‘Faith covenant’ has strengthened cooperation with local authorities, report finds

A “Faith Covenant” 10 years within the making has played a major role in strengthening cooperation between faith communities and public authorities across the UK, particularly during times of crisis, an independent evaluation has concluded.

The report, Ten Years of the Faith Covenant, was commissioned by FaithMotion and the APPG on Faith and Society, and recently launched in Westminster at a gathering attended by MPs, faith and charity leaders, council officials, and government partners. 

First introduced in Birmingham in 2014, the Faith Covenant was designed as a framework to encourage closer working relationships between councils and faith groups. Since then, 33 local authority areas representing greater than 12 million people have signed up.

According to the report, the Covenant “plays a meaningful and constructive role in strengthening relationships between faith communities and statutory partners” and has helped create “greater structure, legitimacy and visibility to partnership working”. 

The study was carried out by Centre for Inclusive Evaluations’s Dr Dan Range and Dr Aurélie French, with academic support provided through a collaboration with Coventry University.

The researchers found that it has been particularly beneficial during “moments of pressure or crisis”, enabling faster and more organised responses between councils and faith networks.

The report also stresses, nonetheless, that the covenant is just not a “once-and-for-all solution” and works best when treated as an energetic partnership model somewhat than a symbolic agreement. 

Researchers found that areas with strong leadership, clear governance arrangements, energetic coordination and consistent engagement between partners tended to see the best impact. 

Successful covenants were often supported by committed individuals, steering groups, and senior council backing. Regular meetings and trusted community connectors also helped sustain collaboration over time.

The evaluation, which used interviews, surveys and stakeholder consultations across 13 covenant areas, also found that existing relationships played a significant role in determining success. 

Survey findings showed that 89% of respondents believed pre-existing relationships strongly shaped outcomes, with many areas already benefiting from energetic interfaith cooperation before formally adopting the covenant.

One of the report’s central findings was that trust-building lies at the guts of the covenant’s success. 

Researchers observed that the covenant often formalised relationships that had previously existed only informally, giving faith organisations greater confidence and recognition inside civic life. 

In many areas, councils and faith leaders reported that the agreement created a “gateway”, “framework” or “mandate” for communication and collaboration on issues starting from public health and social cohesion to emergency response and community safety.

The evaluation highlighted several examples where pre-existing relationships built through the covenant enabled rapid motion through the Covid-19 pandemic, winter crises, and native tensions. 

In one city, faith groups were in a position to quickly organise volunteers and deliver food aid to vulnerable residents during lockdown because trusted communication structures were already in place.

Survey findings showed that just about two-thirds (64%) of respondents believed the covenant made collective crisis response easier of their area, while three-quarters of respondents said it had helped raise the profile and credibility of faith-based organisations inside their communities.

The report repeatedly emphasises that the covenant’s value lies less in funding and more in influence and relationships. 

It notes that faith communities often possess trusted local networks, volunteer capability, and deep-rooted community connections that public institutions may struggle to access independently.

At the identical time, the researchers caution that the covenant’s effectiveness varies significantly between areas. 

Much is dependent upon the continuity of key individuals, institutional support from councils, and available resources. 

The report warns that over-reliance on a small variety of leaders can leave partnerships vulnerable when personnel change, leading to lost momentum and weakened institutional memory.

Capacity constraints emerged as one other major challenge. As the covenant has no central funding mechanism, much of its work relies on the goodwill of local actors, volunteers, and resources. 

A majority of respondents (86%) said staffing and capability issues had affected the covenant’s effectiveness of their area.

Despite these limitations, the report argues that the covenant offers clear value for money when properly supported. 

In its conclusion, the researchers state that it “plays a meaningful and constructive role in strengthening relationships between faith communities and statutory partners” and that “during the last 10 years, the Faith Covenant has improved collaboration between local authorities and the religion sector”. 

The authors also stress that the covenant shouldn’t be understood as a uniform national model but somewhat as “a versatile framework which manifests otherwise across places somewhat than as a uniform model of partnership”. 

Speaking on the launch event, APPG on Faith and Society chair Zöe Franklin said growing pressures on communities made such partnerships increasingly essential.

“Across our society, social cohesion is unfortunately under strain,” she said. “Communities are coping with rising pressure from inequality, the lingering effects of the pandemic, cost of living crisis, and global events that resonate deeply at a neighborhood level in addition to national.”

She added: “And trust between institutions, and sometimes, communities can sometimes not be taken without any consideration.

“And it’s on this context, the Faith Covenant really, really matters. Not as a one off document but as a protracted term framework for trust, dialogue, and collaboration.”

Dr French argued that faith communities proceed to supply something distinctive throughout the UK’s evolving policy landscape.

She said: “Faith communities are also uniquely placed to supply community insight, support social cohesion or rapid mobilization in times of crisis. Given the broader changing policy landscape, we predict that faith perhaps offers something distinct. 

“Faith communities can provide continuity amid local government reorganisation, in addition to at existing networks, practice and learning to latest initiatives resembling the Civil Society Covenant and Protecting What Matters social cohesion strategy.”

The report links the long run of the covenant to broader developments including the federal government’s latest social cohesion strategy, local government reorganisation, and the emerging Civil Society Covenant. 

While researchers see opportunities for deeper institutional embedding, additionally they warn that faith engagement could lose its distinctiveness if absorbed too broadly into wider civil society structures.

The authors due to this fact recommend strengthening national leadership across the covenant, improving local governance structures, creating stronger peer-learning opportunities between areas signed as much as the covenant, and pursuing dedicated resources to support long-term implementation. Additional recommendations include clearer accountability structures and increasing visibility. 

Social security minister Sir Stephen Timms stated within the foreword, “The Faith Covenant has clearly not provided a once-and-for-all solution to the challenges of cross-sector working. Yet there is evident evidence of much being achieved through Faith Covenants.

“It is a model that could be celebrated, strengthened and built upon. The insights and suggestions inside these pages needs to be heeded by Government, councils and faith groups alike.”