During November we
- responded to 50 enquiries
- made 41 decisions
- 12 community care grants
- 29 crisis grants
- upheld 5 (42%) of community care grants and 10 (35%) of crisis grants
- signposted an additional 58 applicants to other sources of assistance. 83% of these were calling us instead of their local council in error. 12% reported accessibility issues as their local council had no freephone number or they were unable to apply online
- received 16 enquiries from local council liaison contacts seeking advice on the guidance
Policy into Practice Award
We were delighted to be announced as winners of the Policy into Practice Award at the Scottish Public Service Awards 2025 on 3 December at the Scottish Parliament!
This award celebrates projects that successfully transform public policy into real, positive outcomes for citizens. Our team’s Spotlight Report on the Scottish Welfare Fund’s High Most Compelling (HMC) Priority Rating revealed inconsistency across the country, impacting some of Scotland’s most vulnerable people. By sharing these findings alongside real-life case studies, we demonstrated the human impact.
We are proud of this recognition, but our work does not end here. We look forward to continuing this conversation to promote fairness and support for those who need it most.
Case studies
Consideration of children's rights
C applied for a community care grant for laminate flooring in a bedroom. Their eldest child had recently returned home after a traumatic experience in homeless accommodation. They explained that their child, who has mental health issues and receives specialist support, has sensory sensitivities and cannot tolerate carpet. C provided detailed health information and photographs to support the request.
The council initially declined the application, stating that laminate flooring was excluded and that a cash award was not something the fund could provide. At first tier, the council upheld the decision, refusing bedroom flooring on the basis that it was low priority.
We examined the council’s file and corresponded with C. We noted that C had provided substantial information about their child’s health needs and the requirement for specific flooring. We determined that the request was not for an excluded item and that C met the qualifying criteria as a family facing exceptional pressure. We assessed the request for flooring as high priority and, given the child’s health issues, concluded that laminate flooring was necessary. We also confirmed that the fund can make awards in cash, cash equivalents, or in kind. As the council could not provide laminate flooring directly, we instructed them to make a cash award.
Recommendations
- We instructed the council to award £453.00 for laminate flooring for the bedroom as this item met high priority
Feedback for the council
- The council did not correctly assess the information available to them in relation to the priority of flooring
- The council did not follow the guidance when saying laminate / a cash award was excluded.
- The council did not show consideration of the child’s rights in line with the UNCRC when making their priority assessment.
We have asked the organisation to provide us with confirmation that the award was made within one week.
You can find more case studies in the searchable case directory on our website.