Background to the Research
- This report is based on a survey undertaken by NICVA's European
Unit in June/July 2000. The aim of the survey was to measure the likely
impact on community and voluntary organisations of the gap in EU funding
provision opening up between the end of the 1994-1999 EU programmes
and the delayed start of the new EU programmes for the period 2000-2006.
Research Approach
- A questionnaire was sent out to 1,221 voluntary and community organisations
and 405 forms were returned from 119 organisations representing a 33.2%
response rate.
Main
Findings
- Nearly
two-thirds of respondents were reliant on EU funding for part or all
of their work. Of these, well over a third received 50% of more of their
income from EU sources, the overwhelming majority from PEACE 1.
- The most
common cut-off-date for grants made under the last 994-99) EU programmes
is December 2000, although a significant number (13.5%) ran out of funding
during the first six months of 2000.
- One fifth
of projects surveyed indicated that they have, or will have to, close
down. Whilst nearly half the projects surveyed expected to find some
alternative funding from an as yet unidentified source, only 13.5% actually
had secured alternative funding, and only 6% at the same level as previously.
One in six projects surveyed were time-limited and had come to an end.
- The survey
results indicated that around 350 jobs were expected to be lost as a
result of the funding gap. Those that indicated an expected reduction
in services due to the funding gap projected job losses totalling the
equivalent of 113,5 full-time jobs. Those that indicated they expected
to close projects entirely, projected further job losses totalling the
equivalent of 229.5 full-time jobs.
- Just
over 80% of the projects surveyed were technically eligible to apply
for gap funding. This does not, however, mean that all of these will
receive funding, or that those who do, will receive funding at previous
levels.
- Given
that the annual EU funding available to community and voluntary groups
in recent years has been at the level of tens of millions, it is likely
that the £2 million allocated to fill the funding gap, whilst
very welcome, will struggle to fill the gap.
|