Agenda item

A copy of the report to be considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on 19 April is attached for the consideration of the Commission.

The Commission considered a report of the Director of Corporate Resources and Chief Executive that would be submitted to the Cabinet for consideration at its meeting on 19 April. The report concerned a proposed review of the County Council’s Strategic Plan 2014-18 and reported on the development of a single outcomes framework which would set the policy context for outcomes-based commissioning and transformation activity. A copy of the report marked “Agenda Item 8” is filed with these minutes.

The Director reported that the revised Strategic Plan would provide a clear vision for the Council and, via a new Commissioning Framework, would focus the Council’s activity on a clear set of priority outcomes for residents, communities and businesses in the County.

This was the first time the Council had developed a council-wide plan of Commissioning Intentions which showed how activity would be geared towards reducing demand on Council services and focussing scarce resources on those areas which would have the biggest impact. The aim was also to make the best use of all the resources available, including maximising the synergies between Council departments.

The Transformation Programme had delivered £23 million of savings. There had been a need to refresh the Programme to make it more agile to adapt to the Council’s changing priorities. The refreshed Programme was required to deliver £35 million of the Council’s full savings target of £75 million over the life of the current MTFS.

Members’ attention was drawn to two Annual Reports on the subjects of the Transformation Programme and the Commissioning and Procurement Strategy, both of which had been circulated to members in March via the Members’ News in Brief Service.

It was confirmed that the Strategic Plan would be the subject of a further report to the Commission in November prior to approval at the full County Council meeting in December.

Arising from a discussion, the following points were noted:

·                The Strategic Plan was a high level document which would set out the key outcomes that the Council was aiming to achieve. These outcomes would inform future Commissioning Plans and provide greater detail and clarity around how frontline services would be delivered and success would be measured;

·                Concern was expressed in regard to the language used in the report. Specific reference was made to the use of the term “providing just enough support to carers” which could be perceived negatively. It was clarified that this wording had been taken from the Adult Social Care Strategy, which had previously received approval through the Cabinet and Scrutiny process. This reflected the Council’s significantly challenging financial position, whilst at the same time continuing to support people to live independent lives. Similar concerns were expressed around the use of the phrase “delaying the development of need” which had been the subject of similar concerns at the Children and Families Overview and Scrutiny Committee;

·                In response to concerns around how the performance of services would be monitored in the light of budget and staffing reductions, it was confirmed that, at project level, this would be tracked via the Transformation Unit, who carried out a robust and evidenced benefits analysis of each project. At a strategic level, the refreshed Plan would include measures of success for each outcome. The Council’s new Business Intelligence service meant it was now better placed to inform future decision making with robust data analysis and evidence. It was suggested that members could be briefed in more detail about the new Service;

·                Some members expressed concern around how any reductions in waste being sent to landfill (page 18, paragraph 31) would be achieved given the changes in payment for recycling credits. It was hoped that the reference to “preventative road maintenance” would equate to a more proactive approach, rather than a more costly reactive road maintenance programme;

·                Members made specific reference to recommendation (e) in the report and the fact that there appeared to be little account taken of the legitimate role to be played by Scrutiny and the Transformation Board in overseeing any changes to the delivery of the Transformation Programme.

RESOLVED:

(a)       That consideration should be given to amending recommendation (e) of the Cabinet report to reflect the legitimate role played by Scrutiny and the Transformation Board in regard to having oversight of any changes in delivery of the Transformation Programme;

(b)       That the comments of the Commission be forwarded to the Cabinet for consideration at its meeting on 19 April.