Agenda and minutes

There were no Declarations of Interest made at the meeting.

There were no members of the public and press present at the meeting.

The Chair reported that a Christmas lunch for the Panel would be held on 10^th December at the rising of the meeting. 

-           2008/09 Outturn and Outcomes of additional Budget Allocations

-           Progress in 2009/10

Mike Shaw, Finance Manager (Neighbourhoods) presented the Revenue Outturn for 2008/09 together with the latest performance and monitoring against the 2009/10 Revenue Budget as part of the first stage of the budget setting process for 2010/11.

The report highlighted:-

-              General Fund Revenue Outturn position was an overall overspend of £261,000

-              Housing Revenue Account Outturn position was an overall overspend of £287,000

-              Value for Money

o             showed that the relationship between cost and performance of homelessness was excellent with Rotherham being the rank bottom spender

o             100% of Neighbourhoods Key Performance Indicators targets achieved

-              As at August, 2009, projected overspend of £538,000 for the Independent Support Service (Wardens)

-              A number of budget pressures within Safer Neighbourhoods.  The wider Neighbourhoods Service was optimising opportunities to save staff costs through tight vacancy management and had implemented a moratorium on non-essential expenditure with the aim of delivering a balanced position by the end of March, 2010

-              Budget pressures of £53,000 within Business Regulation (£5,000 within the Animal Health Team and £49,000 within Bereavement Services)

-              Projected overspend of £31,000 in Neighbourhood Partnerships – unable to meet the vacancy factor allowed for in the staffing budgets

-              Unachievable vacancy factor within Housing Access but would be offset by a reduction in establishment costs due to maternity leave

Discussion ensued on the report with the following issues highlighted/clarified;-

§               Discussions were taking place with the Police with regard to making meetings much more “visible” i.e. holding them in venues that members of the public could attend, publicity etc.

§               The need to streamline the number of community meetings to avoid duplication which hopefully would increase attendance

§               There were a number of instances in the report where it stated that vacancy management savings would not be achieved.  However, it was a Corporate requirement of the Directorate’s budget setting process that an automatic 5% vacancy allowance was built in.  In small teams it was very difficult to fulfil that commitment.  The Strategic Director undertook to report the Panel’s concerns to the Finance Director and Corporate Management Team

§               Independent Support Service

o             Very sensitive issue which needed to be dealt with appropriately as they were highly valued by members of the public

o             Budget used to be contained within Adult Social Care budget which for this year was £68M.  The Warden Service had never broken even or been self-financing but the difference between the costs recovered and the cost of the Service had been contained within the massive Adult Services budget. 

o             When the budgets were realigned the scale of the difference between the cost of the Service and income recovered became more obvious

o             A review was taking place of the Service which had included consideration given to whether there was scope to integrate some of the Warden Services with Domiciliary Care Services.  The review was still ongoing and far more complicated than envisaged due to the skill set and the geographic community served

o             The charges for the Warden  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

John Mansergh, Performance Management Officer, gave a powerpoint presentation on the Performance Management Framework as follows:-

Performance is reality

-              Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) should show what we are getting from our money

-              Should reflect reality

-              KPIs are only a ‘can opener’ – insight into the quality of service

-              Use alongside other tools e.g. budget reports, inspection assessments and customer satisfaction ratings

Target Setting – Why?

-              Legal duty to continuously improve

-              Helps to prioritise

-              Focuses efforts (Service Plan) and resources (Medium Term Financial Strategy) on achieving a target

-              Aims for better performance each year and to achieve levels of the very best

Performance Report

-                    Current Performance

o                   Identifies performance within the year against the set target (green is on target – red off target)

o                   Good performance is identified as a higher figure is better/or lower

-                    Baseline

o                   Outturn performance figure from the previous year

-                    Results

o                   Identifies the cumulative performance within the year at a given point in time

-                    This time last year

o                   Enables a trend analysis comparing the same reporting periods year on year

-                    D.o.T. (Direction of Travel)

o                   Identifies performance when comparing the same reporting period from the previous year (green is better/red is worse)

-                    Target

o                   We will include quarterly targets as recommended at last Panel

-                    Outcome Framework

o                   Identifies the linkage of the KPI to the Outcomes Framework

Making Performance Management Work

-                    Strong leadership and commitment

-                    Clear roles and responsibilities

-                    Setting clear, challenging but realistic objectives for improvement

-                    Robust performance information

-                    Balanced, open and honest reporting

-                    Taking quick and decisive action

-                    Integration with financial management

-                    Ensuring user focus and meeting all needs

-                    Creating a performance improvement culture

John presented the performance report for the first quarter of 2009/10 which outlined the Key Performance Indicator results and efficiency projections.

At the end of the quarter, 12 (86%) Key Performance Indicators were currently on track to achieve their year end targets, this compared to 75% at the end of last year. There were 2 Indicators that were rated ‘off’ target, and were shown as a red triangle alert in Appendix A. Of the Indicators solely owned by the Directorate, 100% were on target.  For 2010 Rotherham Ltd., 7 (78%) Key Performance Indicators were on track to achieve their year end targets which compared to 50% at the end of last year.  The Indicators off target at the end of the 1^st quarter were:-

2010 Rotherham Ltd.

-              BV211a Programmed/Responsive Repairs

-              LPI185 Repairs Appointments Made and Kept

2010 Rotherham was identifying rent lost for 2009/10 as a result of voids at the end of June of £288,000.

Discussion ensued on the report with the following issues highlighted/clarified:-

-              What was 2010 predicting as rent loss for the end of the year?

-              Ward Members had drawn attention to some practices of 2010 that officers had not been aware of.  A review  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

David Rhodes, Corporate Environmental Manager, gave the following powerpoint presentation:-

Why Climate Change?

-              Sustainable Community Strategy

-              Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change

-              Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Act 2006

-              Climate Change Act 2008 – 34% reduction by 2020, 80% reduction by 2050

Impacts of Climate Change

-              Warmer, drier summers

-              Wetter winters

-              More extreme weather events

-              Air pollution episodes

-              Biodiversity

-              Most vulnerable will be the worse affected

Strategy Background

-              November, 2007 – RMBC signed the Nottingham Declaration

-              Commitment to develop a Climate Change Action Plan

-              Council Plan – energy, transport and buildings

-              Action Plan for the Borough needed – inclusive of partner and community activity and wider environmental activity

-              Rotherham’s Sustainability Partnership lead supported by the Council’s Sustainable Development Officer Group

Performance Links

-              Co-ordinate innovative partnerships to improve sustainable infrastructure, mitigate and adapt to climate change

-              Improve the local environmental quality of our neighbourhoods

-              LLA target

-              National Indicators

Aims

-              To reduce Rotherham’s contribution to climate change through CO2 reduction

-              To prepare Rotherham for a changing climate

-              To reduce Rotherham’s Ecological Footprint

-              To promote sustainable development across the Borough

-              To enhance Rotherham’s local environment

Next Steps

-              Consultation August-October

-              Presentations and workshops with partners and stakeholders

-              Website

-              Sign off

-              Ongoing development and monitoring

Discussion ensued on the presentation with the following issues highlighted:-

-              NI185 CO₂ Emissions from Council Activities – the Council collected the data which was reported via a spreadsheet produced by DEFRA

-              NI186 CO₂ Reductions from within the Borough – the information was collected by a private company on behalf of DEFRA.  The Council did not see how the data was collected.  Concerns had been raised with regard to this in the past as it did not allow you the ability to see how accurate the data was.

-              NI187 and 189 were interlinked but was little mention of them in the report

-              An Environmental Statement was produced annually which was externally verified.  Auditors had commented previously that the Council did not publicise all its elements of good practice

-              A meeting was to be held later day with the Children and Young People’s Management Team as part of the consultation process.  Carbon Reduction Emissions would be discussed in particular as the Council would have to purchase allowances for schools but they would only be allowed to report energy consumption data and not carry out reductions.  That was being looked at with the possibility of changing Financial Regulations so that CO₂ reductions could be enforced in the future

-              Recycling facilities in PFI Schools

-              How well was the Eco homes performing?

-              Role of partners e.g. PCT

Resolved:-  (1)  That the development of the draft Environment and Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan for the Borough be noted.

(2)  That David Rhodes raise with Children and Young People’s  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

Tracie Seals, Sustainable Communities Manager, presented an update and progress report on the Garage Site Review including an overview of the initial recommendations, resident consultation feedback information and the next steps to be undertaken to complete the review.

Consultation had been ongoing with Ward Members, residents and 2010 Rotherham Ltd. to enable recommendations to be finalised.

Of the 440 garage sites within the Borough, the analysis of sites undertaken Borough-wide had recommended that 87% of sites be retained and improved and that 11% of the sites be considered for disposal.  The remaining 2% of sites were owned by Environment and Development Services and were being reviewed separately.

The proposed recommendations included:-

A report would be submitted to the Cabinet Member for Housing and Neighbourhoods in November for approval of the Garage Site Review final recommendations.

46 sites had been identified as unsustainable and therefore been recommended for disposal to either support the Affordable Housing Programme, including new Council housing or for potential open market sale, subject to service area consultation processes and Cabinet approval.  Consultation had commenced on 30^th July with garage tenants and residents that surround sites identified for potential disposal and development.

The majority of sites across the Borough were in high use and demand and, therefore, proposed for retention.  These would be programmed for investments if it had not been carried out previously.  The Refurbishment Programme would include garage door replacements, resurfacing work, brickwork and painting works.

A number of management issues raised previously still required monitoring with actions being agreed to resolve matters with 2010 Rotherham Ltd. including:-

-        Concerns regarding the general condition of garage and garage sites

-        Site management protocols

-        Dealing with damaged/derelict garages

-        Tenancy termination process

-        Demand and usage.

The following issues were clarified:-

-              Some of the sites proposed for disposal on the open market were constrained and suitable for self-build or small scale development

-              Where residents adjacent to sites had created a vehicular or pedestrian access an assessment is undertaken to establish whether a right to access exists.  Where access is to be retained the schemes are designed to accommodate such, however, where no such rights exists residents are contacted and arrangements to remove the access discussed

-              Planning appraisals had already been carried out and for sites to be disposed of on the open market, details as to acceptable use and site constraints would be included in the marketing literature

-              Through the 2010 Liaison Group, management issues had been raised and discussed.  The feedback would be contained within the final recommendations

-              Sites with high level of voids would more likely have gone forward for development.  However, for those sites  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.

Jane Davies-Haire, Landlord Relations Manager, presented the latest version of the Improvement Plan which had been approved by 2010 Rotherham Ltd.’s Board on 7^th October 2009. 

The report also proposed that the current management agreement was extended to 30^th June, 2011, three months later than previously recommended.

Meetings had taken place between the Council and 2010 Rotherham Ltd. to establish clear targets which had resulted in the submitted Plan.  It was proposed that quarterly monitoring meetings be held between key managers in RMBC and 2010, following which reports (by exception) would be submitted to the Cabinet Member.-

Tenants’ priorities had been identified through the STATUS Survey and test of opinion surveys and feedback from tenants’ events.  They fell into the following 6 Themes:-

Theme 1         Address tenants’ and leaseholders’ priorities for improvement

Theme 2         Achieve the standards expected of top performing organisations

Theme 3         Make a unique contribution to Rotherham’s priorities, particularly

                        The Safe and Proud themes

Theme 4         Ensure all services are well governed and well managed

Theme 5         Ensure strong financial management processes are in place

Theme 6         Deliver value for money, making excellent use of resources

The next STATUS Survey was not due to be repeated until October, 2010, so 2010 Rotherham Ltd. had requested that it be carried out earlier.

The Council and 2010 Rotherham Ltd. would ensure customers were involved in carrying out reality checks and monitoring progress against the Plan.  Progress reports would include an analysis of risks.

It was also proposed that the current management agreement be extended to 30^th June, 2011.  The three month extension (the previous report recommended an extension to 31^st March, 2011) recognised the additional time taken to agree the Plan, and recent changes to the ALMO’s senior management team.

Discussion ensued on the Plan with the following issues raised:-

-              Out of the 58 outcomes, 12 were on red, 36 amber and 10 green.  How much confidence was there that they would lead to an improved, sustained and efficient organisation? 

-              The status of the Plan showed a degree of self-awareness.  2010 were confident they would be able to deliver and would be monitored every quarter

-              5.4 stated that financial reports were timely and reliable and clear – the test would be whether they identified at an early stage problems that enabled management action to be taken

-              5.3 stated that 80% of all budget holders receive training – all budget holders should receive training

-              Issues around access need to be strengthened

-              Very poor publicity for the new “golden” number

-              Concern expressed regarding the amount of money spent on consultation by 2010 and the number of red and ambers in the Plan.  Was there long enough for them to turn green?

-              How close were the ambers to green or ambers to red?  What was the direction of travel?

Resolved:-  (1)  That the Improvement Plan, attached at appendix 1 of the report submitted, be noted.

(2)  That  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

- minutes of meetings held on 9^th and 23^rd September and 5^th October, 2009

The Panel noted the decisions made under delegated powers by the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods held on 9^th and 23^rd September and 5^th October, 2009.

Arising from Minute No. 66 (Approval of Tender for Structural Repairs to 92 ‘Airey’ Constructed Non Traditional Properties) questions were raised with regard to those properties that had been purchased under Right to Buy.

Resolved:-  (1)  That a report be submitted on the options available to the Council within the resources available.

(2)  That a report be submitted on non-traditional properties in general.

- minutes of meeting held on 17^th September, 2009

The minutes of the meeting held on 17th September, 2009, were agreed.

- minutes of meetings held on 11^th and 25^th September and 9^th October, 2009

The minutes of the Performance and Scrutiny Overview Committee held on 11th and 25^th September and 9^th October, 2009, were noted.