Item 2 is a follow-up to the publication in January this year of our report on support for community sport. There is a strong focus in today’s evidence on volunteering, and I welcome Shona Robison, the Minister for Commonwealth Games and Sport, who is accompanied by Donnie Jack, deputy director of sport and physical activity in the Scottish Government, and by Stewart Harris, chief executive of sportscotland. I invite the minister to make her opening remarks before we ask questions.
I feel a bit old-fashioned without an iPad, but I shall stick to my paper notes.
Apart from the household study figures that you mentioned, which show that 4.5 per cent of the population are involved in volunteering in sport, what other work has been done to audit the number of volunteers?
Sportscotland does a lot of work with governing bodies and we ask them to submit regular information about the activities in the club infrastructure in Scotland, so that we know the position. The toolkit that is referred to in the submission will help us to do that in a lot more depth, because we are asking clubs not only to identify the resources that they have—volunteers and coaches are an integral part of that—but to begin to identify the gaps and what they require in order to grow their club infrastructure. Working with the governing bodies gives us a huge amount of information. Stewart Harris may want to elaborate on that.
We draw up an annual action plan with each of the governing bodies, to look at their aims for recruitment, retention and deployment. It is worth considering how robust we have made our active schools monitoring. We have more than 15,500 deliverers in the active schools system, which covers every local authority and school in Scotland, and 84 per cent of them are volunteers. Our data is much better now, which gives us a platform from which to spring forward, and we are still a good time out from the Commonwealth games. Members will remember us talking last year about a world-class system. Schools, clubs and performance are important, but people and facilities will drive it.
I am looking at the sportscotland response and trying to burrow down into Scottish figures. A lot of the sports organisations that are cited give United Kingdom figures for statistics such as the male-to-female ratio, the fact that 75 per cent of coaches are volunteers and so on. If all that work has been done, why is information relating to Scotland—which is of interest to the committee—not available at that level of detail in your response to our inquiry?
The UK figures are very indicative. We work with each of the sports to look at the breakdown of those figures. We are working to improve the data. We have done a lot of work on the data from active schools and we will continue to do more and more work to ensure that governing bodies can collect that data. Our job will be to amalgamate the data, which has always been difficult because different methodologies have been used to collect it. We are trying to make the data much more consistent. There is a lot of data around that can be broken down sport by sport.
Yes, but I am trying to get behind the 4.5 per cent, the 90,000 volunteers and the 13,000 clubs. Do you have anything apart from the household survey to share with us this morning?
Only what we have described in terms of the figures that underpin the work with the governing bodies, the active schools network and the community sport hubs, all of which are gathering databases around usage and new members coming into sport. It would probably be best for us to share that new information with you when we have got it ready.
I appreciate that, but we have been discussing this with you and sportscotland since October 2012. The committee’s report focused on understanding the capacity that we have. We will come on to the issue of legacy, but the committee’s view was that if we are to maximise the legacy, it will be delivered not by the people in this room but by others. If we do not have the figures broken down, how do we confirm or audit the figures and how do we get an understanding of how many volunteers we will need to ensure that there is a legacy from the Commonwealth games?
Part of the response to that is the club self-improvement tool, which I mentioned earlier. A lot of work has gone on in the past year to have very direct support for the clubs. Traditionally, a lot of work has gone on with the governing bodies, which obviously support their clubs. The difference now is that there is a very direct relationship between sportscotland and the clubs, which has led to the club development support through the regional sporting partnerships; the direct club investment programme, which we have not seen before; and the club self-improvement tool, which looks at where the gaps are and where the capacity of clubs needs to be built up. All that is part of the funding relationship with sportscotland through the various funds that are available. In response, targets will be set with clubs around the growth that they would expect to see in the club environment, whether that is in the number of volunteers being recruited, coaches being developed or participants being brought in.
So, not yet, but we will have some of this—
I would say that it is work in progress.
It is work in progress. The headline figures are all very well, but there is work in progress to establish the reality behind them.
Yes. For every organisation that receives funding, particularly the governing bodies, there is an audit that is usually on a four-year cycle, although it can be done whenever we deem it appropriate.
But in the past, the money has been handed over and spent. We will discuss the outcomes later, because those are part of the issue. You hand over all that money and you have an audit that shows that there is increased activity and participation, but on whose say-so?
The governing bodies do that. Whoever we give the money to will give that back.
So there is no monitoring.
Of course there is monitoring.
Who does that?
Our staff do that. Working alongside each of the governing bodies, we have a partnership manager, a high-performance manager and a coaching development team. Our process is not a grant-making one. We receive a plan from a governing body and we then attach resources, ambition and targets to it. Our staff then work with the governing body to ensure that that happens. At the end of each year, we have a report on all areas, such as development, performance and capacity building, and that gives us a picture of whether the sport has been successful.
Who audits that? Do we just take it at face value?
We audit it directly, but we also engage auditors to provide financial accountability and to go through the outcomes. All of that is done, and we can make that information available to the committee.
That would be interesting.
It is fair to say that, over the years, the relationship between sportscotland and the governing bodies has changed. Some governing bodies might have found it difficult to have a level of scrutiny that perhaps was not there previously. That is the right thing to do but, as you will imagine, it has led to tensions. Where public money is involved, it is absolutely right that targets are set and that, if they are not reached, questions have to be asked and future funding might be affected. As you will imagine, that has led to difficult discussions, but it is absolutely the right approach.
When did we start applying that scrutiny?
Just previous to my becoming sports minister, in 2009, a new and far more robust relationship between sportscotland and the governing bodies began, with an expectation of far more drilled-down targets and delivery for public money. All that is now very open to public scrutiny, because the information is all on the web. Every governing body’s plan and information on delivery and what it has achieved or not achieved is there for everybody to see. That brings a lot of transparency, but it is difficult for organisations that have not achieved. However, that in itself brings pressure to up their game for the next time.
I will let other members in, although I want to return to the cashback scheme later because, despite strenuous personal efforts to get that level of detail on that scheme, I have been unsuccessful.
The convener had interesting questions about how we audit. I have a degree of sympathy on the point about how robust audits can be, either by sportscotland of the national governing bodies or by the national governing bodies of individual clubs. Is an audit a paper exercise or do people physically turn up to see what is going on? A balance needs to be struck between a degree of scrutiny and allowing professionally run clubs to get on with the job that they are doing.
I will start and Stewart Harris will add more detail.
The committee will probably remember that I mentioned that we started capacity building a number of years ago, prior to the Olympics and Paralympics, with every community in mind. Our relationship with all 32 geographies through local authorities and their partners is key. We now have 114 of 159 community sport hubs up and running.
You used swimming as an example. That might be a good example to explore, because swimming has a fairly advanced infrastructure. Will Scottish Swimming have done an audit of all the swimming clubs across the country? Does it know how many swimming sessions will take place across each local authority area in any given week? Does it know where the spare capacity is? Is it asking its clubs to consider whether they could cope if a dozen more teenagers were to present to a club the week after the swimming part of the Commonwealth games finishes? Is it asking clubs what their contingency plans are and how they will develop them? Is Scottish Swimming having those practical conversations with its clubs? Given that everything else is abstract, we hope that, via national governing bodies, every sport is having those practical conversations. I seek reassurance on those issues.
Yes, absolutely. From that perspective, we have learned a lot from sports that had an infrastructure or had developed a system. I reiterate that we are trying to put in place a system for sport across school, club and performance sport, so that there are no gaps.
Finally, the reality is that each national governing body will be at a different level of preparedness, because that is how life works. When some national governing bodies are not quite as advanced as others, will you call the heads of those bodies in for some quite frank conversations to get them to where they have to be?
Those frank conversations happen regularly. This goes back to what we said previously. Sportscotland drives quite a hard bargain these days with governing bodies when it comes to what is to be delivered, not least now when bodies that are overseeing Commonwealth games sports are under particular pressure. However, there is recognition that some of the smaller governing bodies of some of the smaller sports, if you like, perhaps do not have the infrastructure and capacity that some of the large governing bodies have, so they have had to receive particular support and have sometimes linked up with other governing bodies to help with training and with the infrastructure that they might not have themselves. That said, despite those issues some of the smaller governing bodies deliver really well. You can be reassured that, when that is not happening, a very robust discussion takes place.
Are there figures that show increased participation and an increased number of coaches coming through as a result of all that activity?
Yes. Sportscotland produced figures on the coaches who have come through its investment in coaching programmes.
More than 14,000 coaches have been through our continuing professional development programmes and, over the past three years, 12,000 coaches have gone through qualifications.
But have we measured the increase in participation? Given all the work that you are doing and all the money that we are putting in, is there measurement of whether an increased number of people are participating and whether we are reaching kids who would not usually participate? Is there information on that?
For the first time for a long time, the Scottish household survey last year showed that there was an increase in participation.
Just the household survey.
Yes.
As part of your monitoring system, do you not have any other figures?
As I think the minister said, we go down almost into the individual sites of, for example, community sport hubs. That is a good example, because we have 114 community sport hubs up and running and we will monitor every single one.
I am trying to get to how we measure success in terms of the increased number of coaches that we will need and the level of participation. Are we involving kids who would be involved anyway, or are we involving those who would otherwise be less likely to be involved?
The community sport hubs have recognised the need to identify specifically that it is not just a case of kids who are involved in every club going to new clubs. They measure new participation—participation by young people who have never been involved in sport before—to ensure that we get that information.
I am sorry to be a pain, but I think that the committee is looking for some information. If the target is set, is it set by the recipient of the funding?
It is set in conjunction with the recipient. There would be a discussion with sportscotland.
Are there consequences if they do not meet the target?
Yes. The targets for the governing bodies for growth, for the number of volunteers and coaches and for the delivery of elite sport are all published on the internet. If governing bodies are not meeting the targets that have been set for elite performance, their funding is reviewed.
How many bodies has that happened to?
A significant number. Our board has asked for presentations from sports that are struggling to meet their targets. The sports’ governing bodies have been able to give some reassurance, but I reiterate that our staff work with them on an on-going basis to ensure that we get an early warning. This is not about hitting them with a stick; it is about trying to work out how they can turn round poorer performance.
I know that responsibility lies with the three of you in front of me, but I think that the committee found that there was an issue. Whose overall responsibility is it to ensure that we get the outcomes that we seek? There is a myriad of organisations involved, including sportscotland, local authorities and sport organisations.
We give sportscotland the resources and charge it, as our national agency for sport, to deliver a world-class system, whether that is for elite performance or community participation. Sportscotland will therefore have a negotiation with the governing bodies. In addition, it has a direct relationship with clubs through the direct club investment programme. It will tell us regularly what delivery looks like and highlight where there are tensions or perhaps underperformance.
When we add value on matters dealt with by local government, in particular in relation to active schools and community sport hubs, we expect all 32 local authorities to set targets and make reports each year. We hold them all to account.
I have personal experience through my son, who is involved in a sport—I will not name it—that is being targeted because it is not reaching its targets, so I take Mr Harris’s point.
I will let Stewart Harris deal with some of the details of that. The toolkit was developed in consultation with governing bodies and clubs to identify where some of the weaknesses are. You are absolutely right. The landscape is quite difficult, particularly for smaller clubs. There are many different funding streams and many different requirements on clubs. The toolkit was developed with them as a way of helping them to recognise where their gaps are and, more important, how to go about addressing those gaps and weaknesses, and to navigate and find the right fund for them or the right support to develop their coaches or recruit volunteers.
There is the key principle of sustainability. In the past, we have probably had a wee bit of a moaning culture, which is understandable, as people have felt frustrated that they have been doing a service in the community and have had no help. We are saying, “Let’s work together as a partnership, but the first thing you need to do is understand your own capacity, what resources you have and what your ambitions are.” The staff whom I talked about are tasked with doing that. They are tasked with ensuring that there is a sustainable plan for the next three, four or five years so that the club can try to achieve its ambitions progressively, however modest or ambitious they are.
I want to come on to the direct club investment programme. I notice that £500,000 is being allocated for that initiative, which could mean up to £10,000 a club, although the figure may not reach that. The jam could be spread more, and 70 clubs rather than 50 could be involved. Will you give us a wee bit more insight into what you intend to do through that fund?
I hope that they are just the first of a number of clubs. Fifty clubs is a starter for 10. I hope that a lot more clubs than that will be involved by next year.
The last time that I was on this committee—I have only recently returned to it—we spoke about sport hubs. I am impressed by the fantastic growth that has taken place in the past year. You said that you would like there to be a sport hub in every school. Do you still stand by that?
I have told him that he has to deliver on that now that he has said it.
I have a particular interest with regard to a sport hub in my area. I have met your regional manager—a lady whose name I cannot remember at the moment—and was impressed by her enthusiasm. I know that another programme is being developed in the area for another sport hub. Will more money be made available?
The idea of sport hubs being based around secondary schools is a good one. North Lanarkshire is going to make 50 per cent of its secondary schools community sport hubs. The other 50 per cent will link to a sport hub, which is fine—it might not make sense to have two sport hubs that are 50 yards apart. What is important is that everyone has access to a hub and the feeder primaries are able to be part of that as well. There is huge ambition there.
Excellent.
There is a tension in asking you to demonstrate that we are getting more and more people involved, although, as you rightly say, we need to do that because public money is involved. However, is it fair to characterise this as a situation in which we are driving towards bigger clubs rather than more clubs? What are the tensions in that? People might be more likely to give their time volunteering in a club where they feel that their volunteering makes a big difference, which might be the kind of club that is more community focused and in which fewer people are involved than is the case in a larger setting, where they might feel that, if they do not go there, somebody else will do what needs to be done. How are you managing that tension?
That is a good question. One of the discussions that we have with governing bodies—particularly those of sports that are not as fully developed as others—concerns the growth of clubs. In areas in which there are not many clubs for a particular sport, part of the discussion will be about how to grow and develop more clubs. That is particularly the case in areas where there is a demand that is not being met.
You are right to identify the fact that there is a tension. Although new parts of those sport hubs have been generated—new sports and new activities—that has involved bringing together smaller entities. As I said earlier, the aim is sustainable participation. That is at the heart of everything that we do.
The minister referred to identifying the gap and then trying to respond to it. That goes to the heart of the convener’s questions and the committee report’s concern with gaps. When we use statistics to try to understand what is going on, I look for examples of how we have responded and changed because of an identified trend or gap. If we do not have such examples, we are just looking at statistics that say that lots of people in Scotland are engaged and active in sport, and we applaud that for being fantastic.
The initiatives that we have talked about for specific support for clubs to identify their needs and be able to respond were responses to the situation that you described. It was identified that we could not just wait for clubs to respond in a way that was going to achieve what was needed to meet the capacity but that we had to give them a way of doing that through incentives and a bit of a push. The toolkit that Stewart Harris described earlier is the clubs’ way of doing what is needed and the funding is the incentive, because if they identify gaps, there are then resources to help them to tackle the gaps. Again, the direct investment in clubs is another incentive for clubs that have identified that they will see growth, which of course many will, and it will enable them to put all the mechanisms in place.
Shona Robison is talking about a particular conversation. We put together a regional working practice that is not an entity as such but is about bringing together sports governing bodies and the various local authorities. The east region is a case in point, because we had people from the Scottish Borders, the Lothians, and Edinburgh sitting around a table and talking with sportscotland about gaps, modelling, capacity and workforce, then making decisions about priorities that they then recommended to us. That is where the conversation happened. That is the only place where we can make that conversation happen; as it is not effective or efficient to have it 32 times, we have tried to bring things together on a regional basis and make that conversation bite.
Donnie Jack might say something more about this, but a set of databases has been established as a baseline for measuring and monitoring legacy across the whole of Scotland and the legacy team has carried out a lot of statistical work to pull everything into one place so that we can tell the story—not just the narrative, but the hard figures that lie behind it—of what we started off with and what we will end up with post-games. That will be very important, because folk quite rightly want to know what the impact has been. We have the baseline and post-games we will be able to use all the databases and all the statistics and figures, whether it be from the community sport hubs, the participation numbers from the governing bodies or the survey, to see and measure how we got from where we were to where we will be.
We are happy to send the committee details of what is a fairly comprehensive legacy monitoring and evaluation programme. I should say that we recently made a presentation to the Commonwealth Games Federation co-ordination commission—or co-com—which oversees the delivery of the games and it was very impressed by the evaluation programme’s robustness.
I agree that we want to tell a story and, indeed, I have described what failure would look like to me in Glasgow. Obviously, however, we also want to think about what success looks like. In that case, there are advantages to telling the story not only because we want to find out whether we have delivered on the massive public expenditure that has been put into all of this, but because of the huge opportunity to find out whether we can do better in the future and what we need to do next. If by the end of 2014 we are in a position to show what we set out to do, the difference that we made and whether we got really close to or just over what we hoped to get, we can be more ambitious next time round.
Something that we have learned from the Olympics and that we think was a bit of a missed opportunity was that, despite the huge volunteering ethos around those games, there was no measurement to find out whether any of the people who were involved continued to volunteer afterwards. As a result, we decided that, when someone registered to be a volunteer at the Commonwealth games, they would be asked for permission for their data to be shared post games with other volunteering bodies. Through Volunteer Development Scotland, those people will have opportunities to be volunteers not just at major events, but in clubs in their area.
The test will be whether people do more, not whether we get an uplift simply because we take more measurements and count more people.
The test will be what the approach delivers. The on-going work to expand and develop new clubs boils down to the fact that we want more people participating. That is the win; that is the success. As the Minister for Commonwealth Games and Sport, I will be happy if we see more people participating in sport and being active. Volunteers are a crucial part of that—without them and the volunteer coaches, none of that will be possible. If you are asking me what success will look like, I would say that it will be that more people participate regularly in sport and physical activity.
Wherever we have invested money, we have tried to understand the position prior to that investment. I hope that, even before the games begin, we have a story to tell about the capacity that we have built through the investment of resource and effort not only from agencies such as sportscotland and its partners, but from local people and communities, which will be needed if this is to be sustainable. In the athletics example that I gave, over a nine-month period and for a small amount of resource involving part-time positions in and around clubs, the growth by almost 600 in the number of coaches and volunteers in those athletics communities is phenomenal.
Mr Jack, is the baseline figure 195,000 active volunteers?
Yes.
The baseline is 13,000 clubs, but the intention is to increase those numbers.
Yes, I think that that is right.
Are we all agreed on that?
Thirteen thousand is a lot of clubs. It will depend on how the figure is counted. For example, I know of one community sport hub that has nearly 30 smaller clubs as part of its bigger entity, which makes it much more sustainable. It is all about capacity. Those figures reflect a moment in time. We will, I think, balance the bigger national figures with clear progress reports on individual sites, which will help to give a picture across the country.
You seemed to hesitate. We want to pinpoint the baseline figure. If we were to be presented with the figures now, would 4.5 per cent of the population be the baseline? Is the 195,000 figure the baseline? Is it 13,000 clubs? Are we looking for growth in all those areas?
Yes. I am not hesitating, convener. You are absolutely right. We need a baseline by which we can measure success and, as far as I am concerned, it would be the 195,000 figure.
We would include the wider family in the numbers of those who are not actively participating. The 195,000 figure relates to people who actively volunteer in sport.
Yes.
If we started to count the families, that would boost the number—we could probably do a paper exercise on that tomorrow.
As Stewart Harris and the minister have alluded to, the way to do it is to get more robust data on which we will build the baseline. At the moment, it is not there.
It would be interesting to see the baseline.
Yes.
When will those figures be available?
The legacy baseline information already exists. I remember Richard Simpson pursuing us heavily on that previously to ensure that we would have the baseline measurements. There are a number of them, and they cut across a number of areas. The best approach is probably for us to send that information to the committee.
That would be fine.
All that information is available on the website, but it would probably be helpful if we put it into a format for the committee and sent it on.
The 150 sport hubs were mentioned earlier. Does the rise in that number link to an increase in the number of local authority sports strategies? We heard in evidence that there were 14 of those, but does the fact that we have 150 sport hubs mean that we now have 32 sports strategies in place across Scotland, or do the two not link to each other?
The sports strategies should refer to the community sport hub developments. Each sports strategy in the 32 local authorities—I think that we are almost there with them, although perhaps one or two local authorities have not quite got there yet—
So there has been progress since it was reported to the committee that there were 14 strategies.
Yes. They will refer not just to community sport hubs, but to how the local authorities will use their asset bases and facilities, what new facilities they need and how they will better utilise what they have, as well as their ambitions for the community sport hubs in their area.
So they have made some progress. Some information on that would be useful.
Yes. Additional work has been done in Renfrewshire, Inverclyde and Shetland. We have been helping the authorities in a hands-on way to deliver their strategies.
Are the strategies all in progress or are they nailed down?
They are at different stages, but our ambition is to get them all nailed down.
Good. Thanks.
I am interested in what the minister says in her letter to the committee about working with the National Union of Students to try to involve more students in volunteering. Will you elaborate on that?
The NUS approached us with a desire to look at what it could do, having learned a few lessons from the Olympics, I suppose. There was a campaign to get students involved as volunteers and with things that were happening on campuses around the Olympics, and to get people more interested in participation in sport. We met the NUS and agreed that we should do some work with it that focuses on encouraging campuses to do things such as host events, get students more involved in sport and perhaps link with higher education institutes in other Commonwealth countries. The same applies to colleges; it is not just about universities.
It strikes me that that is probably a good thing for the future. Is there a possibility of student volunteers working with school pupils, too? If a culture of volunteering is embedded, I hope that the students will continue to volunteer after moving on from college or university to whatever they do afterwards.
That is a good point. Volunteering in schools already happens. In particular, students on sports courses are a huge resource for schools and local clubs. I think that more can be done. Stewart Harris will talk about Scottish Student Sport.
We have done quite a bit of work with Scottish Student Sport and we support it financially. We have good relationships with all the universities and most of the colleges—although that landscape is changing a little.
Yes, it is exciting.
We have not talked about the skills legacy of the games and the lessons that we can learn about how volunteers can use their experience as a pathway to training, learning and employment. In your letter to the committee, minister, you mentioned legacy 2014 Scotland’s best, which is an employability programme, as well as the games volunteer qualification. Will you say more about those initiatives?
I am happy to do so. We felt strongly that there was the potential to create opportunities for people who might not otherwise be touched by the Commonwealth games. A lot of young people have come forward to volunteer and I hope that many will be successful, but I know that the committee was interested in the young people who might not put themselves forward for whatever reason—they might lack confidence, or they might not see themselves in such a role.
How is the Scotland’s best employability programme being advertised?
It was launched by the First Minister a couple of weeks ago and I think that the contract has now been awarded. The successful bidder will work with our partners across the 32 local authorities to identify, through those partnerships, young people who will benefit from the programme. It will work with the agencies on the ground in those communities to identify young people for whom the programme would be a really good opportunity.
My questions are on workforce volunteering. The Scottish Government is encouraging its workforce to participate in volunteering, and local authorities are encouraging their workforces to do likewise. It looks as though the public sector is doing its best to engage in that. What steps is the Government taking to tap into the resource that the private sector has and encourage that sector to participate in volunteering?
That is important, although, in the current financial climate and given the current economic backdrop, it is a tough ask. It is a tough ask of the public sector as well, because it is not cost free and the absences of people who volunteer must be covered. However, volunteering is a really important thing to do. That is why we have introduced a commitment to five days’ paid leave for volunteering at the Commonwealth games, which is a way of showing leadership on the issue in the hope that others will follow suit.
The private sector responds to and is used to recognition. In business, recognition and awards schemes for the workforce are an everyday occurrence. They do not cost an arm and a leg; they tend to be very cheap. I wonder whether an awards scheme for volunteers across the sectors and across the organisations, as a tiny participating sport in itself, might have a place. Would you consider an award in the public sector or for volunteering in a particular sport as a way of encouraging businesses to participate?
Certainly, I am happy to consider that. We are looking at ways of highlighting and recognising more fully the work of volunteers in sport. We could look at your suggestion in that work, so I would be happy to take that forward.
Do members have any other questions? I have questions on the governance of the cashback for communities programme. Our report highlighted the lack of information on how such money is spent. In your response to our report, you identified that
As you will be aware, work on an evaluation plan is on-going. I understand—I checked the timeframe before coming here today—that the plan will be published shortly. I know that Kenny MacAskill confirmed that point in his letter to the committee. I understand that the evaluation plan should contain some of the information that you are looking for.
Given that £24 million of the cashback money goes into activities that come within your remit, is there capability in sportscotland or elsewhere to take an overall strategic view of where that money has gone and how many people have participated? There are all sorts of claims, such as the claim that 600,000 young people have benefited—I presume that that relates to the £50 million pot—or that, as I think you said, 100,000 young people have benefited from a sporting relationship. How do we know whether that is the case?
I can say that participation in cashback programmes is heavily monitored and recorded. That will form part of the evaluation information that is due out shortly.
When any cashback money comes to us for capital projects such as pitches, particularly 3G pitches, our needs analysis will tell us where the likely gaps are and where the pitches could go. The capacity of 3G pitches is way beyond that of grass pitches.
As we understand it, the ethos of cashback for communities is that its resources will reach kids in deprived communities. I do not know how that fits into the strategy of slicing up pots of money. The minister has given evidence previously in which she lauded football in schools for doing such a good job in involving young people in football to divert them from bad behaviour. However, we had a report subsequently that stated that that work was not reaching the young people that it should.
I understand your point. When I previously appeared before the committee, I mentioned the cashback strategic delivery group and specific work by Inspiring Scotland, to which Mr MacAskill referred in his letter to the committee. The Inspiring Scotland work is an on-going longitudinal study, on which there will be regular reports. The starting point will be the publication of the evaluation plan, then there will be subsequent reports.
I suppose that the problem is that £50 million has been allocated.
The retrospective work that Donnie Jack spoke about will look into that.
Why now, minister? Why were we not doing such work already?
Data was always gathered on who participated in cashback programmes. The evaluation is a much deeper look at what they have delivered, in order—not least, as Donnie Jack just said—to inform future investment decisions.
I am sure that the minister will appreciate people’s interest in the subject; I have no doubt that there is interest in her area. Where cashback money originates from is complicated, which has complications for the benefits of spending money in such a way. However, as an overall principle, the resource should be cash back and not cash diverted.
Donnie Jack was making that point. The strategic group is looking at the very issue of how we deploy cashback in a more strategic way and how that money sits with our other resources.
Will the evaluation give retrospective information on participation rates and the areas involved?
I understand that the evaluation will do that, but I will double check.
Thank you.
The point that was made about applications is important. We have a strategic approach, particularly to the use of capital, no matter where the money comes from. We have regular conversations with people in all 32 local authority areas—mainly through local authorities, but we also drop down to communities—about need and where the priorities should lie. That is not a free-for-all. Our approach is very strategic, and much more so than it was before. I am happy to talk to the committee or to produce a case study about what we do in any local authority area.
I thank the minister and her colleagues for being with us and for the evidence that has been provided.