Inverness Women's Aid outreach programme funding given to Citizen's Advice

[IwantToRetire]

Inverness Women's Aid has criticised Highland Council for handing over domestic abuse outreach services to an organisation with "no experience" in the field.

The local authority has awarded the contract to the Inverness, Badenoch and Strathspey Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) as part of a new Highland-wide service.

Inverness Women's Aid described the decision as "bizarre and reckless" but did not submit an application for the contract during the procurement process.

Highland Council said the process was "fair, open and fully compliant" and its region-wide approach was designed to strengthen support.
CAB Inverness declined to comment.

In November, Highland Council began a review of contracts for four women's aid organisations - Inverness, Lochaber, Ross-shire and Skye and Caithness and Sutherland.

At the time, the council was considering changing to funding just one provider for the whole region and to also make the service available to men - a move Inverness Women's Aid criticised.

News report continues at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cnv95j3eq43o

Such services should not be going out to tender. It's not like buying bloody kettles.

I dont know how they are allowed to do it!

And its not just Scotland. I haven't kept links but should have, but this past year so many but long standing refuges have had to close because local council bidding system, or maybe worse, not thought to be a priority.

Given that many of these services started by using volunteers, then got access to Council Funding, it will be very hard but is there a way of reverting to that model and crowd funding? Then showing by numbers of users that the women want single sex services?

There is something odd about this story tho - the established DV service didnt bid?

could it be that they didn’t bid because they didn’t want to or their charitable objectives wouldn’t allow them to include men and/or cover a wider area? If their objectives are specific, they can’t do other work no matter how “good” that work would be without changing their objectives, which would need board and charity commission approval

According to Public Contracts Scotland, there was only one tender received. The assessment process is 95% quality and 5% price but I’ve not had a chance to look at details yet - but for anyone interested here is the notice info https://www.publiccontractsscotland.gov.uk/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=DEC545991

the award notification is on page 1 when you filter by Buyer

It's quite concerning isn't it? Half of Trading Standards work seems to have been handed to CAB as well.

I would have thought the obvious way of providing this service would be to add a department to Social Services which already has nationwide cover and caring responsibilities.

But perhaps they can't guarantee to preserve the budget that way and this will actually protect the service.

And of course once it goes to a third party it has to be tendered for to get best value for money for tax payers. At least CAB isn't profit making like the special schools and private prisons are.

It would be interesting to find out the names and relationships between the people who allocate/ control funding for these services.
I can't recall the details but wasn't there a connection between the man given the job running the Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre, his partner and funding allocation for womens' services?

I have been following this for some time, but stupidly did not keep links. This is happening all over the UK, so maybe if each of us in our own area kept an eye on their local council we could at least list loss of funding.

Its really bad. Quite few years ago there was a well respected women's support service for women who had been trafficked.

Having established the service and run it on feminist principles for years, the next time they bid for London council funding the contract was given to the Salvation Army!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is AI generated so doesn't have nuance or feminist perspective. But gives as example of the type of process women's services have to go through. And because funding is short term it means valuable support time is spent trying to fill out forms, and "comply" with bean counters.

The start of the process that led to Inverness Women’s Aid (IWA) losing its outreach funding was a controversial 2024 service review launched by Highland Council. 1, 2]

The Core Timeline of the Process

• The 2024 Review: Highland Council initiated a region-wide review of outreach, refuge provision, and emergency funding for domestic abuse. The council’s objective was to transition to the Highland Domestic Abuse Service (HDAS), a streamlined, single-provider model covering all genders across the entire region. This process aimed to slash regional outreach costs to a capped level. 1, 2, 3, 4]
• The Procurement and Reach Bottleneck: The council opened up a competitive procurement process requiring bidders to have a regional reach. Local charities like IWA warned that they lacked the geographic capacity to bid for a single, region-wide contract covering the massive Highland territory. 1, 2]
• The Contract Stand-off (2024–2025): Over a two-year period, IWA attempted to access the funding but was met with a draft contract from the council. The IWA board deemed several clauses within the contract "unsafe and unclear". They stated that the contract terms would:
• Compromise their affiliation with the national Scottish Women’s Aid network.
• Breach service-user confidentiality and staff anonymity.
• Violate existing employment and GDPR data protection regulations. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
• The Refusal to Sign (2025): IWA claimed the council refused to negotiate or clarify these points. As a result, the IWA board chose not to sign the contract in 2025, knowing it meant they would forfeit the council funding. 1, 2]
• The Final De-funding (June 2026): Because IWA did not enter the finalised procurement process, Highland Council officially stripped the charity of its outreach contract and handed it to the Inverness, Badenoch and Strathspey Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB). []

The loss of the outreach contract has triggered severe operational uncertainty for the physical refuge shelter, while the wider regional contract overhaul has drawn a mixed, highly tense response from the other three Highland Women’s Aid groups.

The Direct Impact on IWA's Physical Refuge Shelter
The future of the city's only dedicated domestic abuse shelter remains highly precarious due to a combination of standalone reviews and collateral funding loss: 1, 2, 3]

• The Six-Month Extender Baseline: The Highland Council extended IWA’s refuge funding until 30 September 2026. The council claims there is no explicit plan or target to cut refuge funding, stating that existing shelter arrangements remain active while a broader housing solutions review is underway. 1, 2, 3]
• The "Tantamount to Closure" Warning: Despite the council's reassurance, IWA’s leadership warned that the refuge faces a threat of closure. Because the council has not issued a new long-term contract for the refuge, IWA is operating with acute financial uncertainty. 1]
• Collateral Loss of Discretionary Funds: The stand-off over the outreach contract caused the council to withdraw substantial non-contractual and discretionary monies. This includes the complete removal of funding for:
• MARAC (Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences) for data sharing on high-risk cases.
• The Children’s Partnership and targeted Social Work funding. 1, 2]
• Capacity and Resource Strain: The shelter is currently operating at full occupancy. Because outreach and refuge services share operational overheads, losing the core outreach contract leaves IWA facing staffing redundancies, heavily impacting their ability to process referrals safely. 1, 2]

How the Other Highland Women’s Aid Groups Responded

Highland Council's original domestic outreach service was split among four regional independent charities: Inverness, Lochaber, Ross-shire, and Caithness & Sutherland Women’s Aid (CASWA). Their responses to the council's contract overhaul diverged sharply: 1, 3]

Ross-shire Women's Aid
Accepted the contract.
Secured a 3-to-5-year core outreach contract for the Mid-Highland area. They continue to operate their own refuge under the same temporary September 2026 council extension.

Lochaber Women's Aid
Accepted the contract.
Signed the new regional outreach framework to secure funding continuity for the West Highland area.

Caithness & Sutherland (CASWA)
Accepted the contract under protest.
Signed for the North Highland area but issued fierce public warnings. CASWA revealed that the new funding model imposed a 40% reduction in their core funding (a cut of roughly £55,000) alongside the total withdrawal of their MARAC and child safeguarding funds. They stated this model directly risks lives across massive, rural geographies.

Inverness Women's Aid (IWA)
Rejected the contract.
Refused to sign the draft contract due to confidentiality and legal clauses. They did not enter the secondary procurement loop, resulting in their specific South Highland outreach contract being handed over to the Inverness Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB).

the new funding model imposed a 40% reduction in their core funding (a cut of roughly £55,000) alongside the total withdrawal of their MARAC and child safeguarding funds. They stated this model directly risks lives across massive, rural geographies.

So women's groups are allowed to survive so long as they accept not being able to provide what is really needed.

It’s shit that they were put in that position to begin with, but refusing to properly engage with and follow the process has meant someone else got the contract, which they are now complaining about. What did they think would happen here? That the power-holding abusive men would suddenly see sense and negotiate? It was blindingly naive and ironically they’ve endangered every woman in that refuge which is presumably what they wanted to avoid. They have had this on the horizon since 2024 and should have sorted out alternative funding etc to ensure they could continue. They can’t disengage then complain that the service contract went to someone who engaged with the process. Signing under protest seems much more sensible as a course of action. Alternative provision isn’t going to solve the fundamental problem that necessitates refuges above and beyond basic council emergency accommodation. It’s not going to protect women from abusers in power knowing where they are. What a shitshow for vulnerable women.

I think their point is that given the actual decrease in level of funding they didn't feel they could provide the service.

As one of the groups that did sign pointed out.

Damned if you do. Damned if you dont.

This how for example council social housing is such shit. Not that it couldn't be of better standard but if you say we can only do it to this level, then you have people living in houses with mould, dangerous electrics etc..

Its really sad that decades after feminist got people to recognise the domestic violence is a reality in so many women's lives, and that society hasn't been able to stop men's violence, that councils, or whoever just say, you (women) aren't important enough to have proper service provision.