Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of the Commission held on 5 January 2016.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 5 January 2016 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the following amendments:

·         Page 9, paragraph 4 should state: Steve Ardagh-Walter.

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 7 actions followed up from previous Commission meetings, the following points were noted:

Item 2.4: Councillor Alan Macro suggested that more could be done to encourage residents to return equipment. In his view there were items which could be returned but that remained in the possession of their previous users.

Item 2.7: Councillor Macro supported the recommendation but insisted that a range of payment methods should continue to be offered and clearly referenced on notice boards.

Resolved that the report be noted.

Purpose: To advise the Commission of items to be considered by West Berkshire Council from 10 February 2016 to 31 May 2016 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 (Agenda Item 5) for the period covering 10 February 2016 to 31 May 2016.

David Lowe reminded Members that the item provided an opportunity to consider the need to conduct scrutiny on future planned topics scheduled for the Executive.

Councillor Emma Webster highlighted, within item C2998, that the allocation of representatives on the Outside Body for the Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue Service (RBFRS) was required on a four yearly basis.

Since the meeting it was confirmed that while the majority of appointments were made for four years there are certain appointments that need to be made annually - the appointment to the RBFRS was one of these (Moira Fraser – Democratic Services Manager).

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 2015/2016.

David Lowe introduced Appendix B. The report detailed the findings of a Task Group following a review into the methods by which scrutiny of the Children and Families service could be conducted. It concluded that a panel should be established and:

·         Comprise 4 Councillors;

·         Meet on a quarterly basis;

·         Determine its own work programme, providing annual reports to the Overview and Scrutiny Management Commission.

David Lowe introduced Appendix C which detailed changes to the operation of the Standards and Effectiveness Panel. Members heard that the Standards and Effectiveness Panel was established in 1998 to provide a forum for Councillors to engage with schools. The forum offered an opportunity to scrutinise performance within the relative informality of an open debate with senior management teams. The report set out a number of changes to the Panel’s operation to ensure that it remained appropriately focused on the Council’s priorities.

David Lowe explained that although the Panel was separate and autonomous, the Council’s Constitution required that changes to the Panel’s operation must be approved by the Overview and Scrutiny Management Commission.

Councillor Alan Macro requested that reports generated by the Panel were submitted for consideration by the Commission. He proceeded to comment on the number of members which formed the panel (detailed within sub-point 3 of section 2.3). Rachael Wardell advised that, although the number appeared relatively high, it increased the likelihood that Councillors would be represented at meetings.

Resolved that:

1.    The Housing Grants and Loans Task Group would be added to the Work Programme;

2.    Findings detailed within appendix B, Scrutiny of the Children and Families Service, be accepted;

3.    Appendix C  - Re-designation of the Standards and Effectiveness Panel be accepted;

4.    The changes to the work programme be noted.

Purpose: To consider any items in which an Urgent Decision us required to be taken by the Executive, in exception to the requirements of the Local Authorities (Execut8ive arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012.

The Commission were requested to consider an urgent item in regarding to the following:

The Council conducted a public consultation exercise (Phase 1) on its 2016/17 budget which ran from 3 November through to 14 December.  The consultation contained 47 separate public consultation proposals which amount to £4.6m. This was part of a £10.8m package of savings proposals.

Shortly before Christmas the Government consulted the Council on its proposed Revenue Support Grant (RSG) proposals for the next four years.  The consultation proposed that the Council have its RSG reduced by 44% in 2016/17 effectively meaning that the Council had to find a further £7m in order to deliver a balanced budget.

The Council is now conducting a Phase 2 public consultation exercise which will run from 15 January 2016 to 7 March 2016. 

At its meeting on 1 March the Council will be required to set its 2016/17 budget which will mean that all Phase 1 savings proposals will need to be considered and determine as part of this process.

It is proposed that Phase 2 of the public facing savings proposals be reported back to the Executive on 24 March (not the 21 April as stated on the current forward plan) for them to make appropriate decisions.  This change of date is so that all of those impacted by Phase 2 proposals are informed as early as possible.

Members were reminded that the introduction of The Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 in September 2012 included a requirement to publish 28 clear days’ notice of any intended key decision on the Forward Plan. On occasions, however, situations arise where an urgent decision needs to be made in respect of an item that does not appear on the Forward Plan. The process for taking an urgent decision without giving 28 days’ notice requires the authority to consult  all Members of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Commission to explain to them what the decision is about and why it is urgent.

Therefore, Members of the Commission would be consulted prior to the item being discussed by the Executive on the 24^th March 2016 as an urgent item.

Andy Day, Head of Strategic Support, explained that a great deal of work and time was required in order to upload consultation responses and prepare the report in readiness for the Executive on 25^th March 2016 – following closure of the Phase 2 Consultation . He reminded Members that it had previously been agreed that the Executive would consider the Phase 2 results in April, however, the date for consideration had moved in order that actions could commence and impacted parties could be informed at the earliest opportunity.

Members heard that the Phase 1 proposals would be considered at the Council meeting on 1st March 2016. The meeting would not consider the outcome of the Phase 2 consultation as this would still be in progress at the point of the meeting.

Members discussed whether the Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

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 monitor the progress of Priority 5 set within the Council Strategy - Good at safeguarding children and vulnerable adults.

The Commission considered a report (Agenda Item 11) outlining the progress of delivery against the Council’s Strategy – Priority 5: Good at safeguarding Children and Vulnerable Adults.

Mac Heath, Head of Service for Children and Families Services, introduced the report and outlined the Key Performance Indicators detailed within Appendix A. He elaborated on those items which had been detailed in the exceptions report – Appendix B.

P&S1c&f01 – To reduce the percentage of posts that are filled by agency staff: Mac Heath explained that the service continued to work hard to address Social Worker recruitment and retention challenges. Reducing reliance on agency staff remained a top priority within the service and overall performance against the indicator was moving in the right direction.

Members heard that the service explored various ways to address the challenge but it was important to note that agency staff received higher pay and consequently any encouragement to join the Council, as a permanent member of staff, had to stand against the prospect of reduced wages.

P&s1c&f05 - Percentage of repeat referrals to Children’s services within 12 months of a previous referral: Mac Health outlined that such cases might return to the service due to changing circumstances within the home or a relationship. He advised that performance was heading in the right direction – below that of the comparator authorities and the national average.

For the avoidance of doubt, Rachael Wardell advised that the service expected to achieve a percentage within the target range and that deviance from this would warrant further investigation. The service did not drive performance to achieve targets which could introduce unwanted behaviours. It was expected that the performance levels might fluctuate but this would not generate concern so long as it fluctuated within the expected range; although the service aimed to achieve performance within the targeted range it was far more important to ensure safeguarding and support was the main priority overall.

Catalin Bogos, Performance, Research and Consultation Manager, advised that a revised benchmark range was agreed at Corporate Board and brought performance indicators in line with other Local Authorities.

Councillor Emma Webster asked whether the current benchmark considered the required performance levels in order to achieve a ‘Good’ rating by Ofsted. Mac Heath advised that the service obtained learning from previous inspections and compared performance against other Local Authorities in terms of ‘what Good looks like’. It was of paramount importance to ensure the service continued to act appropriately and promote good practice.

Members noted the remarks by Officers and requested that the terminology used within the report was revised – to clarify performance overall.

Councillor Webster concluded that the service was striving to achieve an Ofsted rating of ‘Good’ and the question remained – what should the service measure their performance against in order to achieve the rating.

P&s1c&f07 – To maintain a high percentage of (single) assessments being completed within 45 working days: Mac Heath stated that the measure considered cases  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

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

The Commission considered a report (Agenda item 12) concerning the Quarter Three Financial Performance Report (2015-2016).

Andy Walker, Head of Finance, Introduced the report to Members and advised that the forecast revenue position was an overspend of £0.6m, which was an increase of £0.1m from Quarter two.

The Communities Directorate forecasted an overspend of £0.9m at Quarter Three, which was similar to that at Quarter Two. The overspend was primarily the result of a £1.3m pressure within Children and Families Services, forecast overspends within Education of £0.4m and Prevention & Developing Community Resilience £0.1m, offset by savings within Adult Social Care and Care Commissioning, Housing & Safeguarding of £0.9m split approximately equally. Andy Walker explained that the Directorate was looking to mitigate the forecast overspend position further and was reviewing all spending plans to see what could be delivered in the remainder of the financial year.

Gabrielle Esplin, Finance Manager (Capital and Treasury Mgt), advised that the forecast capital spend was currently £42.2m against a revised budget of £43.1m with £0.9m expected to be re-profiled into 2016/2017.

Councillor Alan Macro asked why the number of Discretionary Housing Payments released had reduced. Rachael Wardell advised that this was as a result of fewer applications being received; Members were informed that promotion had not changed so it was assumed that the decrease in demand was a result of changing circumstances.

Councillor Macro asked why the Education schemes had been deferred into 2016/17. Gabrielle Esplin explained that the subcontractor recently went into administration, which delayed the progress of work, and was compounded by ongoing environmental concerns on site.

Resolved that the report be noted.