Minutes of the Meeting Held in the Board Room at the Derby Road Site on Thursday, 28 February
Minutes of the meeting held in the Board Room at the Derby Road site on Thursday, 28 February 2008 at 5.00 p.m.
COMMITTEE MEMBERSPRESENT: / Kate Allsop (From 5.40pm)
Nevil Croston, Chair
Carmel Heathcote (From 5.15pm)
Peter Mosek
David Overton
ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: / Asha Khemka, Principal
Maxine Bagshaw, Clerk to the Corporation
Louise Knott, Director: Communication and Marketing
Andrew Martin, Director of Finance
Tom Stevens, Executive Director: Capital Projects
Will Simpson, Grant Thornton
ACTION
by whom / DATEby when
20.
21. / APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies for absence were received from KPMG and Ian Falconer from Grant Thornton. The Committee was advised that Kate Allsop would be joining the meeting late. The meeting was confirmed to be quorate.
DECLARATION OF INTEREST IN ANY OF THE ITEMS ON THIS AGENDA
The Chair reminded those present to declare at the start of the meeting interests held in any matter to be considered. There were no such declarations. / Clerk / 28 Feb 2008
22. / MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 27 NOVEMBER 2007
AGREED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 27 November 2007 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair. / Chair / 28 Feb.
23. / ACTIONS OUTSTANDING AND MATTERS ARISING
There were no matters arising or actions outstanding.
24. / REPORT FROM THE EXECUTIVE AUDIT AND RISK MANAGEMENT GROUP
The Director: Communications and Marketing introduced her detailed report. She drew members` attention to the Internal Audit tracking system devised. She confirmed that this would be regularly updated and monitored and that it was also her intention to add a ‘significance’ rating to the recommendations. She explained that during the Executive review certain actions had been reported as ‘ongoing’ or ‘in progress’ and that principally these were in the areas of finance and payroll. She confirmed that the Director of Finance was undertaking a personal assessment of these items to ensure action was being taken.
The Committee discussed in detail the ICT deadline date of December 2008 given on page 4 of the summary table. Whilst members of the Executive provided assurance that this area was being well monitored members asked whether anything could be done to bring this timescale forward. The Executive Director: Capital Projects confirmed that we would follow this up and an email sent out to Committee members before the next meeting.
Governors agreed that the tracking system was a very useful tool and requested an update report after each meeting of the Executive Audit and Risk Management Group. They requested that consistency in terminology be used so that progress could easily be compared and suggested that the table would benefit from the inclusion of a column detailing the percentage of work completed.
(Carmel Heathcote joined the meeting at this point)
Members were advised that not all of the planned Internal Audit days had been utilised and that the Executive felt that, as capacity was available within the current budgeted provision, a review of Train to Gain should be undertaken. Members were reminded of the significant growth in this area and that this, when combined with the fact that provision is off site led the Executive to feel there was a risk which needed to be assessed and mitigated. The Committee were also advised that the College planned to purchase an external mock inspection exercise to review the quality of the Train to Gain provision. Members were happy to endorse the recommendations made.
RESOLUTION: The Audit Committee resolved to:
(i)approve the inclusion of a high level review of Train to Gain activity in the Internal Audit plan for 2007/08, and
(ii)approve the inclusion of a significant focus on Employer Engagement within the 2008/09 audit cycle. / Dir. of Fin.
Exec. Dir: Cap. Proj
Dir. Comm. & Mkt.
Dir of Fin
Dir of Fin / June 2008
May 2008
Ongoing
June 2008
Sept. 2008
25. / INTERNAL AUDIT REPORTS
(i)Risk Management Arrangements
The Committee was reminded that this report had been presented and reviewed in detail at their meeting on 11October 2007.
(ii)Health and Safety
Grant Thornton presented their report and drew members` attention to the Executive Summary information. They confirmed that whilst a lot of work had been done to progress improvements more could still be done to ensure the College has a robust system in place. Members were advised that the key concern for the audit service was seeing H&S practices and policies being embedded College wide. Auditors specifically drew members` attention to the one high recommendation made and the planned action to be undertaken by Management.
The Committee asked for explanations on a number of issues, these included;
- The degree of assurance given by internal auditors and the phraseology used. Internal auditors clarified that their view was that the College is operating as it should be if it implements the actions identified.
- The need for union consultation on certain areas. The Committee were reassured that the implementation of improved H&S practices was not being delayed as a result of consultation and that in most cases it was really policy documents, encompassing implemented practices, which followed a consultation process.
Grant Thornton presented their report and drew members` attention to the Executive Summary information. Members noted that there were no high level recommendations made. The medium and low level recommendations were discussed in detail with the following comments being made:
- Members were unsure whether committee self assessment needed to be more formal or detailed than current practice but agreed that the method of self assessment and benchmark data would be reviewed within the existing terms of reference for a report to each committee
- The Principal questioned why there should be such specific focus on the impact of the Framework for Excellence. This was discussed in the context of it being a pilot programme only with limited positive feedback and the vast range of additional initiatives in operation, which will have an impact upon the College’s business. Grant Thornton commented that whilst the Governors may have heard of Framework for Excellence (as indicated by the Audit Committee members today) they had not located documented evidence that it had been discussed at Corporation Board level. Members agreed that there would be a discussion on this area but felt that it should be within a larger debate of all the likely influencing factors on the College’s business in coming years.
Grant Thornton presented their report and drew members` attention to the Executive Summary and the several high recommendations made, these recommendations were discussed in detail. Internal auditors were quick to assure Committee members that the rating of ‘high’ had been given on several matters, not because work had not been done but that the consequences should issues be allowed to slip was so significant that it had been felt necessary to specifically formalise concerns.
(Kate Allsop joined the meeting at this point)
Specific comments made by the Executive were:
- Whilst there was an acceptance of the need to review the Terms of Reference for the committees detailed it should be noted that the Chair of the Finance and Estates Committee was also a member of the Capital Project Board and that this had been done to avoid the possibility for confusion in roles and/or ambiguity.
- The Capital Project Board had specifically requested a standing agenda item to report on expenditure tracking and any variances in actual or anticipated costs.
- Turner and Townsend have been informed of the College’s detailed expenditure and forecasting requirements, these to include both benchmarking and value for money assessments.
- Changes in the funding rates will have to be included in the re-forecast. Assumptions need to be made but these are constrained by guidance applicable at any particular point in time.
- Use of the OGC framework limits the ability for partners to manipulate the contract. The College must work to ensure that value added is maximised within the contract framework.
- The Forecast is based upon an LSC template, which has in- built security measures, to prevent data loss or corruption. These messages can be enhanced by the College.
26. / RISK MANAGEMENT
Members reviewed the detailed report presented. They discussed the Risk Appetite and scoring mechanism utilised and agreed that it was appropriate to an organisation that is publicly accountable.
They agreed that they would like to see the Risk Register reported upon at each meeting but that it was only necessary to highlight and report on changes made to the Register and not present the whole document on each occasion.
The Committee discussed the need for a separate Risk Register applicable to the Capital Project. It was acknowledged that a separate Register exists and is reported upon to the Capital Project Group. Members felt that there needed to be some monitoring of overlap in this area. It was agreed that at each meeting the Property Strategy, which is a High level risk, would be pulled out of the report and an update given separately.
Members discussed asset utilisation and whether this should be an identified separate risk or form part of broader strategy matters. The Director of Finance was asked to consider this issue for the next meeting.
RESOLUTION:The Audit committee resolved to:
(i)note the report
(ii)approve the Corporate Strategic Risk Register and Contingent Risk Register for the College / Dir. of Fin. / June 2008
27. / There were no additional items of business. The Clerk to the Corporation reminded members that the next meeting was scheduled for Thursday 26 June 2008.
The meeting closed at 5.55 p.m.
Maxine Bagshaw, Clerk to the Corporation
Signed : ______Chair Date: 26 June 2008
Audit Committee Minutes 28 February 2008
Page 1 of 5