Agenda item

(CSP: MEC)

Purpose:  To inform Members of the latest revenue financial performance for 2018/19.

Resolved that the report be noted, in particular the continued challenge of managing pressures in Adult Social Care, which are shared nationally, and the mitigation that is proposed in year to reduce the current end of year projection.

This decision is not subject to call in as:

·      Report is to note only

therefore it will be implemented immediately.

The Executive considered a report (Agenda item 7) which informed Members of the latest revenue financial performance for 2018/19. The current financial forecast was an overspend of £1.3m against a net revenue budget of £119.4m. This figure took account of a number of mitigation strategies, notably the in year reduction of expenditure, where appropriate, across the Council and in particular in Adult Social Care (ASC). Members were particularly asked to note the continued challenge of managing pressures in ASC, which were shared nationally, and the mitigation that was proposed in year to reduce the current end of year projection.

Councillor Anthony Chadley explained that costs for ASC were significant and concerned a relatively small number of residents. A change in the circumstances of a client could create a significant financial impact, however the costs of care needed to be met. Unfortunately, the funding that had been modelled for ASC was not sufficient to meet increasing costs, however mitigating actions had been and would continue to be taken and central government would be lobbied for additional funding. This included applying to remain in the Business Rates pilot, but there would be competition for this from other local authorities as a shortfall in ASC funding was a national issue.

Councillor Chadley added that the Council had an excellent record of balancing its budgets. He also pointed to the successful implementation of the Property Investment Strategy with the income target being exceeded. The Council was also on target to achieve anticipated income from green waste charging and he expected that this would soon be reported as ‘green’.

Councillor Alan Macro noted the ASC overspend of £2.4m, which was the figure prior to any mitigation measures, and queried when the ASC risk reserve would be utilised as well as the criteria for its use. He asked whether it would be used prior to taking the step referred to of slowing down activity and expenditure.

Councillor Graham Bridgman explained that risk reserves had been established to meet specific identified risks in the budget and were contingency funds to meet unpredicted costs. He also made the point that the timing for the deployment of risk reserves would not alter the outturn position for the financial year and it was felt to be at too early a stage in the financial year to do so. Mitigating measures needed to be implemented in the first instance rather than automatically turning to the risk reserve, this was particularly important when considering that the amount set aside for predicted risks was not sufficient to meet the forecast position due to the level of in-year pressure.

Councillor Bridgman then built on the comment made by Councillor Chadley that a small number of new clients and those with a change in their circumstances could make a vast difference to costs and therefore the ASC outturn. As an example of this he highlighted the cost of residential care placements which was in the region of £1m and was for just less than 25 people. However, this did align with demographic expectations.

Councillor Bridgman made the further point that ASC costs did not just concern elderly residents, they also encapsulated adults with high level needs that needed to be met. He added that the modelling would be worked through in detail to fully understand where there had been issues to aid future predictions.

RESOLVED that Members noted the report.

Other options considered: N/A – factual report for information.