To receive any apologies for absence from Panel Members.

There were no apologies for absence received.

To receive any declarations of interest from Panel Members.

There were no declarations of interest received.

To consider and approve the minutes of the meeting held on 19^th December 2023.

AGREED UNANIMOUSLY: That the minutes from the meeting held on 19^th December 2023 were agreed as a true and accurate record.

Mark Beeley, Principal Democratic Services Officer – Overview and Scrutiny, confirmed that the latest actions table had been circulated to the Panel before the meeting, this included completed actions from the November and December meetings.

The purpose of this report is to provide the Quarterly Assurance Report focused on the latest available position in relation to performance indicators and the corporate risk register. Audit and Workforce insights are also included. The Quarterly Assurance Report is a mechanism to support good governance and reflects performance (Q2 23/24 or where latest information is available until October 2023) and risk for RBWM.

Panel Members are invited to consider whether there may be areas that would benefit from further scrutiny and analysis, as part of the Panel’s forward work programme.

Rebecca Hatch, Assistant Director of Strategy and Communications, said that this was the second edition of the Quarterly Assurance Report in its current format following the first report being considered in November. The key message was that despite the financial challenges, overall performance across a number of indicators was very strong. Areas like adult social care, which was now relying on about a third of its workforce using agency staff, was also an area under significant challenge, both in terms of finances and risk. Considering adult social care on a national scale, the council had the best service in the country for quality of life, second best nationally for the number of people with disabilities in paid employment, third best nationally for residents feeling safe and fourth best nationally for satisfaction with the care and support provided. Rebecca Hatch confirmed that this would be the last time the Panel would be reviewing this exact set of metrics due to the development of the Council Plan, a new set of deliverables and performance metrics would link to the new priorities in this plan. The Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Panel would have the opportunity to review the Council Plan before Cabinet in March.

Councillor Hunt noted that the government had increased funding for local councils, specifically by £500 million for adult social care, she wondered whether any of this funding would be received by RBWM.

Elizabeth Griffiths, Executive Director of Resources, said that there had been a recent government announcement but the council were waiting to hear how much of that would be received. She was expecting around £1 million but considering the overspend in the current year on adult services this would only cover a fraction of the additional cost.

Kevin McDaniel, Executive Director of Adult Social Care, Health and Communities, clarified that the £4.5 billion was the estimated increase in funding for local authorities, the share for RBWM was already built into the draft budget.

Councillor Reeves agreed that the additional funding for adult social care was not enough. It was great to hear the excellent ratings for adult social care and how the service was performing nationally. 70% of staff in the service area were permanent, he asked if this would have an impact on maintaining quality. Councillor Reeves asked when the new performance metrics would come in and if there would be an overlap with the current indicators in the Quarterly Assurance Report. He suggested that it would still be useful to see performance compared with the preceding period so that the Panel could see progress.

Kevin McDaniel said the national performance reflected the hard work done by staff across the adult social care service area. The challenge was recruiting sufficient high quality permanent staff and it was important that RBWM was an attractive place to work. A decision had been taken to not recruit to some of the vacant posts which had created some additional funding which allowed an increase in pay for current social workers. This  ...  view the full minutes text for item 82.

This report details the forecast outturn against budget for the 2023/24 financial year. It includes the revenue and capital budgets along with the financial reserve position at year end.

The report will be considered by Cabinet on 24^th January 2024 and the Panel are provided with an opportunity to further scrutinise the current financial position of the council.

Elizabeth Griffiths introduced the report and explained that it covered the council’s financial position for the month of November 2023. The financial position had deteriorated compared to previous months and there had been a shift in things the council could not control. There had been progress in reducing overspend and demand led services were finding ways to mitigate the increase in costs. The baseline budget was insufficient to deal with the demand currently being seen and it was projected that this increased demand would continue into the next financial year.

Councillor Price noted that reserves should be between 10% and 15% which seemed unachievable, she asked what the level of reserves would be going into the next financial year and how this compared to the level of reserves at the beginning of the year.

Elizabeth Griffiths explained that the council started the financial year with £10 million of reserves. The previous Executive Director of Resources felt that the minimum level should be £7.9 million and this was a subjective calculation. The council was often spending more than it was saving which meant that it was in a vulnerable position. Earmarked reserves had been used to fund spending in year where necessary to reduce overspend. Reserves were significantly depleted and these could be reduced by half going into the next financial year.

Councillor Price asked if the budget would be looked at again if there was no adequate funding in place to deliver some services. She asked if there was any news on how much RBWM would receive from the government from the £500 million pot of funding which had been recently announced for local authorities.

Elizabeth Griffiths commented that the council was trying to find further ways to reduce spending. Now that the draft budget had been finalised, the work needed to take place to ensure that this budget was delivered. She was hopefully that the council would receive around £1 million from the government but given the level of spend in areas like adult social care this would make a relatively small difference.

Councillor Price asked if once the budget was approved in February, that this was confirmation from the S151 officer that she was satisfied with the budget.

Elizabeth Griffiths believed it was about the trajectory, with the balanced budget and transformation work planned it was hoped that the council’s financial position could improve.

Councillor Wilson considered the methodology, with the forecast outturn between month 7 and month 8 worsening by around £650,000. The current overspend was £4.3 million after contingency, he asked if this looked at the current run rate of income and expenditure and projected this looking forward.

Elizabeth Griffiths said that there were a lot of nominals which were considered by the team and were presented as the summary table in the report.

Councillor Wilson asked if there was an update on the level of overdue debt, particularly when considering the current level of the reserves.

Elizabeth Griffiths said that additional resources had been brought  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83.

To consider upcoming agenda items for future meetings of the Panel.

Councillor Price discussed the proposed Panel meeting in February when the full suite of budget papers would be considered.

Mark Beeley explained that there was little flexibility on the date as the finance team were working to a tight deadline to ensure that budget report was ready for Cabinet, moving the meeting forward would shorten the timescales considerably.

Councillor Price asked when the Inequalities Project item could be scheduled in to be considered.

Rebecca Hatch said that the Think Families project was the main strand of work for the Inequalities Project and March would be a good time for the Panel to consider the progress of this piece of work.

Councillor Price commented that in her view, the ‘report it’ tool on the council website did not work.

The Chair agreed and suggested he would like to look at this, he’d discuss this with the relevant officers after the meeting.

ACTION – Councillor Moriarty to discuss the potential of bringing an item around the ‘report it’ tool on the council website to a future meeting.

Councillor Price asked if there were any further scoping documents which would be coming through from other Panel Members.

Mark Beeley highlighted the item on contract management process which had been suggested by Councillor Reeves.

ACTION – Mark Beeley to work with Councillor Reeves on the scoping document for the contract management process.

Councillor Price suggested that Panel Members could feed in concerns about the RBWM Property Company to officers to consider as part of the report which was on the work programme.

Councillor J Tisi questioned why the additional meeting planned for February was needed, particularly as Cabinet would be setting the budget on 20^th February.

Mark Beeley explained that the meeting was to allow the Panel the opportunity to consider accompanying papers like the capital strategy and treasury management, which had not been seen in December. If the Panel did not feel like they needed to review the final proposed budget, then the meeting did not need to go ahead.

Councillor Sharpe suggested that the Panel should review Community Infrastructure Levy and how this was allocated. He also considered whether the report on the Property Company report could highlight how the organisation managed the various properties which it owned across the borough along with how many assets were owned.

Elizabeth Griffiths said that all assets were valued independently ahead of the audit.

On Community Infrastructure Levy, Mark Beeley made Councillors aware that there was a scoping document on the agenda for the next Place Overview and Scrutiny Panel.

Councillor Reeves suggested that the corporate structure should be included as part of the report on the Property Company.