The pandemic has had significant effects on the sustainability of community spaces. The mind pictures bucolic village halls that just tick along – they always have and they always will. But, what of urban spaces? What of those spaces that have resulted from the Community Asset Transfer process that has operated for the past decade? What of those that have moved away from grant funding as they have transitioned into earned income? And, what about the bucolic village hall?  

The report How Many Of Us Had Pandemic In Our Risk Register?, published by Community Matters in January  shows that the situation for charities and other community groups was made more confusing by “shifting and contradictory guidance” from the government about how public buildings could be used during national and regional lockdowns. The rule of six has caused particular issues with social distancing requirements causing problems for user groups who now have to have fewer people attending – thus affecting the economics of the entire operation.  

The report also warns that some of these charities were already running out of financial reserves by the time the second national lockdown ended late last year. A third lockdown was imposed this month (Jan 2021), which began after the data for the report was collected. This is going to make an already critical situation worse.  

The report was compiled by Community Matters who surveyed 20 groups in England and Wales.  These groups operate assets in their local communities, including sports halls, libraries and a former police station. The research showed that many charities chose to end some, but not all, of their activities 

The report states that, during the first lockdown, charities reached a number of different decisions on how to adapt their work, “from complete closure to full-scale provision of a service to people in need”.   

It was not all doom and gloom as the survey showed that “there were those who kept childcare provision open for key workers, those who took the opportunity of an empty building to get maintenance and work done on the property, from decorating to major renovation, and those who kept some services running remotely”. However, some respondents also commented that they had only managed to survive, financially, by raided reserves designated for ongoing repair and maintenance with improvements being kicked well into the long grass.  

Plans to reopen were disrupted when new government rules were introduced, often at short notice, the report found. It said: “Shifting and contradictory guidance has created problems for a number of organisations, especially those with no paid staff or where staff have been furloughed.  As plans have been made, so restrictions have changed again.”  

It also noted that respondents “were particularly concerned about the confusing information about what the restrictions were that they are supposed to abide by, and were trying to keep up with issues around the ‘rule of six’ but also exemptions that applied to educational activities and voluntary and community sector meetings and gatherings”.  

The research found that many charities had been “prudent” in using government schemes to maintain income during lockdowns. None had “never envisaged this situation being so long lasting. The data was collected as the second lockdown was in progress. There was some evidence of organisations reaching the near end of their financial reserves”. The situation has been made more acute for some community groups which have in recent years been “persuaded of the wisdom of generating their own income rather than relying on grant income”.  In one reported case the number of invoices issued, in a typical month, has changed from approximately 100 to none. Income from community hiring; service delivery; hot desking and workspace and a community café all stopped. Some income has returned but not in the volume required. In some cases the possibility of handing the asset back to the local authority, or transferring it to another community body. The report does question what a new business plan will look like in that situation.  

John Wilson, project manager at Community Matters, told Civil Society News: "As the country enters its third lockdown, there is tremendous strain on communities.  The potential issue for community spaces is that, having taken the government's advice to heart and set out to generate their own income rather than being reliant on grants, [they] have struggled as they have been forced to close or opened for reduced hours. In normal times community spaces and centres form the beating heart of their locality, and often provide the only opportunity for social interaction amongst some of the older and more vulnerable members of their community. As we seek to return to whatever passes as normal in the future, communities will need to come together. To make this happen communities will need places to gather, and the crisis in funding for community spaces means that many may not reopen." 

In the North West we have a huge range of community spaces. This report, at 38 pages, is lengthy but readable. It indicates some trends and data that may help funding applications. It provides reassurance, to trustees, that this is an unprecedented situation, and they must not berate themselves over forward planning. None of us expected this! It foretells a potential major crisis that will be in full flow as the year develops.  

Community spaces in well off areas may well be rescued by “the big house in the village”; a medium sized legacy or even a community appeal to rebuild operational reserves. If the government is serious about “levelling up” then it needs to address this issue as a matter of urgency. The fabric of community life is at threat.  

Following this report, Community Matters are asking for survey respondents to obtain more information about community spaces and Covid-19.