Agenda and draft minutes

To consider the minutes of the previous meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board held on 13 March 2024 and to approve them as a true and correct record of the proceedings and to be signed by the Chair.

No comments were raised regarding the accuracy of the minutes, however Councillor Yasseen asked that the minutes were written in a consistent manner going forward with comments being attributed to Members.

Resolved: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board held on 13 March 2024 be approved as a true record.

To receive declarations of interest from Members in respect of items listed on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive questions relating to items of business on the agenda from members of the public or press who are present at the meeting.

The Chair explained that any questions must relate to items on the agenda. He understood that a number of people had attended to ask questions regarding the Palestine petition, unfortunately he had been advised to remove that item from the agenda because of its political nature, given the upcoming general election. The Chair did give his assurance that this item would be added to the first available agenda following the conclusion of the general election.

Councillor Tinsley felt that this had not been consistent in the run up to the local elections and queried if there was a difference was between local and national elections. The Monitoring Officer, Philip Horsfield, clarified that this topic had been excluded from any formal agendas before the local elections as well, so there had been consistency in the approach to formal meetings in both pre-election periods in relation to this topic. He noted that there were slight differences in the rules relating to national and local elections, explaining that he had emailed all members proving additional guidance on the rules regarding pre-election periods and he was happy to take questions from individual members either at the meeting or in writing.

A member of the public asked a question relating to the meeting linked to the advice received prior to the meeting. He had received certain documentation prior to the meeting explaining that the Palestine questions should not be asked at this meeting due to it being controversial or politically sensitive. He noted that the Board were also discussing certain financial inducements on the agenda prior to an election occurring. His question was that the Monitoring Officer was advising that it was controversial then it should not be done but also other things happening that they were told in the guise that they were given prior to the meeting which the Council had to abide by, which was ultimately that it must always be guided by the principle of fairness.  It was crucial that any decision taken would then be seen as fair and reasonable by the public and those standing for office.

They were promised during previous meetings that they would be able to as questions about Palestine during this meeting and now they had been told they could not because of the general election. In the first Overview and Scrutiny Management Board (OSMB) meeting they held they were told by the Councillors attending and by the Monitoring Officer that the law must be followed, and the Council was in purdah and certain provisions were agreed to. During the second OSMB meeting they were told they were still in purdah as it was one day until the local elections and informed that the Chief Executive and Leader had both declined to raise the Palestinian flag. He tried to indicate that there was a gulf of inconsistencies.

The Chair explained he understood where the speaker was coming from however the Council still had to conduct its normal business, which was what was being considered at  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

To consider whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during consideration of any part of the agenda.

The Chair advised that there were no items of business on the agenda that would require the exclusion of the press or public from the meeting.

To consider a report of the Strategic Director of Children and Young People’s Service to refresh the Rotherham SEND Strategy, vision and future priorities.  

Recommendations

That Cabinet:

1.    Approve consultation on the refreshed Rotherham SEND Strategy that has been co-produced with partners across the Borough.

2.      Agree to the refreshed SEND Strategy being presented back to Cabinet in late 2024 for formal approval prior to implementation.

The Chair invited Councillor Cusworth, the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People Services to introduce the report. She introduced Helen Sweaton, Joint Assistant Director, Commissioning and Performance and Niall Devlin, Assistant Director, Education and Inclusion.

The report being submitted to Cabinet on Monday 10 June was asking for approval to consult on a refresh of the Rotherham Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Strategy, which set out the priorities and vision for SEND services over the next four years. Following the Joint Local Area SEND inspection in July 2021, along with partners, the Council had worked to deliver the written statement of action to address significant areas of weakness in the local area’s practice. In September 2023, the Improving Lives Select Commission noted feedback from advisers and successful achievement of the required improvements and the successful discharge of priority actions.

To provide additional context, the areas of improvement were quality of education, health and care plans, communication around the local offer, preparation for adulthood and the graduated response. Since that time, the Department for Education (DfE) White Paper on Special Educational Needs and Disabilities and also an alternative provision improvement was published in March 2023. The national SEND review set out government proposals for a system that offered children and young people the opportunity to thrive with access to the right support, in the right place and at the right time, enabling them to fulfil their potential to lead happy, healthy and productive adult lives.

It was known that, where possible, it was better for children to access education within mainstream with additional support, because children should be able to play in their communities with their friends that live close by. It had a tremendous effect on children and young people’s sense of wellbeing when they were sent out of area for education, whether that was for alternative provision, which used to be called pupil referral units, or whether it is special educational needs. There would always be some children who needed to access specialist provisions.

It was important that a refreshed vision and a co-produced strategy for SEND services in the borough be developed to reflect the changing environment and the current priorities for children, young people, parents, carers and families. The draft strategy had been developed with partners, including the Rotherham Parent Carer Forum, Special Educational Needs and Disability Information advice and support services, and both special and mainstream schools. The refresh strategy titled ‘My Life, My Rights’ reflected the changing environment and priorities for children and young people, parents and carers.

There were seven sections in the strategy, which were set out in the report. She highlighted the voice of children and young people was very important. The Children and Young People’s Partnership Board had been reinvigorated recently and the young people, who were the guiding voices which was the children of the Parent Carers Forum and those children, themselves who had disabilities and additional needs attended those meetings. That Board was the main point for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To receive a report of the Strategic Director of Finance and Customer Services that provides an update to Cabinet on a number of financial matters.

Recommendations

1.             That the update on the revenue budget financial outturn 2023/24 be noted.

2.             That the Councils progress on the delivery of the Local Council Tax Support Top Up payment 2024/25 be noted.

3.             That the Councils delivery of the Household Support Fund 2023/24 be noted.

4.             That provisional allocations of the Household Support Fund Grant 2024/25 of £2.489m be agreed as detailed in Section 2.5 of this report. 

5.             That Cabinet delegate authority to the Assistant Chief Executive in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Social Inclusion, to determine revised and final allocations for the Household Support Grant to include provision for other eligible actions within the use of Household Support Fund should it not be possible to achieve full spend of the grant through the approved provisional allocations.

6.             That Cabinet approve the capital budget variations as detailed in Section 2.6 of the report.

At the Chair’s invitation Rob Mahon, Assistant Director for Financial Services introduced the report, noting that the main purpose of the update was to give the headline outturn position for the 2023-2024 financial year. This was ahead of a more detailed outturn report that would be submitted to the July Cabinet meeting, which would detail the specifics around the directorate overspend and underspend and provide a more detailed update regarding the reserves position of the Council. 

It was worth noting the reported overspend for the Council was at £1.2m at the position for December 2023’s monitoring reported to February 2024’s Cabinet as part of the budget and Council’s report setting process for 2024-25. At that point it was indicated that the Council would try to reduce the overspend position by identifying any potential savings, cost reductions, maximisation of grand funding that it would receive between December and March. Due to that work and to ongoing maximisation of grants, the final outturn position was reduced down to £0.1m. The report covered this by directorate.

Overall, some of the key messages was the directorate overspends were £8.8m across, in particular Children and Young People’s Services (CYPS) and Regeneration and Environment (R&E) with the main pressures being CYPS placements, home to school transport and catering. These were offset by £8.7m savings in central services which was where the Council held the £5m budget contingency reserve and £3.7m savings from Treasury Management. That position was how the £0.1m overspend was reached.

The report covered saving progress, which was split into two key areas. The new savings that were agreed as part of the 2023-24 budget setting process. Those savings had been fully delivered and was a positive position to report in terms of savings delivery. He highlighted that they were over delivered by £54k. Where a savings programme had been identified, the Council would continue to try to over-deliver on those.

He then provided an update on the old savings that had been carried forward and re-profiled as part of the Council’s budget for 2023-24 and 2024-25 and the Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) Update. Those savings were rolled forward into 2023-24. The updated reported the Council was still behind on some of the CYPS savings in placements, which had been discussed as part of the monitoring reports that had been presented to OSMB and Cabinet. There would be work to do in 2024-25 to continue the delivery of the savings but these were reported through the monitoring reports and the outturn report and through the Statement of Accounts as well to ensure the current position was as robust and clear as possible.

The report also included an update on progress on the local Council Tax support top-up scheme for 2024-25, which was agreed as part of the Council’s budget. The scheme had been launched and residents were receiving that support. A progress updated on the Household Support Fund 2023-24 and the proposals for how the Council would use the 2024-25 Household Support Fund  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

To consider any issues referred for call-in from recent Cabinet meetings.

There were no call-in issues.

To determine any item which the Chair is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency.

There were no urgent items.