AFC0002

Written evidence submitted by South East Reserve Forces' and Cadets' Association (SERCFCA).

General.  SERFCA is a great supporter of the AF Covenant, across 9 counties of the south east.  SERFCA is represented at AF Covenant meetings and conferences run by civilian councils, alongside representatives from the 3 Services’ chains of command.  SERFCA also maintains a close liaison with civilian Armed Forces Champions appointed by councils.  This is in line with:

Defence Council Order.  The Reserve Forces’ and Cadets’ Associations Regulations.  The task of establishing and maintaining links with the civilian community underpins all the RFCA’s key outputs. (Annex A, Appendix 1).  The RFCAs assist the chains of command in their relationships within their respective communities, over and above RFCA work with local communities, as an enabling task in support of assigned tasks.

Service Level Agreements with RFCAs. From MOD Reserve Forces and Cadets, Defence Infrastructure Organisation, Royal Navy, Army and Royal Air Force.  Ensure links exist with local authorities and the civilian community in order to maintain overall support for Land Forces and the Army Firm Base Campaign. (Army SLA, Reference B).  In addition, RFCAs have a lead role with Defence Relationship Management to support the Armed Forces Covenant and to encourage organisations to join and progress along the Employer Recognition Scheme, coordinating with all 3 Services.

Value.  There is no doubt that the AF Covenant has added great value to the Armed Forces’ community and continues to do so.  SERFCA observes a number of councils instigating AF Covenant requirements.  All add some value, but vary in their enthusiasm and effectiveness, depending on personalities involved, who are leading the effort.  Some council committees are led by local ‘leaders’; others by appointed personnel.  Some maintain excellent administrative people with a huge depth of experience and dedicated interest, others are less committed.  Examples of excellence are displayed, regionally, particularly by Hampshire, Kent and Surrey, who have well developed AF Covenant action plans.

Main Weaknesses.  Arguably, the main weaknesses are:

Consistency/Best Practice.   Performance varies.  There is scope for capturing, more effectively, best practice.  I understand that this process has recently begun.  This is good news and should enhance performance.

Communication.  The AF community, serving people, do not always seem to be exposed to the success of the AF Covenant or understand it.  I am sure communication can be improved.

6th January 2025