Big Local

Big Local
Name	Big Local
Established	2010s
Area	England
Funder	Big Lottery Fund
Partners	Local Trust, Locality, Cooperatives UK, National Council for Voluntary Organisations

Big Local is a community investment programme launched to allocate long-term funding to neighbourhoods across England. It aimed to empower residents in 150 areas with resources to develop local projects, infrastructure, and social initiatives. The programme connected grassroots groups with national funders and intermediary bodies to promote civic participation and place-based regeneration.

Background and Origins

Big Local emerged from a landscape shaped by the Big Lottery Fund, the National Lottery Community Fund, and policy shifts following the 2008 financial crisis, the Cameron ministry, and austerity measures enacted in the 2010s. Early advocacy involved organisations such as Local Trust, Locality, Co-operatives UK, and the National Council for Voluntary Organisations. Influences included precedent schemes like the New Deal for Communities, the Neighbourhood Renewal Fund, and pilots under Community Development Foundation. Consultations referenced actors including Gordon Brown, Theresa May, and civil society leaders from Joseph Rowntree Foundation and Barrow Cadbury Trust.

Objectives and Funding

The programme’s objectives aligned with priorities advocated by Big Lottery Fund trustees and policy documents from Department for Communities and Local Government ministers. Key aims were resident empowerment, sustainable community-led development, and tackling local deprivation identified by indices such as the Indices of Multiple Deprivation. Funding mechanisms drew on lottery proceeds administered by bodies like Big Lottery Fund and implementation partners such as Local Trust and intermediary organisations including Groundwork UK and Nesta. Financial governance intersected with regulations from Charity Commission for England and Wales and reporting expectations tied to statutes influenced by the Localism Act 2011.

Program Structure and Implementation

Implementation used a devolved model with each designated area receiving multi-year funding and access to support from networks like Locality and Co-operatives UK. Delivery structures involved resident-led partnerships, steering groups, and coordinators drawn from organisations such as Royal Society of Arts affiliates and community development practitioners trained by Community Development Foundation. Monitoring frameworks referenced standards from National Audit Office guidance and employed evaluation partners including Ipsos MORI and academic teams from universities like University of Manchester and University of Leeds. Cross-sector collaborations engaged local institutions such as NHS England bodies, Police and Crime Commissioners, and unitary authorities like Greater Manchester Combined Authority.

Projects and Community Impact

Projects funded covered social enterprises, capital works, cultural programmes, and wellbeing services delivered by groups including Age UK, Citizens Advice, Shelter, and small mutuals inspired by Co-operatives UK. Examples included community hubs near sites associated with English Heritage, green infrastructure projects linked to Forestry Commission initiatives, and youth employment schemes complementing Department for Work and Pensions programmes. Impact assessments connected outcomes to indicators used by organisations such as National Institute for Health and Care Excellence for wellbeing, and case studies were featured alongside work by think tanks like IPPR and Resolution Foundation. Local arts collaborations sometimes partnered with venues like Tate Modern and festivals akin to Edinburgh Festival Fringe satellites.

Governance and Accountability

Governance rested with resident-led steering groups and oversight from Local Trust alongside auditors and accountants registered with Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales. Safeguarding and public duty obligations aligned with guidance from Charity Commission for England and Wales and data practices considered standards from the Information Commissioner's Office. Partnerships often formalised through memoranda influenced by models used by Co-operative Party affiliates and funding agreements reflecting templates from Big Lottery Fund. Performance reporting engaged municipal partners including Local Enterprise Partnerships and tied into local strategies of authorities such as Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council.

Criticism and Challenges

Critiques mirrored those levelled at place-based funds like the New Deal for Communities and included concerns from commentators at The Guardian and think tanks such as Centre for Social Justice about sustainability, uneven capacity, and reliance on volunteer labour. Operational challenges noted by evaluators like Joseph Rowntree Foundation included governance complexity, short-term staffing churn, and difficulties aligning with statutory services such as NHS England commissioning and local authority procurement frameworks. Debates involved academics from London School of Economics and policy analysts at Institute for Government over metrics, scalability, and comparative value versus direct service funding.

Legacy and Evaluation

Evaluation drew on reports by Ipsos MORI, academic studies from institutions like University of Birmingham and Newcastle University, and strategic reviews by Local Trust and funders such as The National Lottery Heritage Fund. Outcomes influenced subsequent place-based initiatives, informing programmes by organisations including Power to Change and contributing evidence to parliamentary inquiries in the House of Commons and cross-party discussions involving MPs from parties like Labour Party (UK) and Conservative Party (UK). The corpus of evaluations provided data for researchers at centres such as Centre for Local Economic Strategies and shaped guidance disseminated by networks like Locality.

Category:Community development in England