CWLEP Programme Delivery Board · 8/7/2018 · Pilot Environment Replication at Dyson Equipment to...

CWLEP Programme Delivery Board

7th August 2018, 09:30 – 11:30 Location: Room 220, Old Clink, Warwick

Agenda

1. Welcome, Introductions & Apologies Chair

2. WMG Degree Apprenticeship Centre Presentation Gareth Roberts

3. Declarations of Interest Chair

4. Minutes – 11th July 2018 Paper Chair

5. Growth Deal Programme Report Paper Lucy McGovern

6. Proposed Improvements to the Assurance Framework: Project Change Control, Escalation and Delegated Authority Process

Paper Lucy McGovern

7. Forward Planner 2018 Paper to note

8. Any other Business

Contact for Meeting: [email protected] Membership: Jonathan Browning (Chair), Nick Abell (Vice Chair), Zamurad Hussain Invited: Martin Yardley, Paula Deas, Roger Dowthwaite, Andy Williams, Barry Hastie, Lucy McGovern and Alicia Law Date of Next Meeting: A meeting will be called in September to Review Open Call Outcomes – Date tbc

Venue: CWLEP Offices

CWLEP Programme Delivery Board, 7th Agust 2018 1

This page is intentionally blank


WMG Degree Apprenticeship Centre (DAC)Gareth Roberts, WMG Programme & Relationship Manager

7 August 2018Agenda Item 2


Agenda

Feasibility StudyCentre ConstructionApprenticeships Future Vision


Feasibility Study

“The project will support the commissioning of design feasibility studies to develop the scope, scale, specification and location of a new build facility to increase capacity for higher level skills through degree apprentices and programmes for existing employees in high growth, high value manufacturing (HVM) businesses in the C&W LEP area”


Market Demand

Ongoing dialogue with the LEP team throughout the program due to moving landscape

Increased demand since Levy introductionHigh Barriers to Entry for Organisations Accessing Levy FundingContinual Evaluation of Degree Apprenticeship StandardsNew Blend of Engineering Skills Required


Technology Enhanced Learning

WMG TEL CommitteeIncreased Online LearningBlended Learning Problem Based LearningNovel Assessment Strategies Suited to Part-time Learner

AR/VR User Acceptance StudyCapability Study through Internships75 Participant


Pilot Environments

Desktop Equipment for Flexible SetupMechanical, Thermo, Fluid & Electronic3D Measuring & ScanningPortable Computer LabsUtilisation of Equipment Across WMGPilot Environment Replication at DysonEquipment to populate DAC Phase 1


Building Feasibility Study

Site EvaluationRIBA 0RIBA 1RIBA 2+Planning Application

Site Evaluation RIBA 0 RIBA 1

Planning ApplicationRIBA 2+


Centre Construction Update

Full Phase 1 Planning ApprovedOutline Phase 2 Planning ApprovedConstruction Contractor AppointedProgram on Time & on BudgetImpact Review of Additional FundingFirst Claim on TargetCWLEP Programme Delivery Board, 7th Agust 2018 10

DAC Phase 1CWLEP Programme Delivery Board, 7th Agust 2018 11

Centre Construction Update

Market Conditions Required VE Design ReviewPlanning Permission Granted 26 JUN 2018KIER Appointed as Construction Contractor on 29 JUN 2018Phase 1 - Site Setup 28 AUG 2018Phase 1 - Construction Completion 21 AUG 2019


Developing the Future

Continue to Develop and Deliver Level 6 & 7 Degree ApprenticeshipsFocussed Support for the Industrial strategy, Regional and National Skills GapsContinually Develop WMG’s DA Portfolio:

Management & Supply ChainEngineering (Inc. Energy Storage)Digital TechnologiesHealth & Wellbeing

Maintain Russell Group University Quality whilst Supporting Social MobilityContinue to Develop Strong Industry Links that Transfer Cross Sector KnowledgeContinue Engagement with IFA & Trailblazer Groups to Reduce Degree Apprenticeship Barriers to Entry for Employers


ENGINEERINGBEng Applied EngineeringBEng Engineering (Dyson)MSc Postgraduate EngineerMSc Systems Engineer

DIGITALTECHNOLOGIESBEng Cyber Security EngineeringBSc Digital Technology Solutions

MANAGEMENT & SUPPLY CHAINMSc Managing in Technology Based IndustriesMSc Healthcare & Operations Management

HEALTH & WELLBEINGBSc Health, Wellbeing, Science & Technology

1 2

34






1 2

34


DAC Phase 2

Precedent Images*


Thank you



7th August 2018

Agenda Item 4

Title: Meeting Notes for 11th July 2018

Present

Jonathan Browning (JB), Nick Abell (NA), Zamurad Hussain (ZH), Martin Yardley (MY)

In attendance:

Alicia Law (AL), Ollie Hindle (OH), Andy Williams (AW), Lucy McGovern (LM), Tony Buttery (TB), Nicola Small (NS), Paula Deas (PD)

Apologies: Barry Hastie (BH), Roger Dowthwaite (RD)

# Note Action

1 Welcome, Introductions & Apologies

2 Declarations of Interest

None declared

3 Notes of Meeting 9 May 2018

The notes were approved

4 VLR Presentation

Nicola Small gave the PDB a presentation of the details of the project and the project progress to date.

NS advised that the vehicle will be modular, so the planned driver position will be able to be removed once autonomous technology is implemented.

It was confirmed that the vehicle will be compatible with Birmingham Metro track.

The board thanked NS for the presentation and are enthusiastic about the future of the project.

5 VLR

CCC to provide further details on VLR project, specifically on the delivery of the production vehicles, for the next Programme Delivery Board meeting (7 Aug 2018), and a full update for the meeting in November 2018.

The following information was requested:

(i) The scope of the project phases (development, prototyping, manufacture) (ii) Plans for moving from a prototype to a low volume production vehicle (iii) How and when a manufacturer will be secured

LM/AW


Agenda Item 4| Meeting Notes for 11th July 2018

# Note Action

(iv) What funding is required for the manufacture of the vehicles, and how much is currently secured.

(v) Clarification of who the operating company will be, how they will be selected and when will they be engaged in the project

PDB asked the project to engage with external project management, potentially from local business or OEMs with experience of bringing prototype vehicles to production, to offer advice and expertise to the project.

PDB approved the revised 2018/19 profile for the Very Light Rail project as set out in Table 3.3, subject to the recommendations above being met.

6 A45 Corridor Project

PDB approved the revised 2018/19 profile for the A45 Corridor project as set out in Table 3.1.

PDB requested that the Programme Management Team works with the project to secure an accelerated funding profile where possible. LEP to issue letter to project if Quarter 1 forecast is not achieved.

LM

7 Coton Arches

PDB approved the revised 2018/19 profile for the Coton Arches project as set out in Table 3.2.

PDB requested the CEO to discuss the project with the WCC Joint Managing Director. LEP to issue letter to project if the Q1 forecast is not achieved.

MY/LM

8 A46 Stanks Project

PDB approved the quarterly re-profile 2018/19 outlined in Table 3.4 and the slippage request of £1.08m from 2018/19 to 2019/20 outlined in Table 3.4.1 for the A46 Stanks Project.

PDB requested a letter to be sent to the project to confirm that the milestones provided in the letter from WCC Head of Economy & Transport, Mark Ryder dated 10th July 2018, will be used as checkpoints to release funding. The Board also requested confirmation that WCC is still committed to the second phase of the project being delivered.

PDB requested that WCC Head of Economy & Transport attends the November Programme Delivery Board to report on the project’s progress.

LM/AW

AW

9 North South Rail

PDB approved the quarterly re-profile for North South Rail 2018/19 outlined in Table 3.5.

PDB requested a full review to be completed of the North South Rail project’s financial budget and forecasts. The project needs to re-apply for the slippage of £694,647 with assurance there will be no further slippages in spend within 2018/19 and into 2019/20.

LM

10 CSW Broadband

PDB approved the revised 2018/19 profile for the CSW Broadband project as set out in Table 3.6.



# Note Action

11 Friargate City Centre

PDB approved the revised 2018/19 profile for the Friargate City Centre Connectivity project as set out in Table 3.7.

12 Cathedral Lanes 2

PDB approved the revised 2018/19 profile for the Cathedral Lanes 2 project as set out in Table 3.8.

PDB requested feedback to be provided to the project, regarding the decision to agree the new lease with the tenants which allowed for the delayed works before requesting the re-profiling from the CWLEP board.

LM

13 Public Realm 4

PDB approved the revised 2018/19 profile for the Public Realm 4 project as set out in Table 3.9

14 Nuneaton Flood Plain

PDB approved the revised 2018/19 profile for the Nuneaton Flood Plain project as set out in Table 3.10

15 Europa Way Corridor

PDB accepted the output position provided by the Europa Way Corridor Project, and agreed to finalise the contracting with the project.

16 Scheme of Delegation for Projects

PDB requested that delegated authority is provided to the Programme Management Team to agree smaller quarterly re-profile requests. Programme Management Team to suggest a suitable level, to be agreed by the Finance and Governance Board and updated in the Assurance Framework.

LM/AW (On Agenda item 7)

17 GD Publicity CWLEP Board

PDB requested a Publicity update is provided to the CWLEP Board at the next meeting on 23 July 2018

LM/PD

Advent

18 Open Call Round 4, Summer 2018

PDB requested the Programme Management Team to work with Alicia Law to enquire about any emerging funding, or funding that has be deallocated by the National Growth Deal programme, that maybe allocated to other LEPs that are successfully delivering and have project pipelines.

In addition, if any details of more niche funding could be confirmed, to provide targeted support to projects that are unsuccessful in securing funding from the Open Call.

PDB requested the Call process period is brought forward because of the urgency to allocate funding and see projects delivering. A Programme Delivery Board to be held in early October to discuss the recommendations, and for these agreed recommendations to be provided to the CWLEP Board meeting on 15th October 2018.

PDB requested that an additional gateway criteria is added to the Open call: ‘asking applicants to confirm with any external delivery partners their

LM/AL

LM

LM



# Note Action

commitment to deliver to time and budget and detailing of associated risks and how they would be managed’.

19 Growth Deal Forward Planner

The Board reviewed the forward planner and noted the upcoming events.

20 AOB

The board noted the appointment of Emma Squire as the new Senior Civil Servant CWLEP Sponsor.


CWLEP Programme Delivery Board 7th August 2018 Agenda Item 5 Title: Growth Deal Programme Report 1 Purpose of Paper

1.1 The purpose of this paper is to report on key issues affecting the Growth Deal Programme including three recommendations for any remedial action to ensure it delivers on time and budget. The paper details the confirmed position for Quarter 1, from the return of project claims on the 13th July 2018.

2 Summary

2.1 Table 2.1 gives an overview of the projects. Out of the 37 Growth Deal 94% of projects (35) are rated GREEN or AMBER/GREEN, 1 project is rated AMBER, 1 project is rated AMBER/RED and 0 RED.

Table 2.1 – Projects Rated Amber or Red

Project Risk Rating Risk Category Rugby Construction Technology and Innovation Centre AMBER/RED Financial & Deliverability

North South Rail and Station Access AMBER Financial & Deliverability VLR AMBER/GREEN Deliverability ULS Cathedral Lanes 2 AMBER/GREEN Deliverability

2.2 Summary position for the above projects for consideration at Programme Delivery Board:

Rugby Construction Technology and Innovation Centre – Higher than anticipated

construction tenders have caused a shortfall in project funding. North South Rail and Station Access – Project update following July PDB Very Light Rail – Project update following July PDB Unlocking Sites (Cathedral Lanes) – Project update following July PDB

3 Projects in Delivery

3.1 Rugby Construction Technology and Innovation Centre AMBER/RED

3.1.1 The project had reported a £71k slippage in the claim against their forecasted spend position of £151k in Q1. This slippage is a direct result of two events: extension of the tender period to eight weeks to encourage all three of the original six companies to submit tenders, and late receipt of invoices which were sent to the wrong address.

3.1.2 Since the submission of their Q1 claim the project has received tenders for the construction of the centre. From six initial expressions of interest, only two full tenders were received by the extended deadline. Both are significantly higher than the QS predictions, so value engineering work is underway.


Agenda Item 5| Growth Deal Programme Report

3.1.3 Following the return of tenders on the 20th July and confirmation of delays the project submitted an amended claim on the 31st July requesting additional slippage of £177k into the 19/20 financial year.

Table 3.1.3 – Rugby Construction Technology and Innovation Quarterly re-profile Request

18/19 Quarter 1

£

18/19 Quarter 2

£

18/19 Quarter 3

£

18/19 Quarter 4

£

18/19 Total

£

19/20 Total

£ Forecast Q4 17/18 151,000 318,000 557,000 391,112 1,417,112 -

Forecast for Q1 Now 79,830 48,934 528,211 582,529 1,239,504 177,608

Variance -71,170 -269,066 -28,789 +191,417 -177,608 +177,608

3.1.4 The project has submitted a draft report to the Growth Deal Programme Management team (GDPT) containing the details of their recent meeting with the construction company. The key findings of the report are summarised below:

With the new tender, the total project cost will be £4,104,406. This has increased the total project cost by £1.2m.

The Project Team believe that a realistic project saving target of £200k is achievable. With the project savings, there will still be an estimated funding shortfall of £1million. Initial implications are that the project is delaying the start of construction by 8 weeks to

September 2018, resulting in the construction ending in September 2019.

3.1.5 Based on this information the project is now deemed to be at risk. The project team are due to meet their contractor on 2nd August 2018 and will provide a full update by the 3rd August for presentation at 7th August PDB. The GDPT will provide a verbal update at the meeting.

3.1.6 Recommendation: The Programme Delivery Board are recommended to discuss options for the project following the meeting with the contractor on 2nd August 2018.

3.2 North South Rail and Station Access AMBER/RED

3.2.1 The project has submitted information in response to the actions from July’s PDB with a full update to be presented to Programme Delivery Board in November. The project will continue to be monthly monitored against key milestones and spend targets.

3.3 Very Light Rail AMBER/GREEN

3.3.1 The project has submitted a draft response to the questions raised at July’s PDB. A verbal update will be provided at this meeting.



3.4 Unlocking Sites Cathedral Lanes 2 AMBER/GREEN

3.4.1 The Programme Management Team has received a letter from the project on the 25th July in response to the feedback provided from the last PDB in July. Please refer to Appendix 1.

3.4.2 The project has also supplied a full update of progress against the works and will continue to be monitored on a monthly basis.

4 Projects in Contracting

4.1 Appendix 2 provides an update on the Growth Deal 3 projects, of note is the sign off against the WMG contract which has progressed from its holding position with its bank.

5 Growth Deal Programme Finances and Outputs

5.1 Finances

5.1.1 The complete financial picture across the Growth Deal Programme is detailed in Appendix 3. The financial profile detailed outlines the project’s actual Q1 spend position against the estimates provided at the previous PDB on the 11th July. Projects have progressed well against their Q1 forecasts achieving 97% of the estimated spend. £1.55m against a forecasted position of £1.60m.

5.2 Outputs

5.3 Overall the programme is performing well against targets. The latest position is detailed in table 5.3.

Table 5.3 – Programme Outputs Table

Output Achieved to Date

Achieved this Quarter

Target 18/19

20/21 Programme

Total

Funder Target

Houses Completed - - 1,533 4,112 3,400

Jobs + Apprenticeships (a) 1,654 20 726 4,682 -

Indirect Jobs (b) 56 - 11 5,838 -

Jobs Total (a+b) 1,710 20 737 10,520 7,500

New Skill Space (m2) 4,033 - - 7,537 -

Commercial Space (m2) 4,629 - - 13,383 -

5.4 The Programme is currently forecasting an over achievement of ‘Houses Completed’ by March 2021. The first ‘Houses Completed’ will be reported in the next quarter.



5.5 The ‘Jobs and Apprenticeship’ figures are on track against contracted values. Further jobs will be created after the close of the Growth Deal Programme.

5.6 A review of the ‘New Learner’ and ‘Transport’ outputs is nearing completion and any unreported outputs will be included in the next quarter.

5.7 The latest Q1 data return is detailed in the dashboard in Appendix 4. Programme Delivery Board are asked to approve this on behalf of the CWLEP.

6 Growth Deal Evaluation

6.1 Carney Green is progressing well with stakeholder and project interviews for the 2017/18 Growth Deal Evaluation. The draft interim emerging findings report is listed in Appendix 5. This work will feed into the Annual Conversation with BEIS scheduled for December 2018.

6.2 Initial feedback indicates that:

The CWLEP has responded robustly to the findings of the Mary Ney Review and the associated best practice guidance issued by government, as well as to recommendations provided within its previous Growth Deal evaluations.

There is significant rigour and discipline within the governance and management of the Growth Deal programme. This was commented upon by members of the overall CWLEP Board.

To date, the Programme Management Team has performed its function effectively and is well regarded by senior LEP representatives and individual project representatives.

The Programme Management Team has undertaken considerable work with individual projects to confirm the definition and collection of outputs, as well as identifying wider outcome data and narrative regarding impacts.

It is evident that some projects are more able and responsive than others to test and evidence wider outcomes (i.e. beyond core outputs).

There is effective communication between the CWLEP, Programme Delivery Board, Programme Management Team and Project stakeholders, though it is recognised that the current resourcing of the Programme Management Team presents a risk to the continued high quality of its delivery.

There remain some gaps within business groups, an example being within the membership of the Culture and Tourism Group. This highlights the challenge of ensuring relatively limited private sector resource is used most effectively by the LEP.

Importantly, the CWLEP has ensured significant involvement within the WMCA at a range of levels.

Wherever possible, the CWLEP would benefit from increasingly promoting the achievements of its Growth Deal projects. This relates to a specific ‘elevator pitch’ regarding quantitative outputs, any identified outcomes and impacts, and a wider qualitative narrative. This will be supported by the annual evaluation process.



6.3 Resourcing the Programme Management Team is now emerging as a key issue in effectively managing the Growth Deal Programme. This also reflects the comments of the PDB at its meeting on the 9th May 2018 where the level of programme management resourcing was originally flagged as a concern given the increasing size of the programme. It is therefore proposed to bring a Programme Management resourcing paper to the next PDB meeting for discussion.

7 Recommendations

The Programme Delivery Board is asked to:

7.1 Approve the recommendation in 3.1.6 and noting the progress and delivery of the Growth Deal Programme.

7.2 Approve the Quarter 1 Local Growth Fund Data Report Dashboard in Appendix 4.

7.3 Receive a proposal for resourcing the Growth Deal Programme until 31 March 2021.


Agenda Item 5. | Growth Deal Programme Report

Appendix 1 Letter from CCC regarding Cathedral Lanes 2

Coventry City Council One Friargate

Floor 10 Coventry CV1 2GN

Lucy McGovern Coventry City Council One Friargate Floor 11 Coventry CV1 2GN 25th July 2018 Dear Lucy, Local Growth Fund 2018/19 - GD18 ULS03 Cathedral Lanes 2

Thank you for taking time to discuss the items of concern raised by the board members on the Cathedral Lanes project, in particular the acceptance of the lease agreements.

I understand the issues raised by the board and the potential implications this could have on the funding and delivery of the project. It was never the intention to undermine these principles and I apologise for any inconvenience caused.

With regards to the project, the construction side has been moving along in line with the general methodology and principles of project management for a construction project. The leasehold agreements had been worked on it the background between the developer and future tenants of the buildings, using the proposed public realm enhancements as a method to attract high end tenants. Unfortunately, the urgency of signing up the proposed tenants meant that the lease agreement was ultimately agreed outside of the scope of our proposed works.

Ultimately this has led to a delay in the delivery of the terrace works however it has ensured that abortive works have been minimal and material specifications will be adjusted to suit the new arrangements.

From a lessons learnt perspective we understand that discussions between parties need to take place and any information should be provided to the development managers in order to determine the need to update the board members. All team members have been briefed accordingly.

I trust this provides the necessary assurances that we understand the issues and will work to resolve these on future projects.

Yours sincerely

Ian Lewis Senior Programme Manager Transport and Infrastructure



Appendix 2 – Growth Deal 3 Project Update

GD Ref.

Name £M Total

£M Grant

Start Complete Status

GD31 CSW Broadband Installation of Superfast Broadband infrastructure through Coventry & Warwickshire to 1,400 businesses & 13,000 homes.

15.0 1.0 Apr 18 Oct 20 Contract signed in delivery

GD32 Warwick Arts Centre 2020. Extension to create 3 new digital auditoria, exhibition space and visitor facilities 17.1 2.0 Apr 18 Sep 20 Final version of the contract agreed out for signature.

GD33 Rugby CTIC (Construction Technology & Innovation Centre). New building for higher level technical & professional skills training

2.9 1.5 Jun 18 Sep 19 Tenders are over estimate, project delivery at risk, full update as above.

GD34 Friargate & City Centre Connectivity Infrastructure work to unlock access & investment to the city centre

22.21 11.8 Jan 18 Mar 20 Final delivery plan and signed allocation letter received. Project now in delivery.

GD35 Rugby Parkway Station New railway station at Houlton, new development area east of Rugby, on Rugby/Northampton line

14.9 4.0 N/A N/A Funding returned.

GD36 A452 Europa Way Highway and transport improvements between M40 J14 & Princess Drive, Leamington Spa to enable housing & employment development

3.6 Jun 18 Mar 21 Final output detail received from the project and approved by the CWLEP PDB on the 11th July 2018.

GD37 Nuneaton Town Centre Transformation – Development of the Eastern Quarter, infrastructure improvements, unlocking development land & public realm

22.5 7.5 Apr 18 Mar 20 Further meeting to discuss phase 2 being arranged.

GD38 AME Expansion – Expansion of Coventry University / Unipart co-operation and connection with advanced manufacturing & engineering supply chain by teaching, skills development, R&D and Innovation

5.0 1.0 May 18 Dec 18 Signed State Aid received. Contract out for signature.

GD39 WMG Degree Apprenticeship Centre. New training centre for Higher and Degree Apprentices specialising in engineering and health.

12.81 10.0 Mar 18 Mar 19 Contract agreed and signed by WMG bank signed copy return expected imminently. Planning permission granted.



Appendix 3 – Growth Deal Finances

18/19

GD Ref 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Q1 Estimate Q1 Actual Q1 Variance Q2 forecast Q3 forecast Q4 forecast 18/19

GD05 Coventry A45 Corridor CCC 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.150 0.148 -0.002 0.150 0.200 0.452 0.950 0.950 - 1 2 1 AG 0.000 0.000 0.950

GD06 R&D Steel WMG 0.000 0.150 0.484 0.000 0.036 +0.036 0.159 0.057 0.113 0.366 0.366 - 1 1 1 G 0.000 0.000 1.000

GD08 Duplex Fund CCC 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 - 0.000 0.100 0.160 0.260 0.260 - 2 2 1 AG 0.480 0.560 1.300

GD11 Coton Arches WCC 0.000 0.146 0.148 0.437 0.447 +0.010 0.629 0.629 0.000 1.705 1.705 - 1 2 1 AG 0.000 0.000 2.000

GD12 Very Light Rail CCC 0.000 0.036 0.813 0.088 0.074 -0.014 0.757 0.769 0.012 1.611 1.611 - 2 2 2 AG 0.000 0.000 2.460

GD14 A46 N-S Corridor (Stanks) WCC 0.000 0.326 0.234 0.070 0.070 +0.000 0.020 0.420 1.530 2.040 2.040 - 2 2 1 AG 1.500 0.000 4.100

GD18 Unlocking Development Sites 0.208 1.449 2.841 0.041 0.052 +0.011 0.076 0.140 0.224 0.492 0.492 - 2 2 1 AG 0.000 0.000 4.990

GD19North South Rail & Coventry Station / Cov Station Access

CCC 4.900 2.965 3.226 0.331 0.311 -0.020 3.672 4.181 7.560 15.724 16.419 -0.695 3 4 2 A 0.695 0.000 27.510

GD25 GD PMT CCC 0.000 0.018 0.080 0.027 0.027 - 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.108 0.108 - 1 1 1 G 0.111 0.012 0.329

GD31 CSW Broadband WCC 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 - 0.000 0.064 0.144 0.209 0.209 - 2 1 1 AG 0.791 0.000 1.000

GD32 Warwick Arts Centre 20:20 WU 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 - 0.000 0.119 0.735 0.854 0.854 - 2 2 1 AG 1.146 0.000 2.000

GD33Rugby Construction Technology and Innovation Centre

WCC 0.000 0.000 0.083 0.151 0.080 -0.071 0.318 0.557 0.462 1.417 1.417 - 4 4 2 AR 0.000 0.000 1.500

GD34Friargate and City Centre Connectivity

CCC 0.000 0.000 0.349 0.085 0.083 -0.002 0.114 0.488 0.517 1.201 1.200 +0.001 2 1 1 AG 6.633 3.617 11.800

GD36 A452 Europa Way Corridor WCC 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 - 0.100 0.075 0.125 0.300 0.300 - 1 1 1 G 0.500 2.800 3.600

GD37Nuneaton Town Centre Transformation

WCC 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 - 0.000 0.325 0.175 0.500 0.500 - 2 2 2 AG 3.700 3.300 7.500

GD38 AME Expansion CU 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 - 0.662 0.204 0.134 1.000 1.000 - 1 2 1 AG 0.000 0.000 1.000

GD39WMG Degree Apprenticeship Centre

WMG 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.220 0.221 +0.001 0.999 3.000 2.000 6.220 6.220 - 2 2 1 AG 3.780 0.000 10.000

GD40 Commonwealth Games 0.000 0.000 - 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 - N/A 0.000 1.200 1.200

GD41Unallocated & Deallocated Funds

0.000 0.000 - 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 - N/A 0.000 6.020 6.020

SUB - TOTAL 17.270 11.824 10.547 1.600 1.550 -0.050 7.682 11.356 14.370 34.958 35.652 -0.693 19.336 17.509 111.445

Technical Capital Management -0.09 11.682 12.576 -20.100 -20.793 -11.121 7.053 0.000

GRAND TOTAL 17.180 23.507 23.123 14.859 14.859 8.215 24.561 111.445

Project Total

19/20 20/21Fin

ances

Reputatio

n18/19 Budget

Variance

Deliverables

RAG Rating

Project Name Lead Deliverer



Appendix 4 – LGF Data Report Dashboard

LEP Name Coventry and Warwickshire LEP Growth Deal Performance

This Quarter: Q1_1819 AG

2015-16 2016-17 17-18 18-19 19-20 20-21 Total17-18 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 £17,180,000 £23,506,663 £23,122,974 £14,858,866 £8,214,575 £24,561,463 £111,444,541

Houses Completed 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - 0Forecast for year 1,533 0 0 1,533 738 1,841 4,112Progress towards forecast 0% - - 0% 0% 0% - - 0% LGF Outturn 17-18 18-19 19-20 20-21

Actual 1,550,188£ 29,094,253£ 10,600,770£ 1,550,188£ -£ -£ 41,245,211£ Jobs Forecast for year 34,780,781£ 29,094,253£ 10,547,469£ 34,780,781£ 19,513,603£ 17,508,434£ 111,444,541£ Jobs Created 3 64 179 3 0 0 - - 246 Progress towards forecast 4% 101% 4% 0% 0% 37%Apprenticeships Created* 17 1,025 386 17 0 0 - - 1,428Jobs including Apprenticeships 20 1,089 565 20 0 0 1,674 LGF ExpenditureForecast for year 726 1,091 457 726 1,068 1,340 4,682 Actual 1,550,188£ 29,094,253£ 10,600,770£ 1,550,188£ -£ -£ 41,245,211£ Progress towards forecast 3% 100% 124% 3% 0% 0% - - 36% Forecast for year 34,780,781£ 29,094,253£ 10,547,469£ 34,780,781£ 19,513,603£ 17,508,434£ 111,444,541£ * Apprenticeships included within jobs totals prior to 2017 Progress towards forecast 4% 101% 4% 0% 0% 37%

Skills Non-LGF ExpenditureArea of new or improved floorspace (m2) 0 2,745 1,288 0 0 0 - - 4,033 Actual 6,709,030£ 5,123,106£ 6,912,280£ 6,709,030£ -£ -£ 18,744,416£ Forecast for year 0 2,745 1,288 0 3,500 4 7,537 Forecast for year 14,530,186£ 5,123,106£ 6,709,030£ 14,530,186£ 85,520,812£ 52,547,366£ 164,430,500£ Progress towards forecast - 100% 100% - 0% 0% - - 54% Progress towards forecast 46% 103% 46% 0% 0% 11%

Number of New Learners Assisted 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - 0 Total LGF + non-LGF ExpenditureForecast for year 0 0 0 0 330 280 610 Actual 8,259,218£ 34,217,360£ 17,513,049£ 8,259,218£ -£ -£ 59,989,627£ Progress towards forecast - - - - 0% 0% - - 0% Forecast for year 49,310,967£ 34,217,360£ 17,256,499£ 49,310,967£ 105,034,415£ 70,055,800£ 275,875,041£

Progress towards forecast 17% +101% +17% +0% +0% 22%TransportLength of Road Resurfaced 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - 0.0Length of Newly Built Road 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - 0.0Length New Cycle Ways 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - 0.0

Contractual Commitments (manual entry)Previous Quarter This Quarter Previous Quarter This Quarter 15-17 17-18 18-19 19-20 20-21 Total

Project Name Q4_1718 Q1_1819 Project Name Q4_1718 Q1_1819 Forecast 61,322,958£ 17,805,829£ 32,315,754£ 111,444,541£ Actual 61,322,958£ 17,805,829£ 79,128,787£

GD01 Advice Centre G G GD40 Commonwealth Games N/A N/A Variance +0% +0% -100% - - -29%GD04 Venture House G G GD41 Unallocated & Deallocated Funds N/A N/AGD05 Coventry A45 Corridor AG AG - - -GD06 R&D Steel G G - - - CommentaryGD08 Duplex AG AG - - -GD09 Trident Centre G G - - -GD10 A5 Corridor Project R R - - -GD11 Coton Arches AG AG - - -GD12 Very Light Rail AG AG - - -GD13 Dynamic Routing AG AG - - -GD14 A46 N-S Corridor (Stanks) AR AG - - -GD15 Kenilworth Station AG AG - - -GD16 Coventry City Centre Access G G - - -GD17 National Transport Design Centre G G - - -GD18 Unlocking Development Sites AG AG - - -GD19 North South Rail & Coventry Station / Cov Station AccessG A - - -GD21 Construction Centre Expansion AG AG - - -GD22 Warks College STEM AG AG - - -GD23 City College STEM Phase 1 AG AG - - -GD24 WMG Academy Pre-Dev AG AG - - -GD25 PMT G G - - -GD31 CSW Broadband AG AG - - -GD32 Warwick Arts Centre 20:20 AG AG - - - Section 151 Officer ApprovedGD33 Rugby HE Construction and Technology Centre G AR - - - NameGD34 Friargate and City Centre Connectivity AG AG - - -GD35 Rugby Parkway Station R R - - - SignatureGD36 A452 Europa Way Corridor A G - - -GD37 Nuneaton Town Centre Transformation AG AG - - -GD38 AME Expansion AG AG - - - DateGD39 WMG Degree Apprenticeship Centre AG AG - - -

Project RAG Ratings

Finances

Two projects have fallen out, and an open call was launched to re-allocate the funds. The call will close at the end of August, the projects to be appraised, selected and contracted before 31 March 2019

A recent exercise to update how the programme outputs are collated has been undertaken, with the first updates included in this return.

Total15-17 Financial YearThis Quarter

Area lead comments

Deliverables Progress Financial Progress

LGF Allocation15-17Financial Year

TotalHousing This Quarter



Appendix 5 – Emerging Interim/Draft Evaluation Headlines for Programme Delivery Board

Evaluation of the Coventry and Warwickshire Growth Deal 2017/18

Key Draft Emerging Headlines for Programme Delivery Board

This paper summarises emerging headlines from the evaluation of the Coventry and Warwickshire Growth Deal 2017/18. It is based on initial consultation activity and a review of programme documentation, and has been developed specifically for the Programme Delivery Board meeting on 7 August 2018. It is important to note the evaluation is at a relatively early stage, with considerable consultation and data review scheduled to take place between August and October 2018; for example, meetings with a BEIS representative, the Chief Executive of the CWLEP, the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) and several Growth Deal project representatives. A full final report will be submitted in November 2018; this will include supporting documentation for the 2018 Annual Conversation. Governance The CWLEP has responded robustly to the findings of the Mary Nay Review1 and the associated best practice

guidance issued by government,2 as well as to recommendations provided within its previous Growth Deal evaluations. This has seen a further strengthening of its already robust governance and decision making processes, and has provided additional transparency. Examples include: - Publishing (on the CWLEP website) minutes, agenda items and associated papers for the CWLEP Board,

Finance and Governance Board and Programme Delivery Board (a clear timescale is also provided here) - The option of submitting confidential complaints via the Complaints Procedure (on the CWLEP website) - Provision of a Whistleblowing Policy (on the CWLEP website) - An updated Code of Conduct in line with the Government’s LEP Best Practice Guidance (on the CWLEP

website) - An updated Register of Interests in line with the Government’s LEP Best Practice Guidance (on the CWLEP

website) - Provision of an Equality and Diversity Statement

The CWLEP has further enhanced its transparency and robustness through the following means:

- The appointment of an additional private sector CWLEP board member to the Programme Delivery Board; providing further direct relationships with the CWLEP Board, additional challenge and enhanced capacity

- Attendance of the Accountable Body’s Section 151 Officer at the Programme Delivery Board; ensuring further coordination between the LEP and the Accountable Body and supporting quality assurance

- Regular attendance by the Assistant Director from the Cities and Local Growth Unit at the Programme Delivery Board; supporting alignment with government policy and process

- Terms of reference made available on the CWLEP website for the CWLEP Board, Finance and Governance Board and Programme Delivery Board

There is significant rigour and discipline within the governance and management of the Growth Deal

programme. This was commented upon by members of the overall CWLEP Board. The Board is provided with details of any challenges faced by the programme and its projects in a timely manner; this helps to ensure a culture of honesty and openness. Where issues are raised by the Board they are followed up by the CWLEP Executive and Programme Management Team and subsequently reported back. The Board is furnished with effective levels of information regarding progress.

1 Department for Communities and Local Government (October 2017) Review of Local Enterprise Partnership Governance and Transparency 2 HM Government (January 2018) Local Enterprise Partnership governance and transparency: Best practice guide



Programme management As noted in previous evaluations, a strength of the Coventry and Warwickshire Growth Deal programme is the

effective communication between the Programme Delivery Board, CWLEP Executive and the Programme Management Team. This incorporates a relatively small number of committed individuals. It is evident that the management and delivery of the Growth Deal programme faces significant challenge from the Programme Delivery Board; this is designed to ensure high standards and effective delivery of the programme. It places significant emphasis upon an effective Programme Management Team, which reports ‘up’ to the Programme Delivery Board and communicates ‘down’ to individual projects. Project-level liaison includes a wide range of activities and functions related to: contracting; stakeholder management; expenditure; delivery; output monitoring etc.

To date, the Programme Management Team has performed its function effectively and is well regarded by senior LEP representatives and individual project representatives. Feedback indicates the team is helpful and supportive of projects whilst also ensuring the level of robustness required by the Programme Delivery Board. However, given that the Coventry and Warwickshire Growth Deal will be at the ‘peak’ of its delivery period during 2018/19 (regarding project volume and expenditure) the team’s current level of resource is relatively minimal for what is a ‘high risk’ year. Whilst it is recognised that the team accesses wider resources where available, its current resourcing may pose a risk to the continued high quality of its delivery. This is particularly relevant given the increased focus upon output definitions and monitoring as projects progress.

The Programme Management Team also relies on external (to its own team) resource where available in

relation to specific areas of expertise; for example, national transport strategy/policy, state aid, skills policy, culture and tourism etc. It would therefore benefit from more defined access to such expertise; this highlights a balance faced by LEPs whereby they seek to retain their agility whilst also ensuring they can access sufficient specialist knowledge. It may be possible to facilitate some of this via the CWLEP’s Business Groups, although it is recognised that leading individuals within these groups have limited time availability.

Project progression Overall, project progress has been positive, with most projects delivering to schedule or with minimal delays;

this should lead to significant impacts. Several projects are also complete. This not only highlights the effective management of project activity, but also relates to an increasing recognition by stakeholder organisations that: - The LEP represents a (and sometimes ‘the’) key funder for individual interventions - The LEP requires efficient delivery of projects; as noted previously, there is some evidence of behavioural

and cultural change whereby project delivery organisations are increasingly recognising the robust requirements demanded by the private sector-led Programme Delivery Board as ‘business as usual’; there is also evidence of greater realism regarding the ability to meet expenditure requirements

- To access future funding, it is important to be part of the CWLEP’s project pipeline

Despite this progression, and a general increasing awareness of the LEP’s role, feedback has indicated that funded projects would welcome greater understanding of the overall Growth Deal programme. Although this is now possible via publicly available Board papers, project representatives suggested a simple list of projects funded, for example showing funding amounts/sources, timescales, output targets and progress towards targets. There are several examples of this produced by other LEPs. Such a resource would promote a greater understanding of the wider package of support within which individual projects sit; it could be provided to project delivery organisations at contracting stage.



A relatively small number of Growth Deal projects have experienced a series of delays to delivery and expenditure. This represents a concern for the programme as it moves closer to its end date. The CWLEP and the Programme Management Team have worked extensively to resolve issues, which have primarily been linked to external factors/stakeholders. This has highlighted, in some cases, the difficulties faced regarding stakeholder management whereby individual project managers are not best placed to provide robust responses regarding project issues. Therefore, it may be worth considering individual organisations that have multiple projects providing a more strategic representative for overall liaison with the LEP (regarding these projects). This is particularly relevant for large infrastructure projects which, whilst ambitious and potentially impactful, carry a greater risk of external influences.

Building on the previous point, given its significant number of infrastructure projects and strategic importance

to the Growth Deal, further consideration could be given to a representative of Warwickshire County Council attending the Programme Delivery Board.3 It is recognised that there are currently no attendees of the Programme Delivery Board which specifically represent project organisations (i.e. Coventry City Council employees attend as representatives of the Accountable Body), but from a pragmatic perspective this may be helpful given the significant expenditure and delivery outstanding.

Aligned to the above issues regarding project delays, the programme responded decisively and robustly

regarding delays which could not be addressed within the current programme. This specifically relates to the process whereby Growth Deal funding was withdrawn for the A5 Corridor and Rugby Parkway Station projects.

The programme responded to identified underspend by undertaking an open call for additional projects, with

a clear timeline and process outlined on the CWLEP website. Whilst open to all, it is understood this will be recognisant of existing gaps regarding culture and tourism, and associated opportunities around the 2022 Commonwealth Games. The open call has also addressed some issues identified within Growth Deal Round 3, for example ensuring match funding, political support and planning permission from applicant projects; the CWLEP has sought to ensure that all risk factors, for example related to external stakeholders, are identified at the very outset. It also responded to previous feedback by providing a longer time period for submissions. Whilst utilising the CWLEP’s existing pipeline, it is also understood that the open call has also attracted submissions from a wide range of different organisations, including private sector businesses.

Project outputs, outcomes and evaluations The extent to which projects are fully aware of their ongoing monitoring requirements will be tested during

the remainder of the evaluation, but it is clear that the Programme Management Team recognises the importance of this, both as part of the funding requirement and to demonstrate impacts within future funding bids. Clarity will be required regarding the level of resource available to continue tracking outputs and outcomes beyond the end of the current programme.

The Programme Management Team has undertaken considerable work with individual projects to confirm the definition and collection of outputs, as well as identifying wider outcome data and narrative regarding impacts. Examples particularly relate to skills projects which have been affected by changing national circumstances related to apprenticeships, as well as ‘unlocking projects’. This activity was also affected by changing BEIS metric requirements in late 2017.

It is evident that some projects are more able and responsive than others to test and evidence wider

outcomes (i.e. beyond core outputs). This raises two key questions: - The extent to which wider outcomes and impacts referred to in original project business cases should be

specifically measured as part of each project’s delivery and evaluation? Some projects report that these

3 Please note that feedback from Warwickshire CC has not yet been obtained within this evaluation; a meeting is scheduled for 2 October.



were included in business cases to demonstrate likely future impacts, but had not anticipated measuring these

- The extent to which projects provided with solely capital funding can be expected to undertake wider research and evaluation, or whether other revenue funding should support this? The CWLEP is doing its best to identify outcomes and impacts but this partly relies on the goodwill and resource of project delivery organisations; a situation faced by all LEPs. This represents a grey area and more clarity from government would be helpful for future interventions.

Business Groups Initial feedback4 indicates positive developments regarding the CWLEP’s Business Groups, partly linked to

previous evaluation feedback and comments within the Annual Conversation. These developments specifically include: - Enhanced communication across the different Business Groups by the appointment of specific individuals

as ‘links’, whereby they attend two different groups and report back to each - An increasingly focused and targeted approach to membership, for example identifying individuals focused

on specific issues the groups are seeking to address - A clear focus on associated thematic elements of the refreshed SEP, and the Local Industrial Strategy, whilst

enabling a flexible approach to each individual group (e.g. some are task and finish groups)

Despite this progression, there remain some gaps within business groups, an example being within the membership of the Culture and Tourism Group. This highlights the challenge of ensuring relatively limited private sector resource is used most effectively by the LEP. Wider engagement and the future

Importantly, the CWLEP has ensured significant involvement within the WMCA at a range of levels.5 This key to ensuring Coventry and Warwickshire’s influence within the WMCA as it continues to develop; it is also particularly relevant given the current lack of clarity regarding the focus of future funding mechanisms beyond Growth Deals and ESIF. A specific example of joint working was the approach taken in bidding for Channel 4’s relocation to the West Midlands.

Given the significant development of effective processes, knowledge and expertise through the CWLEP (which

enables communication between a wide range of individuals from different sectors, public and private), it would be beneficial for future funding to continue to be filtered at LEP level. The CWLEP has a clear understanding of its priorities and its areas requiring further development, and is best placed to address these; it also has a strong pipeline of projects for consideration within future funding mechanisms, dependent on their focus. This is also particularly important to ensure ongoing effective private sector engagement, which would be diluted if funding was redirected via a wider geography.

Wherever possible, the CWLEP would benefit from increasingly promoting the achievements of its Growth

Deal projects. This relates to a specific ‘elevator pitch’ regarding quantitative outputs, any identified outcomes and impacts, and a wider qualitative narrative. This will be supported by the annual evaluation process.

4 This will be further tested when consulting other Business Group representatives during the remainder of the evaluation. 5 Note that a request has been made to the WMCA for an interview in support of this evaluation.



7thAugust 2018 Agenda Item 6

Title: Proposed Improvements to the Assurance Framework: Project Change Control, Escalation and Delegated Authority Process

1 Purpose

1.1 To update the CWLEP Assurance process for managing project slippage, underspend and general project underperformance. This includes but is not limited to projects funded as part of the Local Growth Fund (Growth Deal) and Growing Places Fund.

1.2 The proposal addresses the escalation procedures and delegated authority process to ensure changes are transparent and open. The processes outlined below correspond with the CWLEP’s existing governance procedures as outlined in the CWLEP’s Assurance Framework. The principles outlined in this paper are expected to be updated within revisions to the Assurance Framework in 2018-19 and will replace those outlined in Section 8 (Risk and Programme Management).

1.3 The Programme Management Team have researched other LEP escalation and delegated authority processes. The updates within this paper are aimed at using examples of good practice to support the development of the CWLEP’s policies and procedures.

1.4 It is the delegated responsibility of the Finance & Governance Board (FG) to make changes and recommendations to the CWLEP Assurance Process. The CWLEP Programme Delivery Board (PDB) is invited to make comments and suggestions before it is presented to the next FG Board.

2 Principles to Mitigate Risk

2.1 The CWLEP has measures in place within its governance and monitoring procedures (as outlined in the Assurance Framework) to ensure that risk attached to its programme of funding is adequately managed and delivered, and the reputation of the CWLEP is appropriately safeguarded.

2.2 In all cases the following should be adhered to in order to mitigate risk:

All grant agreements that CWLEP enter into for funding should clearly stipulate the amount and timing of spend within financial years.

Grant Agreements should have clearly defined milestones, timelines and output profiles which align with the funder’s expectations for delivery.

All agreements should allow CWLEP to terminate an agreement if there are significant concerns or examples of poor performance, underspend or slippage.

A clear risk and escalation policy should be contained within the Assurance Framework, with all projects being made aware of the Framework upon signing for CWLEP funding.


Agenda Item 6| Proposed Improvements to the Assurance Framework:

3 Identification and Communication of Issues leading to Change Control Process

3.1 Principles for identification and communication of issues:

Projects must communicate key issues that may negatively impact on achievement of spend targets or general project performance at the earliest opportunity to the Growth Deal Programme Management Team (GDPT) and not rely solely on the Quarterly Claims process to communicate such information.

Projects must keep clear and updated risk logs, which should be accessible to the GDPT at any point during the life of the project and for an agreed period after.

A full update on delivery, risks, outputs and milestones should be provided by projects within each of their quarterly claims.

4 Change Control Definition

4.1 The GDPT propose a review of the Change Control Definition which will clearly define its scope. For the purposes of the Local Growth Fund and wider CWLEP projects change control will be defined as “the process through which all requests to change a project baseline are captured, evaluated and then approved, rejected or deferred.”

5 The Change Control Process

5.1 Change control is deployed to enable changes that deviate beyond the set tolerances. Table 5.1 lists the instances that would trigger change control / a request for change:

Table 5.1 Reasons for Initiating Change Control Process

5.2 The project manager will use the ‘Change Request’ form to document the request and submit this to the GDPT. Depending on the nature of the request it may be subject to technical appraisal (e.g. if changes to property / land elements of scope) at the discretion of the CWLEP. The Change Request, and any technical recommendations (if applicable), will be considered by the next available PDB or by written procedure if it is deemed urgent.

5.3 There are some requests that are within the tolerances of GDPT to approve or decline. However, if the requested change submitted by the project falls outside of their direct delegation the GDPT will make a recommendation to the next PDB.

Financial - Change to LGF spend allocation (both within and between financial years) - Change to match funding - Change to total cost of a project

Scope - Change to project from original scope as agreed in Delivery Plan submitted as part of the Grant Aid Agreement

- Change to project scope from Business Case approved by the PDB - Delays or changes to planned milestones

Outcomes

- Change to the expected outcomes agreed in the project Business Case or as reported to Government through monitoring return

- Change to intended scheme benefits, outputs or wider impact (e.g. GVA)


Agenda Item 6| Proposed Improvements to the Assurance Framework:

6 Tolerances (Managing by Exception)

6.1 A key principle in the governance of CWLEP funding programmes is that reporting is managed by exception and using an appropriate risk based approach. Currently all change requests to projects are reported to the PDB for decision. This inevitably means the programme cannot make day to day decisions without PDB approval.

6.2 Under the management by exception rule, the PDB and CWLEP Board only take decisions on high impact deviations from planned results. This frees the PDB and CWLEP Board to focus on strategic activities. Instead the authority to take a decision on the PDB’s behalf is delegated to the GDPT in some circumstances these are outlined within this paper.

6.3 Within pre-determined conditions project change requests can be approved via delegated authority. The different instances of delegated authority are detailed below:

Delegated Authority

Growth Deal Programme Management Team

Programme Delivery Board

CWLEP Board

Changes to project financial profile within financial year

Up to 25% of total project current year budget

Over 25% of total project current year budget

No reporting, decision making or endorsement required

Changes to project financial profile between financial years

Up to 5% of total project current year budget

Over 5% of total project current year budget

Change of 50% or more is reported to CWLEP Board for endorsement

Acceleration of project financial profile between financial years

Up to 50% of total project budget

Over 50% of total project budget


Changes to project metrics and outputs within financial year

Up to 50% of project metrics within current year profile

Over 50% of project metrics within current year profile


Change to project metrics and outputs between financial years

Up to 25% of project metrics between yearly profiles

Over 25% of project metrics between yearly profiles

Change of 50% or more is reported to CWLEP Board for endorsement

Changes to project milestones

Delays of up to six months for key project milestones

Delays of over 6 months for key project milestones

Changes which impact on a projects end date reported to CWLEP Board for endorsement.

Withdrawal or termination of projects

N/A Ability to make recommendations to withdraw or terminate projects

Reported to CWLEP Board for decision making

Inclusion of new projects

N/A Ability to make recommendations on the inclusion of new projects

Reported to CWLEP Board for decision making

4.3 Recommendation: That the Programme Delivery Board approve the Change Control and Escalation Process as outline in this paper.


CWLEP Programme Delivery Board 7th August 2018 Agenda Item 7 Title: Forward Planner

Programme Delivery Board

Agenda Items Key Funding dates Additional Attendees

Sep 2018 (tbc) 2018 Open Call Update Resourcing Growth Deal Programme Management

6th Nov 2018

Growth Deal Q2 Performance Report LFFN Programme Update Duplex Fund Update Report Annual Conversation Preparation

GD Q2 BEIS Data Report Sign off Presentation Dynamic Routing IVMS – Sunil Budheo, Coventry City Council

Wk beg 7th Jan 2019

Growth Deal Programme Key Items Annual Conversation Feedback

Presentation tbc

Wk beg 11th Feb 2019

Growth Deal Q3 Performance Report 2017/18 Growth Deal Evaluation contract Assurance Framework Signoff Dissemination of final Growth Deal Evaluation Report

GD Q3 BEIS Data Report Sign off

PD Board Membership CWLEP Executive Accountable Body & Programme Management Observers

Chair – Jonathan Browning Vice Chair – Nick Abell Board Director - Zamurad Hussain

Chief Executive – Martin Yardley CWLEP Operations Director – Paula Deas CWLEP Secretary – Roger Dowthwaite Senior CWLEP Executive – Andy Williams

Accountable Body S151 Officer – Barry Hastie Growth Deal Programme Manager - Lucy McGovern

BEIS Observer- Alicia Law


CWLEP Programme Delivery Board · 8/7/2018 · Pilot Environment Replication at Dyson Equipment to...

Documents

Transcript of CWLEP Programme Delivery Board · 8/7/2018 · Pilot Environment Replication at Dyson Equipment to...