Agenda item

Julie, Evans, Strategic Director of Resources and Roger Parkin, Strategic Director of Improvement and Development, outlined a report highlighting the Council’s overall performance from delivery of service to financial management covering the period up to and including November, 2010.  The key areas measured were performance monitoring against the Corporate Balanced Scored Card and the LAA Balanced Score Card to November, 2010 and the revenue and capital monitoring position to November, 2010.

Performance

The Strategic Director of Improvement and Development advised that the corporate scorecard drew attention to areas of exception, improved performance, and an assessment of where improvement actions were needed for performance to achieve end of year targets (providing the most up to date detail).  The Committee noted that the report comprised exceptions from the Balanced Scorecard relating to performance indicators selected by CMT members to determine the organisational health of the council and the LAA Scorecard which related to indicators in the LAA.  It was noted that several of the indicators were scheduled to be updated at the end of December, reporting quarter 3, and these would be reported at a future meeting.

The Committee was advised that 10 highlight reports had been received during the relevant period and of these 4 projects had an overall green status, 5 amber and 1 red.  The Strategic Director discussed the position on the 10 highlighted areas which had been circulated within the agenda papers in advance of the meeting. 

The Committee considered the detail of the various projects and the suggested recommendations therein. 

In the ensuing debate members asked a number of questions regarding the project, including the following (responses in italics):-

·  In relation to the school places in Slough project, a member advised that a number of residents had complained to him that their children were unable to obtain a place in local schools but immigrants were obtaining places.  He asked why this was the case?

The Director advised that he was unable to respond to this question in detail and it was agreed that the Strategic Director, Education and Children Services would provide a response for the member in questions. 

·  In respect of the Housing Futures (ALMO move) a member was concerned that the move had not been completed and a number of areas including an accommodation review to confirm the location of the housing service and how many staff would be relocated had not been completed.  He asked why this was the case?

The Strategic Director of Resources advised that the ALMO was a separate company and a process had been agreed to TUPE staff across on current terms and conditions.  All of the staff had been involved in the formal consultation and she accepted that although it appeared to have taken a long time the matters had been outside of the Council’s control.  The member suggested it was the case that the council had not been sure what it wanted to do in the first place and the Director advised that the decision had been taken to bring across staff and their roles would be incorporated into roles within Slough Borough Council.  It had been necessary however to fit this move into a broader corporate restructure and members had taken the decision that staff would be offered the opportunity to consider voluntary redundancy.  It was confirmed that the former restructure remained incomplete.  The member concluded that in his opinion the council had not been efficient in this area and was unhappy that the overall status of the project was amber.

·  In response to a question regarding the number of schools which had been identified as completion centres, under the 2011 census project, the Committee was advised that there would be a full report on the position at the next meeting on 27^th January, 2011.  The Chief Executive advised that the list would be reviewed on the following Monday and highlighted that SBC had taken the lead role in community planning to cover the involvement of particular groups within the population.  The Committee was advised that the fire service would provide a bus and driver which would be strategically  placed in the town  at various times to provide leaflets and other literature to promote awareness of the census. 

Financial Reporting

The Strategic Director of Resources outlined the Council’s financial position, advising that the Council’s net revenue budget for 2010/11 was £103.9m and the Housing Services agreed net operating budget for the same period was a surplus of £213k.  The Committee was advised that there was currently a projected under spend position for the general fund of £744k but this position would change as work was underway to create a provision to mitigate an expected future liability in respect of looked after children. This figure compared to a reported overspend at the same stage in the previous year of £854k reported at the end of November, 2009.  The Committee was advised that for the Housing Revenue account, there was currently a projected under spend position of £142k from the budgeted surplus position of £213k at the start of the year and this presented an adverse movement of £106k from that reported in the previous months.  The Committee noted the detail of the month on month movement in variances within each directorate, as set out in the agenda papers.  The Committee also noted the Treasury Management position regarding refinancing and the impact of capital reprogramming.  The Director concluded that at present the financial performance position was as planned and that services were being delivered in accordance with budget that had been set. 

Members raised a number of questions/comments in the ensuing debate including the following (responses in italics):-

·  In response to a question about Sure Start funding the Director was pleased to advise that although there had been an expected reduction in Sure Start funding, this had been protected in the draft Budget.  It was anticipated that approximately £400k of grant funding would be used to fund frontline child protection social worker posts but this was dependent on the funding being available beyond March 2011. 

·  In response to a question regarding the number of foster carers, the Committee was advised that there were an equal number of joiners and leavers in this area but full details of the relevant costs could not be provided at this stage.

·  In response to an outstanding question regarding the cost of the new pest control contract, it was agreed that the Director of Resources would provide the detail of the disparity between the cost to the Council of rat treatment against the charges made to customers in causing this pressure and this would be forwarded to the member in question.

·  A Member questioned why Slough BC had paid more for foster carers than every other Borough?

The Chief Executive advised that several years  ago there was a shortage of foster carers in Slough and it was believed at that time that by increasing the allowances, it would be possible to recruit more foster carers. 

·  It was highlighted that a young peoples substance misuse worker post had remained vacant since October, and this would remain vacant until the end of the financial year saving £17k, why was this the case? 

The Director advised that this service area was under considerable pressure and cuts had to be made.  Further pressures had been realised following the announced government settlement and the Director of Education and Children Services had protected all service arrangements where possible. 

Returning to the Gold Project update, a member commented that five projects were amber in status and one was red and he considered that this was the worst position he had ever seen.  The Committee was advised that the point of the various status levels was to draw attention to problematic areas or areas of slippage.  An amber status was to be viewed as an area of concern but not a serious problem.  A red status was problematic but often caused by unavoidable reasons, for example targets were not being met within the Britwell and Haymill Regeneration Project (BHR) but this was outside of the Council’s control.  Plans would be put in place to further review those projects with an amber status.  The Leader of the Council in attendance under Rule 30, commented that most of the items which were not at the green status were in this position due to the current financial situation.  In the case of BHR project the council was awaiting on further direction from the Homes and Community Agency and this was outside of the Council’s control.  Many other projects were at the green status and it was important to highlight that the council was trying to deliver a whole range of services across the town.  The census project was amber but this was attributed to the way that the ONS was managing the scheme and again this was outside of the council’s control. 

A member highlighted that within the performance status and improvement report (page 35 of the agenda) a summary of the status for the 48 national indicators at 30^th November, 2010 showed that there were 14 indicators with a green status, 6 amber, 9 red and 19 indicators awaiting final results.  He was concerned at the number of amber and red indicators.  The Chief Executive explained that several years previously the Council had selected indicators from a range of 190 and the Council had chosen more challenging targets – it was therefore to be expected that not all of the current statuses would be green.  It was also highlighted that originally there was a financial reward system in place but all funding for this had been removed during the summer of 2010.  She concluded that the position of having 14 green and 6 amber projects was not a bad position to be in and accepted that there were 9 indicators with a red status but these were largely due to financial restraints.  It was also highlighted that Slough BC had in many cases exceeded targets met by other Berkshire Authorities. 

·  A member advised the Committee that several burglaries had taken place in the Britwell over the previous weekend and he was concerned that any cuts in public protection would contribute to this problem rising. 

In response the Chief Executive advised that Members were right to be concerned that budgets for community safety were under threat and it was clear that some issues of resources could be outside of the council’s control.

·  The Treasury Management Section of the report had indicated that in relation to the heritable bank, to-date £1.17m of the original deposit of £2.579m had been repaid.  A Member questioned whether the total balance would be recouped or were the monies at risk?

The Director of Resources advised that the Council was on course to recoup all of the money that it had planned to recoup and the amount exceeded the amount that was expected in the area of 1 or 2%. 

Resolved – That the Committee note the current position regarding  Performance and Project Management and Financial Performance (Revenue and Capital).