Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of the Commission held on 30 June 2015.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 15^th September 2015 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any Personal, Disclosable Pecuniary or other interests in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

There were no declarations of interest received.

To receive an update on actions following the previous Commission meeting.

There were 4 actions followed up from previous Commission meetings, of which three had been completed. Members heard that item 2.1 (Annual Target Setting Task Group) had been scheduled for 22 September 2015.

Resolved that the report be noted.

Purpose: To advise the Commission of items to be considered by West Berkshire Council from 2 September 2015 to 31 December 2015 and decide whether to review any of the proposed items prior to the meeting indicated in the Plan.

The Commission considered the West Berkshire Forward Plan for the period covering 2 September 2015 to 31 December 2015.

Resolved that the Forward Plan be noted.

Purpose: To receive new items and agree and prioritise the work programme of the Commission for the remainder of 2015/16.

The Commission considered its work programme for 2015/16.

Members noted that the Severe Weather review would be considered in December 2015 due to report being submitted through the Executive Cycle. The update report would first be considered by Corporate Board and the Operations Board, on this occasion, but going forward the update would be received in conjunction with all other update items. Members heard that the delayed update would not impact the progress against recommendations which had been agreed by the Commission In September 2014.

Members considered the Terms of Reference in respect of the West Berkshire Parking review. Councillor Mike Johnston stated that concerns existed in relation to the cumulative charges of parking and whether these lead to parking pressures elsewhere. He strongly advocated the review and believed that it provided the opportunity to consider longer term parking provisions in relation to future developments.

Councillor Emma Webster advised that the review would take place in the form of a Task Group. Members who would be interested in contributing towards the review were requested to contact David Lowe.

Councillor Paul Bryant advised the Commissions that he would like to see a review of the Council’s parking policies. He suggested that concerns raised by residents might be addressed if the policies were clearer.

In response to points raised by the Commission, Councillor Emma Webster advised that the Task Group would consider general issues (across the district) and specific issues (which had previously been raised).

Resolved that:

1)    The Terms of Reference for West Berkshire Parking was accepted by the Commission.

2)    Volunteers for the West Berkshire Parking Task Group should contact David Lowe.

3)    The work programme was noted.

Purpose: To consider any items called-in by the requisite number of Members following the previous Executive meeting.

Purpose: To consider any items on which an Urgent Decision is required to be taken by the Executive, in exception to the requirements of  The Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012.

There were no Urgent Items to be considered

Purpose: To consider any items proposed for a Councillor Call for Action.

There were no Councillor Calls for Action.

Purpose: To consider any petitions requiring an Officer response.

There were no petitions received at the meeting.

Purpose: To receive the report of the Returning Officer into the effectiveness of the Parliamentary and Local Elections held on 7 May 2015.

The Commission considered a report (Agenda Item 11) concerning the Review of the May 2015 Elections. Nick Carter introduced the item to Members as the Returning Officer and stated that it would be another 20 years before a similar situation would occur again (Parliamentary, District and Parish/ Town Elections on the same day). However, he stressed that lessons could be learnt from the event to help develop preparedness and execution of Elections in the future.

Nick Carter proceeded to set the scene as detailed within the Introduction of the report. Members heard that the management and operational aspects of elections were dealt with by the Electoral Services Team who wwere part of the Strategic Support Unit. The team consisted of three core members who dealt with elections and electoral registration (Elections Manager, Electoral Services Officer and Elections Assistant). During busier periods the team was supported by other staff within Strategic Support and more widely across the Council and by non-Council employees.

It was agreed at an early stage to conduct the count over three days in the following Layout: 

·         The Parliamentary Count immediately following the close of poll – a statutory requirement.

·         The District Count on Friday 8 May commencing at 11.00am.

·         The Parish/Town Count on Saturday 9 May commencing at 10.00am.

It was envisaged that the verification process would be complete by 01.00am and the Parliamentary Count concluded by 3.30am at the latest.

Members heard that, in Nick Carter’s opinion, no significant issues had been identified in either the use of Polling Stations or the format of the Count. However, he highlighted that the lack of capacity of the Elections team had become evident at an early stage due to the volume of calls they had to manage on a daily basis. Whilst a project plan was put in place to oversee the overall Elections process, the programme was not robustly followed; the project plan lacked detail and the team reverted to previous methods of operation – relying on a smaller number of experienced staff.

Nick Carter proceeded to explain the events and issues associated with the Post Notice of Election (23^rd March – 6^th May). He advised that the Elections Team received a large number of District/Parish Council nominations just before the deadline - this placed significant pressures on the Election Team. In addition to this, the Council issued 23,131 postal vote packs for the Parliamentary Election and District Elections and a further 10,507 for Parish/Town elections. These packs contained a total of 47,809 votes. Nick Carter explained that it was not possible to include three ballot papers in a single pack due to printing constraints. Members were aware that some voters were confused by the multiple ballot papers they had received and that better communication could have helped.

The Elections Team ran a range of training courses for staff associated with the elections. Nick Carter suggested that the training could have been more robust so that support staff were better prepared to assist.

The challenges  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

Purpose: To consider the findings of the Inspectors' report and agree future topics of scrutiny assessing the effectivness of Children's Services functions.

The Commission considered a report concerning the progress of Children’s Services subsequent to their Ofsted grading of ‘inadequate’ issued in May 2015. Mac Heath (Head of Children and Families Services) introduced himself to the Commission, stating that he had been in post since June 2015.

Six months had passed since the grading was published and in that time a lot of work had been undertaken – which was highlighted within the report.  The key point to note was that the Improvement Action Plan had been developed in response to the Ofsted report and clearly set out the vision for children, young people and families.

The Improvement Plan showed how the Improvement Commitments linked to Ofsted’s recommendations and showed what would be measured, monitored, observed or established to demonstrate that the service met their commitments. Each section of the plan contained SMART actions with target dates and a lead officer who had responsibility for completing them.

Mac Heath explained that the Secretary of State showed confidence in the Council’s ability to improve the service with minimal intervention; the plan had been accepted as a constructive tool to track the improvement journey. Since the plan was publically accepted, in August 2015, it had been confirmed that the Improvement Partners to work alongside the service would be an organisation called Exploring Choices.

Mac Heath wanted to emphasise that the plan showed a number of red statuses and these indicated that the plan was ambitious. However, the service still recognised the need to complete the items so deadlines had been rescheduled.

Members heard that concerns had been raised regarding the leadership and culture within the service. Mac Heath advised that a number of management roles had secured permanent staff (from previously temp/ contracted posts). Mac Heath explained how it would help to demonstrate that the service was committed to its staff which in turn would help to shape an improved culture.

He concluded by stating that he would use every available opportunity to provide updates (Local Safeguarding Children’s Board, Overview & Scrutiny Management Commission and Children’s Improvement Board) to ensure the service was transparent in its improvement journey – he wanted to ensure the plan received robust challenge in various forums.

Councillor Alan Macro was disappointed to see that a review of Test of Assurance on the Director post had been postponed. Councillor Lynne Doherty advised that the review was postponed in order to allow time to consider the best way forward. The service was committed to conducting a review and this would take place in due course.

Members proceeded to focus their discussions around the items which had been reported as either ‘amber’ or ‘red’. The Commission heard that, in many cases, an item would be deliberately categorised as ‘amber’ although the action had been completed. This was to allow sufficient time for the action to be embedded within the service. Lynne Doherty stressed that numerous changes required cultural improvements and it was recognised that this would take time to embed.

Councillor Emma Webster  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

Purpose: To compare the Service Area’s performance levels in respect of Delayed Transfers of Care between 2011/12 and 2014/15.

The Commission considered a report concerning Delayed Transfers of Care (DToC) in West Berkshire. Tandra Forster (Head of Adult Social Care) reminded Members that the item was previously considered by the Commission due to the concerns raised about the poor performance of the Council in comparison to national statistics.

Tandra Forster explained that, since the previous review, DToC figures had significantly improved with social care delays decreasing from an average of 9.0 to 4.5 people per 100,000 population.

Members heard that section 2 of the report detailed how the Maximising Independence Team had managed the improvements through the focused efforts of managers overseeing the following:

·         In reach hospital link workers based on acute hospital sites could ensure a close dialogue with Health hospital discharge teams before point of referral. This enabled staff to get to know people at an early stage to understand their likely social care needs.

·         Referrals were responded too in a more timely manner. The teams proactively worked to the principle of engaging with patients from the point of admission rather than point of discharge, linking with the Council re-enablement team to maximise rehabilitation opportunities and facilitate safe and timely discharge.

·         Engagement with Health managers before formal notification to the Department of Health to ensure that data on delayed transfers is accurately reported as part of the DToC Situation Report (SitRep). 

Tandra Forster advised that helping clients from rural areas to return home presented challenge due to limited capacity with external homecare providers. This placed the Council’s in-house reablement team under pressure as they were having to hold on to clients for longer than they needed reducing access for new people.

Members heard that Adult Social Care (ASC) was committed to continuing good progress and new ways of working in partnership with health partners. The work would include the development of the Joint Care Provider (JCP) project under the Better Care Fund programme of work. The project involved the Council and Berkshire Healthcare Foundation Trust pooling their resources to avoid duplication of services to support timely hospital discharges.

In addition to this, work was underway to develop a 7 day social care response. The plans were in the early stages and some minor changes had been introduced without making any formal adjustments to staff working patterns. The approach was introduced in June 2015 with a sole focus on the Royal Berkshire Hospital. Since then the scope had widened to include North Hampshire Hospital and Great Western Hospital. The impact had been closely monitored and data collected on a daily and weekly basis. The feedback received so far suggested that the changes were effective; should it continue to prove successful then the service would undertake a formal consultation.

The Commission heard that, given the significant improvements in performance and mitigations in place, it was recommended that the DToC item was removed from the Work Programme. Tandra Forster advised Members that the topic was also considered and scrutinised through the Health and Wellbeing Board  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

Purpose: To receive the latest period revenue and capital budget reports

The Commission considered a report concerning the financial performance for Q1 of the 2015/16 financial year. Melanie Ellis (Chief Accountant) advised Members that current forecasted revenue position was an overspend of £987k.

The Commission heard that the overspend predominantly originated from Children’s Services who were forecasting an overspend of £1.9m. The Service and Directorate introduced a range of actions to help reduce the overall overspend by year end. Adult Social Care forecasted an underspend of £877k, as a result of releasing £400k from the risk reserve and capitalising over £400k of equipment expenditure which was previously funded from revenue budgets.

Councillor Laszlo Zverko asked how much the service expected to reduce the overall underspend by through proposed actions. Melanie Ellis advised that it was too early to know.

Councillor Alan Macro acknowledged that £400k of the risk fund had been utilised in order to reduce the current overspend but he was concerned that the risk fund might be required later in the year and he subsequently asked how much of the reserve was left. Melanie Ellis advised that she did not know the exact amount of the reserve fund remaining but that she would report back to the Commission with a definitive response. Members heard that the risks within both services were still present and she suggested that an assessment had been made by the Directorate of the likelihood of all risks arising and it was felt that £400k could be released at this time.

Councillor Rick Jones asked whether Adult Social Care had reprioritised the delivery of services in order to forecast a significant underspend. Melanie Ellis advised suggested that Members would receive a comprehensive response from Tandra Forster.

Resolved that:

1)    Melanie Ellis would confirm the remaining value of the risk reserve

2)    Tandra Forster would be requested to detail whether activities within Adult Social Care had been re-profiled in order to increase the forecasted underspend.

Purpose: To monitor quarterly the performance levels across the Council and to consider, where appropriate, any remedial action.

The Commission considered a report (Agenda Item 15) concerning the Key Accountable Performance outturn report for quarter one 2015/16. Catalin Bogos (Performance, Research and Consultation Manager) informed Members that it was the first report issued since the performance management methodology had been revised. This was also the first performance report on the new Councils Strategy approved by the Council in May 2015.

The current report contained 27 key measures, of which 19 were available at the end of Q1. Fourteen of these measures were reported as ‘green’ and 5 were reported as ‘Amber’. Catalin Bogos advised that the amber items predominantly related to Children’s Services’ performance measures, however, exception reports were requested for all items reported as amber and then detailed within the main body of the report.

Councillor Alan Macro was concerned to read that the majority of amber items related to Child Protection processes, most notably because the Commission had received an update from the Head of Children’s Services earlier that evening and was led to believe that progress was being made.

Councillor Macro stated that it was unfortunate to see that some key performance measures had been withdrawn from the report, empty houses being one of those. He highlighted that the previous reports suggested that the performance was outside the target level which had been set and that it was a shame to lose sight of these.

Councillor Emma Webster reminded Members that a task group would meet the following week to consider the current set of measures and to note that these should be closely linked to the Council Strategy.

Catalin Bogos reminded Members that the previous performance reports included a basket of indicators that provided progress updates against the previous Council Strategy and that the report considered by the Commission reflected the new basket of indicators used to monitor the delivery of the new Council Strategy 2015-2019. In addition, the revised performance management methodology allowed services to propose new targets if it provided a more accurate reflection of the performance challenges/ successes faced within their service.

Councillor Rick Jones asked for clarification regarding the term ‘core functions’. Catalin advised that a large number of measures could be included within the report as several hundred functions were undertaken by services within the Council. However, the Council was selective in the measurements it considered to be a priority – based upon whether the item directly linked to an element of the Council Strategy. Items referred to as ‘core business’ were not directly linked to the identified priorities of the Council Strategy but they were additional measure that contributed towards a fundamental, high profile, public facing service within the Council.

Councillor Laszlo Zverko highlighted the alarming figures detailed within graphs 13 and 14 of the report. Catalin advised that when compared to the national result, West Berkshire’s levels were similar (for 4-5 years olds) or significantly better (for 10-11 years old). The Commission heard that child obesity was an area of national concern but that it had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.