Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence received.

There were no declarations of Councillors' interests made at this point in the proceedings.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the Value for Money Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 21 June 2016 be agreed and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

No announcements were received.

(To receive a report from Judith Hetherington Smith, Chief Information and Commissioning Officer, which provides the Scrutiny Committee with an update of recent performance against contractual Key Performance Indicators for May 2016.

Please note: performance information for June 2016 was under review at the time of publishing the agenda, an addendum report will be provided to the Committee prior to the meeting)

Consideration was given to a report from Judith Hetherington-Smith, Chief Information and Commissioning Officer, which provided the Committee with an update of Serco's performance against contractual Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).  KPI Performance information pertaining to June along with additional information on the delivery of IT; and new technology milestones had been circulated to members prior to the meeting.  Appendix A to the report provided the Committee with detailed KPI results for the previous 12 months up to May 2016, broken down into service areas.

The Chief Information and Commissioning Officer introduced the item and advised that up to June 2016 there had been some progress; particular areas highlighted were Adult Care Finance and the Customer Service Centre.  There was however, still work to be done with regard to People and Management and Information Management Technology.  It was noted that the finance service had had one failed KPI which had been negatively affected by LCC staff not authorising invoices in a timely fashion and that the KPI refresh negotiation team were exploring options to address the matter.

The Committee noted that the KPI review programme was due to be considered by the Committee at its 27 September 2016 meeting. It was noted further that due to current workload, the review item might have to be moved to the 22 November 2016 meeting.

Paul Briddock, Partnership Director Serco and Zam KaderKutty, Programme Director Serco provided the Committee with a short presentation update on the Recovery Report discussed by the Recovery Board at its meeting on 22 July 2016.  The Committee was advised that work was ongoing by joint working teams between Serco and LCC to deliver outcomes.  A High Level Forward Plan was shared with the Committee, which highlighted requirements from Agresso, which were spilt into two categories of Rectification Fixes; and Business Case Driven Changes.  The Plan also detailed the Sprint processes that had been put in place to make sure requirements were completed.

It was highlighted that an upgrade was to be done to Agresso (Commitment Accounting) to ensure that figures were accurate and could be relied on.  The process would take a number of months to complete, including pre-testing, but it was felt that the improved system could be available for the end of October 2016.  The improvements would enable a better service to be provided in a more efficient and effective manner.  Officers confirmed that financial information had been collated with the help of behind the scene spreadsheets, and information from other systems.

One member enquired as to how long it would be before Serco was delivering what was required by the contract, as based on previous evidence, contained in the Addendum report, it was felt that indications were that it would take a further year.  The Committee was advised by Serco that things were on track to deliver the contract by November 2016.  It was highlighted that the process had taken longer, but that it was mindful to remember what was fit  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

(To receive a report from Kevin Kendall, County Property Officer, which provides the Scrutiny Committee with an update on the performance of the Property Services Contract with VINCImouchel at the end of year one)

The Committee gave consideration to a report from Peter Moore, Executive Director of Finance and Public Protection, which provided an update on the performance of the Property Services Contract with VINCImouchel at the end of year one.

Kevin Kendall, Chief Property Officer, introduced the item; and Brian Goodwin, Contract Manager took the Committee through the presentation, which made reference to:-

·         Health and Safety – It was noted that no serious incidents  had occurred during  2015/16; and that staff awareness had increased;

·         Performance Figures – Year One, the Committee was advised that Capital receipts target of £2m had been exceeded and that the target for year 2 would be higher;

·         Contract and Projects Pain/Gain Results - It was highlighted that the contract included an incentive to beat target costs for projects, planned maintenance and other property services.  The goal for year one had had been to break even or to achieve a modest gain.  The Committee noted that at the end of year one the contract was in gain in the sum of £60,193.33, with VINCImouchel share being £27,668.93;

·         Repairs % Maintenance Capital Works – The Committee noted that the £2.5m of funding to spend 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2016, had been increased to £3.6m in October 2015 setting a very challenging target and that 97% had been delivered.  Officers advised that they had been very happy with the way VINCImouchel were working;

·         Concerto – It was reported that the Concerto system had improved the understanding of roles and responsibilities within each project.  The system had therefore delivered all the Day-1 requirements, ensuing business continuity during transformation.  The system had then been developed into a bespoke system for Lincolnshire;

·         Contract Risks/Contract Opportunities – It was noted that all risks had been dealt with or measures were underway.  It was noted further that there was opportunity for leveraging efficiencies for one public estate;

·         Key Performance Indicators – The Committee noted that as part of the continuous improvement strategy, a review had been conducted and the KPIs had been rationalised from 80 to 12 with greater focus on significant events including health, safety and statutory compliance and quality performance.  A summary of the new indicators were detailed within the presentation. It was highlighted that the revised KPIs would affect Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR). Under the old KPI's, a RIDDOR event was captured in 4 KPIs, with a maximum effect of 4.58% reduction in available gain if applied in all four areas. Under the proposal, a single RIDDOR event in any service area would a 15% reduction in available gain for that quarter. 

It was reported that the end of year result for KPIs was 92%.  The target for year had been 90%.  An explanation of the Year one results was detailed in Fig 1, at the bottom of page 25 of the report presented.

In conclusion, the Committee was advised that Corporate Property were continuing to deliver and identify further opportunities for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

(To receive a report from Daniel Steel, Scrutiny Officer, which provides the Scrutiny Committee with the opportunity to consider its work programme for the forthcoming year)

Consideration was given to a report of the Director responsible for Democratic Services, which provided the Committee with the opportunity to consider the work programme for the coming year.

The Committee was advised that there were two consultations concerning Business Rates, to which the Council would be responding to.  It was suggested that an update on the needs and distribution of business rates was an important issue and should therefore be included on the work programme as an update item for the 27 September 2016 meeting; and also as an item going forward into 2017.

The Committee agreed that there was not a need to have a 9.30 am briefing session before the next meeting, but future briefings would be arranged as and when necessary.

It was also agreed that inclusion of the KPMG audit would be included on a future agenda once timings for the audit had been agreed.

RESOLVED

That the work programme as detailed at Appendix A to the report be agreed, subject to the addition of the items mentioned above.