Pride in Place has the potential to make a significant difference to communities across the country. However, recent conversations that I have had with councils and community representatives have raised a critical question: “Do places have the capacity to deliver what is being asked of them?”
At the FLIPIM event in Birkenhead on 24 September, PiP Chairs highlighted some practical challenges that they are facing around resources, capacity, partnership working, project development and community engagement.
These are not issues of commitment, but of delivery.
The scale of the task matters. Each Pride in Place area can receive up to £20 million over a decade. In effect, partnerships are being asked to manage investment on the scale of a £20 million organisation, requiring robust financial oversight, programme management, risk management and delivery systems.
Chairs are expected to provide leadership, build partnerships, engage communities and turn investment into lasting change. That takes more than ambition and good governance – it takes the skills, resources and capacity/support to make delivery possible.
The role of the Chair
Chairs cannot solve every capacity problem themselves, but they must keep it on the strategic agenda and ensure risks are identified early. Many are volunteers and may not have a professional background in place-based regeneration or community development. They are navigating complex governance, partnerships and delivery challenges, making ongoing mentoring, peer support and access to experienced independent advice essential.
So, some key questions for Chairs and their partnerships to consider could include:
- Do we have the people, skills and systems to deliver our commitments?
- Are community organisations adequately supported and are we too dependent on a few individuals?
- Can our financial, procurement and evaluation systems manage the investment and demonstrate what works?
Addressing these gaps early can prevent delivery failures and help partners tackle shared challenges together.
I have also learned that there is a possible personal cost to the role of being a PiP Chair that should not be overlooked. Some Chairs report that when communities disagree with board decisions, criticism on social media can become personal and feel like vilification.
Chairs must remain accountable and open to challenge, but no volunteer should have to manage personal attacks alone. In view of this I do think Partnerships need clear routes to mentoring, communications support, conflict resolution and independent advice. This is not about them avoiding scrutiny, but ensuring it remains constructive and that those leading this demanding work are properly supported.
Capacity is more than having enough people involved
Having worked for many years in neighbourhoods and town centres, I know that capacity is about more than funding or headcount. Effective delivery requires three things:
- Strategic capacity – the time and authority to set a clear long-term direction, identify priorities and measure progress.
- Delivery capacity – the skills and systems to turn strategy into action, including programme management, finance, procurement, communications and evaluation.
- Community capacity – the resources and support residents and local organisations need to shape priorities and participate meaningfully, including providing small grants and funding for training, mentoring and practical help.
The partnership challenge
From my experience, successful partnerships depend on councils, residents, community organisations, public services and businesses all working together. Pride in Place is no different.
The challenge for PiP Chairs is to bring partners with different priorities, budgets and decision-making processes together and get them moving in the same direction. The governance they develop must strike a balance. Too little coordination leads to fragmentation, too much creates bureaucracy and delay.
Strong partnerships need clarity on responsibilities, decision-making, resident influence, resource allocation, risk management, delivery monitoring and how disagreements are resolved.
Build capacity before the pressure peaks
Capacity must be addressed from the outset. Some Chairs reported that their partnerships had been meeting for over a year with little or nothing delivered, highlighting the gap between planning and tangible outcomes.
Capacity takes time to build. Recruitment takes time and trusted relationships take longer. Investing in capacity early is essential to delivery, not an optional extra.
Making the money work harder
Capacity must be seen as an investment, not an overhead. While buildings and public spaces are visible outcomes, poor management can waste far more than investing in the skills, systems and infrastructure needed to deliver well.
A programme of this scale cannot rely on goodwill alone. It needs robust financial and programme management, procurement, assurance and delivery monitoring to protect public money and turn community priorities into results.
Chairs must maintain momentum while being realistic about what can be delivered, by whom and when.
One solution could be that every Pride in Place partnership could develop a capacity and capability plan alongside its delivery plan.
Independent support
Having considered the challenges facing Pride in Place partnerships, I believe independent support can help assess capacity, address skills and resource gaps, strengthen governance and develop practical delivery plans. This should include mentoring for Chairs, peer learning and confidential advice when challenges arise.
The starting point should always be the place. Every partnership will be different. Independent support can also create space to ask the difficult questions:
- Do you have the capacity to deliver, or are you trying to do too much?
- Are you too dependent on individuals and what happens if they leave?
- Are communities adequately supported?
- Which projects are genuinely deliverable?
The real legacy
In my view, ultimately, success will be judged not by the quality of the plans, but by the tangible difference they make on the ground.
The legacy of Pride in Place should not simply be a list of completed projects but stronger communities, partnerships and local capacity that endure beyond the programme. This requires Chairs to make capacity a priority from the outset, not only when delivery starts to slip.
Pride in Place has the ambition. The question is whether partnerships are building the capacity to match it.
If your partnership faces these challenges, we welcome an informal conversation about how we can help identify gaps and strengthen delivery.