authority should have 21 days (3 weeks) to respond and the lead public service authority should have 42 days (6 weeks) to respond. If the request only involves one public service authority, the public service authority should have 28 days (4 weeks) to respond.
With timescales shorter than this, there is a significant concern that request could be dismissed because authorities do not have enough time/resources to properly consider them and to work on a possible outcome improvement process.

If the decision is a refusal, the authority should make suggestions about how the group could improve requests in the future.
Information about participation requests should also be published on the authority’s website. For transparency, there should be a running tally of the requests made to an authority, and the numbers of agreements/refusals. There should be a list of who has applied and refused, but not details about the request itself. A community body should be able to request to be listed anonymously. There should also be a performance chart detailing timelines for responses.

If it is anticipated that the outcome improvement process will last longer than three months, updates should be published at intervals during the process. The views from the community body about the process should also be published.

As with the previous question, if it is anticipated that the modified outcome improvement process will last longer than three months, updates should be published at intervals during the process. The views from the community body about the modifications should also be published.

The public authority should give the community body a draft of the final report, and publish the community body’s unaltered response to the final report alongside the final report. The community body should also sign a form that states that they agree with what has been said in the final report.