Agenda and minutes

To consider the minutes of the previous meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board held on 10 December 2025 and to approve them as a true and correct record of the proceedings and to be signed by the Chair.

Resolved: - That the Minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board held on 10 December 2025 be approved as a true record.

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

No declarations of interest were made.

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

No questions were received.

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

There were no reasons to exclude the press or public.

Report from the Executive Director of Corporate Services.

Recommendations:

That Cabinet:

1.    Note the overall position in relation to the Year Ahead Delivery Plan activities.

2.    Note the Quarter 2 data for the Council Plan performance measures.
 

3.    Note that a progress report covering the remainder of the year will be presented to Cabinet in July 2026.  

At the Chair’s invitation Councillor Read, the Leader of the Council (Leader) introduced the report, explaining that it was the six-monthly update on progress on the Council Plan and Year Ahead Delivery Plan.

The Leader set out the following headline points from the report:

·      Of the 89 Action Points set out in the Year Ahead Delivery Plan, nearly a quarter of those (21) had been completed, with 27% being delayed;

·      A reduced number of performance measures had been set out (27), and 20 of these were on target.

Council Plan Themes

Places are thriving, safe and clean

·      The Street Safe Team had been launched and the second part of recruitment had been commenced, with 9 out of 10 posts filled. Regular patrols of Wath, Dinnington, Swinton and Maltby had started taking place.

·      The Roadside Cleaning Team had been in place since October.

·      Construction on the Riverside Garden/Corporation Street public realm works had been underway since May 2025.

·      There had been delays to a private sector town centre housing development due to a complicated procurement process. That process had now concluded and tenders were being scored.

·      Work on the flood alleviation scheme at Whiston Brook was on target and due to be commenced within the next few weeks but there had been delays in progressing schemes at Eel Mires Dike in Laughton Common and Kilnhurst. The Eel Mires Dike scheme had experienced challenges with access to land and additional funding would be required. The Kilnhurst scheme would also require additional funding but the Leader confirmed that the Council remains committed to see these projects through to delivery.

An economy that works for everyone

·      The economic inactivity trailblazer/Pathways to Work scheme was up and running and the Social Value Action Plan had been completed.

·      The Templeborough Business Zone Scheme, which was a government funded scheme, had been a longer process than expected to due to complications regarding land owned by Magna. The Leader was hopeful that sign-off stage on this scheme would be reached shortly.

Children and young people achieve

·      The refurbished water splash park at Clifton Park had been reopened over the summer.

·      Building work at the new SEND Hub at the Eric Mann’s building was almost complete. The Rotherham Parents and Carers Forum had started to move in and offer activities from this building.

·      Progress on implementing Independent Travel Training for children was off target due to staffing issues at the end of 2025, but the Leader confirmed that those posts were now filled.

·      The commitment to the provisions of more Multi Use Games Areas (MUGAs) had experienced challenges due to the Football Federation delaying their funding round. Alternative sources of funding were being explored.

Residents live well

·      The specialised support service for people who had attempted suicide had been delivered.

·      Groundworks on new council homes at West Melton and Maltby were underway.

·      There were delays to the Rothercare analogue to digital switchover.

·      The roll-out of Strengths Based Working training had been partly delayed by the vacancy in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 84.

A Question-and-Answer session with the Leader of the Council regarding matters within the scope of their portfolio.

The Chair invited members to ask questions of the Leader relating to matters within his portfolio. The Leader explained that the kind of issues covered in the previous Council Plan item on the agenda made up a large part of their portfolio. The Leader explained that they also held responsibility for overall governance processes within the Council and would lead on communications, social value and inclusive economy activity. In addition, the Leader continued to sit as a member of the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority (SYMCA) board, which was a fast -changing environment.

In response to a question from Councillor Yasseen, the Head of Democratic Services provided members with a brief summary of other areas within the Leader’s portfolio, as follows: - Customer Services; Democratic Services; community cohesion; responsibility for social value through corporate commissioning and procurement strategies and implementation, including Community Wealth Building; Household Support Fund and other local welfare assistance schemes, including the Food for People and Crisis Partnership, crisis loan schemes and development of the social supermarket; and advocacy and appeals.

Councillor Yasseen went on to ask a question of the Leader around the decision to rename to the former Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) Strategy to the Inclusion Strategy. In Councillor Yasseen’s view, this marked a noticeable shift in how the Council was approaching its defined legal duties towards equality.

In response, the Leader asked Councillor Yasseen to wait and see what the new draft Inclusion Strategy looked like when it came to OSMB, as it still contained everything members would expect it to cover. The Leader further explained that the Equalities Assessment through the Local Government Association (LGA) had changed its objectives and as the Council aimed to achieve “Gold” standard in this, some of the changes to in terminology within the draft Inclusion Strategy reflected this. The Leader also confirmed that responsibility for the Inclusion Strategy sat with Councillor Alam, who would present that report when it came to OSMB.

In a further question around community cohesion, Councillor Yasseen commended the strong key performance indicators and positive work that had been carried out to address and tackle hate-related incidents and crimes in the borough. Councillor Yasseen welcomed the range of activity and engagement with young people but asked the Leader what outcomes were anticipated as a result of this important work to try and keep communities together?

The Leader agreed that community cohesion was of great importance and was an area where the Council had statutory duties. However, the local council was not the main factor that influenced whether or not communities pulled together and currently, national and international trends demonstrated that other concerning factors were pulling communities apart. The Leader commented that as a measure of success, the Council would want to see less hate-related crimes being reported. There was an annual survey carried out where Rotherham residents were able to comment on how they felt people from other backgrounds got on with each other. The Leader was proud that this measure  ...  view the full minutes text for item 85.

Report from the Executive Director of Corporate Services.

Recommendations:

That Cabinet:

1.    Note the current General Fund Revenue Budget forecast overspend of £3.4m.

2.    Note the projected overspend and that whilst the Council aims to manage this pressure, should that not be possible use of reserves will be required to balance the 2025/26 financial position.

3.    Note the updated position of the Capital Programme.

4.    Approve the capital budget variations as detailed in section 2.17 of the report.

At the Chair’s invitation Councillor Alam OBE, the Cabinet Member for Finance and Community Safety, introduced the report, which presented the Council’s financial position at the end of November 2025 and the forecast for the remainder of the financial year, based on actual costs and income for the first eight months.

As of November 2025, the forecast overspend stood at £3.4m, comprising of an £8.7m direct overspend offset by a £5.3m underspend in central services. The overspend was largely driven by placement pressures in Children’s Services, rising costs of adult social care packages, and backdated payments for Older People and Physical and Sensory Disabilities. Market price increases above inflation also contributed to budget pressures. These challenges were consistent with those faced by councils across the UK.

The Council continued to face significant pressures in funding social care and responding to rising demand. Traded services continued to perform well. The forecast position was being closely monitored, and it was noted that, even with mitigation, reserves might be required to achieve a balanced outturn for 2025/26. The financial impact would be reflected in future monitoring reports to Cabinet.

The Service Director of Financial Services, Rob Mahon explained that this time of year could be challenging due to scrutiny presentations. It was noted that this report related specifically to financial monitoring, and that issues concerning the budget and the Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) would be addressed in the next presentation.

The Chair invited members of OSMB to raise questions and queries.

A question was raised by Councillor Allen regarding CYPS placements in relation to paragraphs 2.7 and 2.9.2 of the report. Paragraph 2.7 noted a reduction of 120 placements following the review, while paragraph 2.9.2 reported a £5.7m overspend on children in care placements, mainly due to increased use of external residential children’s homes. Clarification was sought on whether the recent overspend formed part of the cumulative reduction identified in the review, or whether it occurred after the review. A further question asked whether this trend was likely to continue.

The Service Director of Financial Services explained that the savings delivery assessment reflected the long?standing work to review CYPS placements. The original savings were driven by reducing the number of children in care and improving the placement mix, including reducing external residential placements and increasing both in?house foster carers and kinship care options.

The review had resulted in a reduction of 120 placements over the period, as referenced in the report. However, the CYPS placement position remained fluid and subject to monthly fluctuation. A spike in looked?after children numbers occurred over the summer but had since reduced.

It was noted that ongoing challenges remained, particularly the continued reliance on external residential placements. Progress on developing in?house residential provision was expected to help reduce external placements over time. Work also continued to strengthen in?house fostering and kinship care to reduce demand for high?cost external placements.

It was confirmed that, based on the assessment, the CYPS savings set out  ...  view the full minutes text for item 86.

To consider the Medium-Term Financial Strategy update.

At the invitation of the Chair, Councillor Alam, Cabinet Member for Finance and Community Safety and the Service Director of Financial Services introduced the item, explaining that the presentation would provide members with an update since the last report to Cabinet on the Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) in November 2025.

The key financial pressures currently faced by the Council were as follows:

·      Placement pressures in social care, due to the complexity of care, market inflation and rising demand for services.

·      Numbers of SEND children were rising year on year, which added pressure to home to school transport services

These particular financial pressures reflected the national picture and were not unique to Rotherham and when looked at in comparison to neighbouring local authorities, Rotherham was performing well in these areas.

·      The waste management optimisation programme had proved challenging but was not forecast to create a pressure in the financial year 2026-27 as the savings linked to that programme should be delivered in full.

·      Pressures on income generation within Regeneration & Environment remained but were not considered a huge issue in the context of the wider £350m net council budget.

·       The impact of the local government pay awards, which were not funded by central government.

In taking members through the presentation, the Service Director of Financial Services explained that locally generated taxation (business rates and council tax) funded over 60% of the Council’s core activity, with much less funded by central government. Over 60% of the Council’s overall spend was taken up by social care for children and adults.

The Service Director of Financial Services commented that the Council had been getting more robust in its financial decision making and had demonstrated that savings could be agreed and delivered. The Council’s reserves were in a  stronger position than they had been historically, with a low level of reserve usage in the budget and MTFS profile.

The key dates for the budget setting process were highlighted as follows:

·      Announcement of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) in September was key because that was the measure the government used to dictate the funding increases on core government grants year on year. September 2025’s CPI was 3.8%, which was higher than the MTFS assumption of 2%, which was therefore positive, and would bring in more resource.

·      The provisional settlement was announced in late December 2025, which included the output of the Fair Funding Review. This provided the Council with clarity on what funding would be from the various central government funding pots.

·      February's cabinet meeting and the Full Council meeting in March would be where the Council’s budget for 2026-27 would be formally set.

When the November MTFS update was provided, there was a £0.9 million overspend. Due to challenges within adult social care caused by backdated care placements and additional demand pressures, this overspend had increased to £3.4 million. It was hoped that this could be reduced significantly before the financial year end and the use of reserves minimised.

The Fair Funding Review represented a significant  ...  view the full minutes text for item 87.

Report from the Executive Director of Regeneration and Environment.

Recommendation:

1.    That Cabinet approves the allocation of Strategic CIL funds to the Whiston Brook Flood Alleviation Scheme (£3,000,000).

At the Chair’s invitation, the Executive Director of Regeneration and Environment introduced the report which provided an update on the outcome of the 2025 bidding round for Strategic Community Infrastructure Levy (Strategic CIL) funding.

The Executive Director of Regeneration and Environment explained that Strategic CIL funding was a method to secure contributions from developers towards strategic infrastructure to support developments across the borough. CIL funding was separate to contributions from developers under section 106 agreements, which were used to counteract the impact of developments in a specific local area. The report summarised the application process which had taken place and recommended to Cabinet the allocation of £3 million to the Whiston Brook Flood Alleviation Scheme, which was the only project that fulfilled all of the criteria in this bidding round.

The Chair invited members of OSMB to raise questions and queries.

Councillor Allen complimented officers on the report, commenting that it was clear, concise and logical. Councillor Allen then asked whether the A57 Todwick roundabout project, which sat within her ward, would be carried forward to a future bidding round and enquired if there were any other avenues of funding that could be made available to that project?

Simon Moss, the Service Director of Regeneration and Environment responded that the Todwick roundabout had been considered for Strategic CIL funding in this round. However, the project had been costed at over £8 million, which took it over the £3 million threshold for Strategic CIL funding. This project would require other funding to bridge that funding gap, which would usually come from SYMCA or the Department for Transport (DfT). The Service Director explained that the current phase of SYMCA block funding for transport was coming to an end and that policy work would soon commence with SYMCA to inform a new local transport plan. This would hopefully provide a new five-year funding scheme that could be utilised for local projects. The Service Director confirmed that it could be challenging to make a strong business case for congestion schemes as they hadn’t been a priority for the government. However, the council had previously submitted an expression of interest in respect of the Todwick roundabout to the DfT and would continue to seek any funding opportunities as they arose. In the meantime, the Todwick roundabout project would not be ruled out for other rounds of Strategic CIL funding.

Councillor Steele asked whether any additional funding could be put into the projects that were not successful in this bidding round and enquired what consultation would be undertaken with ward members regarding Strategic CIL funding?

The Executive Director of Regeneration and Environment confirmed that for those projects that did not meet the threshold on this occasion, the council would look at alternative funding streams and it was anticipated that some projects would come back for future Strategic CIL bidding rounds. It would be expected that service providers would consult with ward members on projects within their areas – not all proposals had come from the council,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 88.

To consider the Board’s Work Programme.

The Head of Democratic Services noted that the current work programme was presented in the report and informed members that the proposed Q&A session with Mayor Coppard for the February meeting was still awaiting confirmation. The Budget and Council Tax Report 2026-2027 was due to come to OSMB for pre-decision scrutiny in February’s meeting, alongside the Inclusion Strategy and Annual Report.

The review on by-laws and life-saving equipment was underway and information from the Service Director for Community Safety and Street Scene had been received and circulated to members, which would enable the review to progress.

The Chair informed members of two potential reviews which could come to OSMB that he was currently monitoring, following receipt of satisfactory information from Service Directors. These reviews related to problems with bin collections and the Snow Warden Schemes. Both of these issues would be put on hold until the end of April, at which point it could be properly assessed whether the issues still warranted a formal review. The Chair also referred to a working group due to be established by Councillor Williams, which would look into grit bins and their placement across the borough. Scrutiny had been asked to have some input into this working group.

Resolved: - That the Work Programme be approved.

To review and identify items for pre-decision scrutiny from the Forward Plan of Key Decisions.

Link to: Browse plans - Forward Plan of Key Decisions, 2025 - Rotherham Council

Councillor Allen referred to the meeting of the Audit Committee which was due to take place that afternoon and commented that one risk that consistently appeared on the council’s risk register was around climate change. Councillor Allen was aware that the Climate Emergency Annual Report was due to be presented to the Improving Places Select Commission but requested that it come to OSMB. The Head of Democratic Services confirmed that the Climate Emergency Annual Report was on the forward plan of key decisions for Cabinet and that OSMB could consider it as a pre-decision item. The Chair commented that an additional meeting may be required to cover the additional items of pre-decision scrutiny as the scheduled 4^th February meeting was likely to already be very busy with consideration of the budget, which would take priority.

The Head of Democratic Services outlined the forward plan for February, including reports on: the Rotherham Baby Packs: Outcomes and Future Commissioning; the Local Authority Better Care Fund 2025-26 Discharge Grant Commitments; SEND Sufficiency Strategy; Business Rates Discretionary Relief Renewals 2026-27; Climate Emergency Annual Report; Rotherham Markets & Library Update; and Rotherham Gateway – Progress to Full Business Case.

Resolved: - That the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board:

1.    Agreed that the following items would be added to the work programme for February 2026 as part of OSMB’s pre-decision scrutiny work:

·       Climate Emergency Annual Report;

·       Rotherham Baby Packs: Outcomes and Future Commissioning;

·       Rotherham Markets & Library Update; and

·       Inclusion Strategy & Annual Report.

2.    Agreed that OSMB should add an additional meeting to the work programme in the first week of February to consider the above pre-decision items. This would ensure that the scheduled Wednesday 4 February 2026 meeting could be dedicated to the planned Q&A Session with Mayor Coppard and pre-decision scrutiny of the Budget and Council Tax Report 2026-27.

3.    Agreed that the Head of Democratic Services would liaise with officers and Members to agree a suitable date for the additional February OSMB meeting.

As part of their role the Chair and Vice Chair of OSMB are appointed to the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority (MCA) Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The Chair of OSMB is the Vice Chair on this committee.  

This committee holds the MCA to account and ensure that all aspects of the decision-making process are transparent, inclusive and fair.   The Committee are responsible for checking that the MCA is delivering its objectives and that the decisions made in policies, strategies and plans have been made in the best interests of the residents and workers of South Yorkshire.

The published agenda packs and minutes can be accessed via: South Yorkshire MCA.

Members who have comments and queries regarding any item on any agenda should refer this to the Chair of OSMB and the Governance Manager at the earliest opportunity to ensure they’re reflected in debate during the relevant public meeting.

The Chair reported that there was nothing to update from the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority, as no formal meeting had taken place since the last OSMB meeting. The Chair commented that the minutes to the last meeting of the SYMCA Overview and Scrutiny Committee in November were available to members to review.

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.