Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015: update and findings report

Findings

Part 3: Participation Requests

The full findings for the review of Part 3: Participation Requests are available and this section provides a summary of those findings. The legislative pages for participation requests are also available.

Introduction

This section presents findings from a review of participation requests as introduced by Part 3 of the Act and came into force on 1 April 2017. Part 3 provided a legislative route to enable community groups request to have greater involvement in, and influence over, decisions and services that affect their lives. Participation requests were designed as a way for communities to proactively initiate dialogue with public authorities around improving public services. They do not replace existing participation mechanisms but are a potential way for community groups to strengthen their involvement in other processes. The legislation is a useful framework to inform all engagement, in that it promotes dialogue, has a focus on improving outcomes, improves collaboration and transparency and is co-produced with a focus on addressing inequality.

Participation requests can be made by community organisations to public authorities which are highlighted in Schedule 2 of the Act. As defined by the Act, the term used for community organisations is Community Participation Bodies and the term for public authorities is Public Service Authorities. There are currently 77 Public Service Authorities in Scotland. Both the Community Participation Body and the Public Service Authority must complete an Outcome Improvement Process which turns ideas into action and achieves the aims of the participation request. The Outcome Improvement Process is a process that will help improve the outcome set by Community Participation Bodies. Participation requests have been used for a variety of purposes including community participation for pier safety issues, local road improvements, local service delivery and improvements to community halls.

The aim of the review of Part 3 was to present and synthesise findings on the use and impact of participation requests since its introduction in 2017 by Public Service Authorities and Community Participation Bodies. In addition, the review considered whether an appeals or review mechanism for participation requests was required. Findings from this review will help inform what practical or statutory updates might be required for participation requests to further empower communities.

This review was undertaken by the Scottish Government’s Public Service Reform Directorate and focused on three key questions:

• Is Part 3 of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 being implemented as intended by Public Service Authorities?
• Are participation requests enabling Community Participation Bodies to be more involved in decisions and processes aimed at improving outcomes for communities?
• Should an appeals or review mechanism be introduced for participation requests?

The review of Part 3 was conducted using available quantitative and qualitative data. Not all Public Service Authorities have made their reports publicly available and not every authority returned their annual reporting templates to the Scottish Government. As a result, the findings in this report cannot be said to reveal the full picture of participation requests activity in Scotland. It is also important to note that a participation request may be received by a Public Service Authority and an Outcome Improvement Process can subsequently be agreed informally, without using the legislative framework. Furthermore, Public Service Authorities can accept an application in one year and decide on this in a subsequent reporting year.

Key Findings

• Since participation requests legislation was introduced in 2017, 104 participation requests have been made with 56 granted and 27 refused. Of the remaining 21, no further details were provided except that a request had been made
• The number of applications has decreased from a high of 26 in 2018-2019 to a low of five in 2023-2024, with some variation in numbers over this period
• Since 2017, 96 participation requests were received by Local Authorities, seven by Health Boards, and one by Police Scotland. Thirty eight of these participation requests were made by Community Councils, the most common Community Participation Body type. Out of a total of 77 Public Service Authorities, 55 have never received a request
• Participation requests have helped to enable Community Participation Bodies to be more involved in decisions and processes aimed at improving outcomes for communities, but there is mixed understanding of their purpose and when they are needed
• Capturing robust data to define the value and impact of participation requests remains a challenge due to low numbers and reporting practices by Public Service Authorities, and in particular understanding the relationship between inequalities and participation requests
• There is patchy implementation of, and adherence to, the participation request legislation by Public Service Authorities, including continued low annual reporting
• Many Public Service Authorities believe that participation requests should only be used when informal engagement has failed and therefore do not proactively promote them
• The Outcome Improvement Process is not consistently implemented by Public Service Authorities and further monitoring of what a good Outcome Improvement Process looks like is needed
• There are calls to explore a local review and/or national appeals process. However, the majority of Public Service Authorities expressed concern that appeals for participation requests have the potential to impose significant administrative and financial burden on them
• Strengthening the participation requests statutory guidance and promoting a set of participation requests principles have been proposed as a more practical approach than implementing legislation to introduce a local review and/or national appeals process for participation requests

Conclusion

The Scottish Government introduced Part 3 of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 in 2017 to enable communities to have greater involvement in, and influence, over public sector decisions. This legislation has supported communities to highlight local needs and become more involved in change or improvement at local level. Participation requests were not intended to replace good quality existing community engagement or participation processes.

The impact of participation requests has been assessed considerably since 2017, firstly by an evaluation undertaken by Glasgow Caledonian University in 2020, and Scottish Parliamentary scrutiny by then Local Government and Communities Committee in 2021. The Scottish Government has significantly invested in support for participation requests in response to the recommendations in the two aforementioned reports to increase awareness, understanding, and implementation of participation requests.

Despite Scottish Government investment in supporting the understanding and implementation of participation requests, this review has found that further work is required to ensure there is shared clarity on their purpose and when their use is most appropriate. It has also found that further work could be undertaken by all parties to ensure the experience of utilising a participation request is a positive one with improved outcomes for the local community.

This review found that the legislation is perceived differently by the Public Service Authorities responsible for implementation and the Community Participation Bodies who have used it. On the one hand, Public Service Authorities consider low numbers of participation requests to be a positive outcome as this could indicate that existing community engagement methods are effective. Additionally, some Public Service Authorities reported that receiving a participation request is a failure, as communities should not need to use a statutory route to be involved in discussions about positive change for their community.

On the other hand, Community Participation Bodies feel that participation requests are underutilised and have only gone some way to increase the involvement of communities in decisions and processes aimed at improving outcomes for communities. However, they acknowledge that the legislation has provided a useful framework for communities to turn to, particularly when other informal engagement routes with public authorities have been unsuccessful.

Based on the information available and gathered to inform this review, the use of participation requests legislation remains low with 104 applications made between April 2017 and March 2024, and only 22 out of 77 Public Service Authorities ever receiving one. Therefore, due to the contrasting views on their purpose and use, and the low number of participation requests made since 2017, capturing robust information to define their value and impact remains a challenge.

However, this review has found that participation requests have encouraged Public Service Authorities to be more accessible and transparent by using alternative engagement methods before a formal legislative route needs to be explored. Nevertheless, more work needs to be done by Public Service Authorities to raise awareness of the right to use participation requests, especially with disadvantaged communities. Although existing guidance for promoting and supporting participation requests is working well, it is not being implemented consistently and in some areas the right to make participation requests is not widely known.

This review has identified the need for better understanding of the Outcome Improvement Process by Public Service Authorities and ways to explore how best to share good practice, including the experiences of Community Participation Bodies engaging with the process. Updating the participation requests statutory guidance and creating a set of principles for participation requests is a way in which this might be addressed.

A key part of this review was to investigate the potential need for an appeals or review mechanism for participation requests and there is some support for a local review or national appeals process. However, due to the low number of participation requests and the potential financial and administrative costs of an appeals or review mechanism, the Scottish Government’s view is that an appeals or review mechanism would add minimal value to the process at this point. It is anticipated that the requirements identified by this review outlined above could benefit both Community Participation Bodies and Public Service Authorities, more than an appeals or review mechanism could.

It is also important to note that this review of participation requests has been undertaken in parallel with the Scottish Government and COSLA’s Local Governance Review which is considering how powers, responsibilities and resources are shared across national and local spheres of government, and with communities. The Local Governance Review’s community empowerment engagement process, Democracy Matters findings report, was published in September 2024 and reflects a clear desire to have a greater control over decision making at a more local level and a diversity of views on how to achieve it. The Scottish Government and COSLA’s joint statement published alongside the findings report committed to a robust policy development process before an implementation phase in the next Parliament. This work is ambitious in outlook and will deliver new inclusive decision making arrangements which allow communities to take more decisions for themselves, ensures more local control over resource, and better enables everyone, regardless of their background, to participate in civic life.

The Democracy Matters Steering Group has been assembled to ensure that the policy development phase of Democracy Matters proceeds in the same spirit as the engagement process. The group has members from the community sector, local government, equalities groups and other local partners and is taking a co-production approach to model development, ensuring that models deliver on the ambitions set out by communities.

In response to the findings of this review the Scottish Government will:

• undertake engagement with Public Service Authorities, Community Participation Bodies and interested stakeholders on the potential benefits of updating the Part 3: Participation Requests Statutory Guidance
• undertake targeted consultation with Public Service Authorities, Community Participation Bodies and interested stakeholders on the proposal for the adoption of a set of participation request principles
• explore options with Public Service Authorities and Community Participation Bodies on ways to improve understanding of the Outcome Improvement Process and raise awareness of the benefits of participation requests for when their use is required

Part 5: Asset Transfer

The full findings for the review of Part 5: Asset Transfer are available and this section provides a summary of those findings. The legislative pages for asset transfers are also available.

Introduction

This section presents findings from a review of asset transfer as introduced by Part 5 of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015. Part 5: Asset Transfer came into force on 23 January 2017 and provided a legislative route for community groups to buy, lease or manage public land or buildings. It was designed to encourage and support ownership and control of assets by communities in situations that recognised the public benefits that community use would bring. Whilst asset transfer was not a new process, the legislation placed new responsibilities on public authorities to respond to their requests in a transparent and timely way.

Asset transfer requests can be made by communities defined in the Act as Community Transfer Bodies, which can represent a geographical community or a community of interest. Community Transfer Bodies must have a constitution which provides that it is open to and controlled by members of that community, and uses its funds and assets for the benefit of that community. Public authorities are defined in the Act as Relevant Authorities and there are currently 95 of these bodies subject to asset transfer legislation. This list can change over time as public authorities can be added or removed as required.

The aim of this review was to present and synthesise findings on the implementation of asset transfer legislation by Relevant Authorities, explore the impact it is having on communities and assess if the asset transfer appeal and review mechanisms are working as intended. Findings have helped to inform what practical or statutory updates might be required for asset transfers to further empower communities.

In the course of conducting this review, it became apparent that there are varying asset transfer recording methods used by Relevant Authorities, and furthermore, that decisions on applications can span reporting years. Given these gaps and complications it has not been possible to provide detailed quantitative breakdowns on asset transfer applications. Therefore, the method of collating data needs to be reviewed to ensure the availability of robust data in the future.

This review was undertaken by the Scottish Government’s Public Service Reform Directorate and focused on three key questions:

• Is Part 5 of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 being implemented as intended by Relevant Authorities?
• Is asset transfer legislation empowering Community Transfer Bodies to make a positive difference in Scotland’s communities?
• Are the appeals and reviews mechanisms working as intended?

Summary of Key Findings

• Relevant Authorities view asset transfer legislation positively and although the legislation can be considered a complex process to navigate, it has provided a useful legal framework and greater consistency nationally
• Asset transfer has helped Community Transfer Bodies achieve benefits for their communities and has provided community groups with a more prominent, rights supported route to the use of land and buildings for community benefit
• The asset transfer process can be challenging for some disadvantaged or smaller Community Transfer Bodies and more work is needed to address inequalities, supported by community development services
• The review found that updates to the asset transfer statutory guidance are required including case studies and questions and answers, and it was suggested that better alignment of the Scottish Public Finance Manual with the asset transfer statutory guidance would be beneficial
• More robust information is required on Relevant Authorities’ registers of land as under the asset transfer legislation these should be maintained and made publicly available
• It has been difficult to gather accurate asset transfer data due to variations in local recording practices and more is required to collate robust data to better inform the impact of asset transfer legislation
• The value of peer support at a local level and a targeted model of support for smaller and newer organisations can yield positive results and this approach could be upscaled to other areas of Scotland
• Asset transfer appeals and reviews are working well and despite their complexity and uniqueness, the majority have been upheld
• Significant learning has been gained from the appeal and review reports, not previously available, which include suggestions for procedural improvements
• A UK-wide report found that Scotland is viewed as the most advanced nation in the UK for community asset acquisition due to the legislation in place, and proposed opportunities should be identified to share learning with the other UK nations around what works

Conclusion

Prior to Part 5 of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 coming into force in 2017, many Local Authorities and some public bodies had operated successful asset transfer schemes, mainly in relation to property they had identified as surplus for disposal. The Scottish Government introduced Part 5 asset transfer to build on this voluntary approach. The legislation introduced a right for community bodies to make requests to a wide-ranging list of public authorities for any land or buildings, surplus or not, with the proviso that the request would be agreed unless there were reasonable grounds for refusal. This legislation, the first of its kind in the UK, shifted the balance of power towards the community body and ensured that asset transfer was available throughout Scotland. This community-led action to own, lease or manage public land and buildings is a powerful tool for communities to drive change locally and achieve their own goals for the benefit of the community. This review also noted findings from a recent UK-wide report which found that Scotland was viewed as the most advanced nation in the UK for community asset acquisition due to the legislation in place.

It has not been possible to provide detailed quantitative breakdowns on asset transfer activity in this report. Although the majority of public service providers display asset transfer information on a website as required by law, the review found that there are varying recording methods being used and decisions on asset transfers can span reporting years. Given these gaps and complications, a key finding of this review is that more work needs to be done to collate robust asset transfer data to better understand its impact.

Despite the challenges around collating asset transfer data, to provide some perspective on asset ownership, the latest Community Ownership in Scotland Report published in November 2024 provides information on private and public land, buildings and other assets owned by community groups in Scotland. Due to land reform and asset transfer legislation introduced by the Scottish Government, the number of groups who own assets have increased significantly over the last 20 years from 86 groups in 2000 to 533 in 2023 and this equates to 208,597 hectares which is 2.7% of the total land mass of Scotland. Asset transfer ownership is included within these figures; however, numbers for asset transfer lease or management are not.

Although considered a complex process to navigate by many who participated in this review, the asset transfer legislative framework is welcomed as it provides greater consistency of approach across Scotland’s public service providers. Additionally, it was reported that it has created greater awareness of the availability of public assets beyond Local Authorities, compared to before the legislation came into force. Another key advantage reported is that it has provided Community Transfer Bodies with a structured and time bound route to the use of public land and buildings, which includes appeals mechanisms to challenge decisions.

This review highlighted the need for more transparency and robust information on the lists of assets published by Relevant Authorities, known as asset registers. It also raised the need for clarification on a number of the technical requirements contained within the legislation is required by Relevant Authorities and updates to the asset transfer statutory guidance were proposed to support this. This review also found closer alignment with other national policies such as the Scottish Public Finance Manual and the Scottish Land Fund would be beneficial.

The Community Ownership Support Service (COSS), who provide an adviser led service for individuals engaging with asset transfer legislation, made a number of suggestions for legislative changes based on their experience working with asset transfer over many years and from information they had gathered from Community Transfer Bodies as part of this review. Examples include changes to the Community Transfer Body membership numbers requirement for asset ownership; setting a minimum working day response target for Relevant Authorities to respond to a formal asset transfer request; and changes to the procedural timescales permitted for the appeals and review processes. However, any changes to legislation would have to be assessed further, including cost implications and impact on Relevant Authorities and Community Transfer Bodies. The National Asset Transfer Action Group could assist with any assessment undertaken.

This review also found that more work needs to be done to support disadvantaged or smaller Community Transfer Bodies. Targeted support from community development services was highlighted as important in this space as well as peer support at a local level. For example, a pilot project undertaken in Barmulloch, Glasgow during 2021 and 2022 enabled a local anchor organisation to provide targeted peer support for 11 small and emerging community groups to engage with the asset transfer process. This highlighted positive results that saw the groups progress their asset transfers and the model could be replicated in other areas in Scotland.

In response to the findings of this review, the Scottish Government will:

• Refresh the remit and membership of the National Asset Transfer Action Group to consider the key findings of this report
• Work collaboratively with Relevant Authorities, Community Transfer Bodies, the refreshed National Asset Transfer Action Group and key stakeholders including COSS, to explore options to strengthen the operation of asset transfers including considering proposals to update the statutory guidance
• Work with Relevant Authorities, COSLA, the refreshed National Asset Transfer Action Group and key stakeholders including COSS to explore options for gathering accurate and robust asset transfer data - including information on assets transferred into community ownership (asset type and area)
• Consider the value of independently evaluating the impact of community asset transfer ownership and lease on local communities and how this is contributing to community empowerment and public service reform