Agenda item

The Director Housing and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report setting out the progress made in reviewing the structure and functions of Housing and Neighbourhood Services together with highlighting the outcomes where implications for Service delivery should be noted.

All of the services under the Neighbourhood element of the Directorate were faced with significant Policy change and financial restriction.  As part of the development of the Corporate Service and Financial Planning process for 2011/12, various services had been subject to Service Reviews:-

-        Neighbourhood Investment (contributing to Corporate Reviews of Regeneration Services, Asset Management and Financial Services)

-        Neighbourhood Partnerships

-        Food Safety

-        Neighbourhood Wardens

There were also additional reviews currently underway/proposed for Locality Services (and the integration of 2010 Rotherham Ltd.), Trading Standards and Enviro-Crime Enforcement.  Services would also be impacted by other Council-wide reviews including Management Review, Customer Services and Business Administration.

The reviews had resulted in a reduction of 35 posts achieved by the loss of vacant posts, voluntary severance and/or successful re-employment within the Council via the Talent Pool or by other employers.    A summary of each review and associated implications were set out in Appendix 1 of the report submitted.

Discussion ensued on the report and also on Minute No. 108 (Food Standards Agency Audit) of the 21^st March Cabinet Member for Housing and Neighbourhood Services. 

Discussion ensued on the report with the following issues/concerns raised:-

-        Why had it taken 9 months for the outcome of the Food Standards Agency Audit to be reported to the Cabinet Member when weaknesses had been highlighted by the Food Standards Agency

-        Why cut £75,000 lose 2.14 FTE from a Team that had been found not to be performing adequately?

-        The Audit had taken place before any cuts had taken place.  The report had said that the way that Team had operated at that time was not sufficient.  There had been criticism that inspections had not been completed in some categories.

-        The figures had been analysed and found that the average number of inspections per year per member of staff was very low.  Meetings had taken place and the Team felt that the workload required was doable and reasonable and wanted to pick up Category E inspections

-        The inspection had taken place in May, 2010, report received in July, 2010 and then an action plan produced and had been worked to since that time.  A number of the recommendations within the Audit had been completed.  It was acknowledged that it should have been submitted to the Cabinet Member sooner and to Scrutiny

-        100% of Category A, B and C inspections had been carried out this year.  No Category D inspections were carried out last year

-        Why had this issue not been raised through performance monitoring?

Resolved:-  (1)  That an update be given to the July meeting following the return visit of the Food Standards Agency.

(2)  That a copy of the Food Standards Agency’s report be submitted in due course.

(3)  That a 6 monthly update be submitted on the staffing structure and the impact of the restructure.