Ask for: Emma Lund
Ext: 25563
My ref:
Your ref:
POLICY AND RESOURCES CABINET PANEL
17 NOVEMBER 2010
M I N U T E S
ATTENDANCE
MEMBERS OF THE PANEL
D A Ashley, F Button, M Cowan, P V Goggins, S M Holmes (for K F Emsall), T W Hone,
D E Lloyd (Chairman), S M P Newton (for R A C Thake), S J Pile, J M Pitman, S Quilty,
R M Roberts (Vice-Chairman), R H Smith, S J Taylor, R G Tindall
Other Members in Attendance:
C J White
Upon consideration of the agenda for the Policy and Resources Cabinet Panel meeting on 17 November 2010 as circulated, copy annexed, conclusions were reached and are recorded below:
Note: No conflicts of interest were declared by any member of the Panel in relation to the matters on which conclusions were reached at this meeting.
PART 1
ACTION1. / MINUTES
1.1 / The minutes of the meeting held on 15 September 2010 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
2. / PUBLIC PETITIONS
2.1 / There were no public petitions.
3. / AWARD OF THE SHARED MANAGED SERVICES CONTRACT
[Officer Contact: Stuart Campbell, Assistant Director Performance and Intelligence]
3.1 / The Panel considered a report which provided an update on the Shared Managed Services procurement and the proposed award of the contract to Serco Limited. Jonathan Prew, Managing Director Business Solutions and Vikki Perkins, HR Director Business Solutions (both from Serco Limited) attended the meeting to respond to Member questions and inform the Panel of Serco’s approach to the implementation of the contract; the target operating model; and the proposed structured transition by which the change process would be managed. Stuart Campbell, Assistant Director Performance and Intelligence, informed the Panel of the process by which the procurement had been undertaken; the process towards commercial agreement; and the expected savings to the authority offered by the new contract. Members also heard that the contract offers the opportunity for District Councils and / or the Police Authority to take-up services on an optional basis over the 8-year term of the contract: this would enable them to benefit from the EU procurement work which has already been undertaken and purchase services on a flexible basis, with much of the initial up-front investment in relation to the production of business cases being borne by Serco.
3.2 / In relation to the target operating model, it was noted that this centres around a single branded Customer Services Centre (for customer transactions and mid-office processing activities) and an Integrated Business Support Helpdesk (for transactional back office support activities). It was noted that the savings which can be achieved under the contract will be improved by effective use of these facilities by customers and staff, and the need for IT systems to be user-friendly and tolerant of error was emphasised.
3.3 / Assurances were received from Serco that work is on target for services to be operational from the first day of implementation of the contract. Whilst acknowledging that the transfer process will be complex, the Panel heard that Serco will bring its knowledge and experience of managing similar transfers across a variety of other authorities to the process.
3.4 / In response to questions from Members on how performance will be monitored, Members heard that performance measures have been agreed between Serco and the County Council involving a range of key performance indicators. These will be required to be reported on under the terms of the contract.
3.5 / In relation to future development of the contract, the Panel heard that if successful the contract could be extended / adapted to include other functions, for example ‘back-office’ staff functions. An argument would need to be made that any changes fell within the original EU notice; otherwise a new EU notice would need to be issued to address any changes or developments.
Conclusions:
The Panel:
3.6 / noted that, subject to final contractual agreement, the Director of Resources and Performance will award the Shared Managed Services Contract to Serco Limited from the week commencing 22 November 2010, with an effective date (for the majority of in-scope services) of 1 April 2011.
4. / WORKFORCE REPORT 2010
[Officer Contact: Louise Tibbert, Head of Human Resources and Organisational Development]
4.1 / The Panel received a report which updated Members on the latest workforce information and key changes in HR resourcing, and which sought endorsement for the approach being undertaken. The report also presented workforce statistics as at July 2010, as well as the annual workforce profile for the year ending March 2010, highlighting key changes and actions.
4.2 / The Panel noted that the Council’s transformation programme is likely to have an impact on the workforce profile: however, as the report provides a retrospective view this is not fully apparent in the current version of the report. Members heard that as a result of transformation, workforce numbers are beginning to drop; there has been an increase in fixed-term contracts; a reduction in temporary staff; and a priority application process has been implemented in place of redeployment for those at risk of redundancy. Staff have also been offered the opportunity to apply for voluntary redundancy, and a number of staff have chosen to take early retirement. It was noted that the effect of the changes brought about by transformation will need to be monitored, to ensure that this does not have a disproportionate effect on any one section of the workforce.
4.3 / Louise Tibbert, Head of Human Resources and Organisational Development, presented the report and highlighted the key issues identified. Members sought additional information on a number of questions arising from the report, including: why dismissals are more common in Adult Care Services; why there has been an increase in turnover of CSF social workers; why social worker recruitment is now being undertaken in Atlanta when this had previously been considered unsuitable; whether risk management measures have been put in place for social worker recruitment from Atlanta; the detailed figures for harassment and grievance cases; why turnover figures within shortage skills areas are so volatile; and why the overall headcount has increased.
4.4 / The Head of Human Resources and Organisational Development undertook to provide a schedule of written answers to these questions, as well as those which had been submitted separately by Members prior to the meeting (appended to these minutes). / Head of Human Resources and Organisational Development
Conclusions:
The Panel:
4.5 / endorsed the report, but recommended that closer consideration be given to use of language in future reports;
4.6 / endorsed the actions reported in section 7.0 of the report and noted that updates on progress will be included in next year’s report;
4.7 / recommended that consideration be given to bringing reports to an appropriate forum (possibly the Cabinet Panels) on the reasons for the change in policy towards recruitment of social workers from the United States, associated costs, and any risks. / Executive Members for Children’s Services and Adult Care and Health
5. / COMPARATIVE PERFORMANCE 2009/10
[Officer Contact: Chris Badger, Head of Performance Improvement and Diversity]
5.1 / The Panel received a report which provided an analysis of 2009/10 comparative performance data, measuring Hertfordshire’s performance against other County Councils across a range of indicators, based on the PwC benchmarking tools. Members also received a presentation from the Head of Performance Improvement and Diversity which provided detailed information about the authority’s performance and those areas where changes had occurred.
5.2 / It was noted that Hertfordshire remains a high-performing council and has increased its overall position, maintaining top quartile performance, although at high cost compared to other County Councils. Performance on priority indicators remains strong - with two-thirds in the top two quartiles - and relative to other authorities 51% of all indicators improved and 48% of priority indicators improved.
5.3 / It was noted that the data must now be considered in the context of the changed economic climate: the transformation process and reductions to budgets will result in the need for decisions around prioritising those areas where performance must be kept high, and considering the cost of retaining high performance in one area in relation to the cost of achieving improvements in another.
5.4 / It was noted that the existing national indicator set is to be abolished, and this will therefore be the last year in which this level of analysis can take place. The replacement performance regime is likely to involve a smaller set of indicators for local authorities to use to benchmark performance in future. It was agreed that some performance indicators are only marginally relevant to Hertfordshire: a focus on a smaller set of indicators which have real value and relevance to the county was therefore considered to be a helpful development, and it was suggested that consideration be given to determining those indicators on which Hertfordshire should focus most closely.
5.5 / It was also noted that whilst a useful tool, performance indicators are one of a number of ways to understand performance, with inspections, for example, also providing a valuable indication.
Conclusions:
The Panel:
5.6 / noted the report;
5.7 / recommended that the indicators for adults with learning disabilities and children with special educational needs be monitored to determine whether improvement is achieved next year.
6. / ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UPDATE
[Officer Contact: Neil Hayes, Head of Economic Development]
6.1 / The Panel received a report which updated Members on plans for a Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) for Hertfordshire; the current state of the Hertfordshire economy; and other related economic matters. It was noted that the updated claimant count showed a further decrease, which was welcomed.
6.2 / In debate Members discussed the continued uncertainty around the funding of LEPs, and how European funding which is currently available to the East of England Development Agency (EEDA) may in future be made accessible via the Partnerships. The Panel heard that the Leader of Hertfordshire County Council had recently met with officials from EEDA, and discussions had included this issue. It was also recommended that the progress of other authorities in obtaining funding be monitored, so as to ensure that opportunities for Hertfordshire to access funding streams are not missed.
6.3 / It was noted that the Regional Growth Fund is now open to bids until January 2011. In response to a question as to whether the authority had yet submitted any bids, the Panel heard that in light of the Fund’s stated objective to support areas or communities which are currently dependent on the public sector make the transition to private sector led growth, caution would be needed to ensure that officer time and resources are not expended in preparing a bid which would be unlikely to succeed.
6.4 / It was noted that a LEP implementation plan is currently being drafted, which will outline the establishment of the LEP. This will be considered by the Hertfordshire Works Board, the Hertfordshire Leaders’ Group and the Countywide Business Forum. An event is also planned for 15 December, which will enable issues related to business engagement, governance, priorities and potential programmes to be considered.
Conclusions:
The Panel:
6.5 / noted the current position with regard to economic development issues, and agreed to receive regular briefings at future Panel meetings.
Kathryn Pettitt
Chief Legal Officer
101117 Minutes
6