Agenda item

A presentation will be provided as part of this item on Corporate Risk 7.6 (If Adults & Communities fail to provide robust evidence of good practice for the CQC inspectors, then this will result in a poor inspection outcome and incur reputational risk alongside extra resources and possible external governance to undertake any actions required to make the improvements necessary to fulfil statutory requirements).

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Corporate Resources which provided an overview of key risk areas and the measures being taken to address these.  The report also provided an update on the Council’s Risk Management Policy Statement and Strategy and the Council’s Insurance Policy.  A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda item 7’ is filed with these minutes.

As part of this item the Committee received a presentation from the Director of Adults and Communities on Corporate Risk 7.6 (If Adults & Communities fail to provide robust evidence of good practice for the CQC inspectors, then this will result in a poor inspection outcome and incur reputational risk alongside extra resources and possible external governance to undertake any actions required to make the improvements necessary to fulfil statutory requirements).  A copy of the presentation slides is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussion, the following points were made:

Risk Presentation

(i)           This was a new inspection process which would commence in April this year and apply to all adult social care authorities.  Two authorities (Hampshire County Council and Manchester City Council) had been subject to partial testing and learning had been shared from those exercises to help other authorities prepare.

(ii)         It was a contractual requirement for external providers to inform the County Council and the CQC of any safeguarding alerts.  Audits were also undertaken annually, though it was acknowledged that these provided only a retrospective view.  Training was provided to make sure alerts were made as necessary and in a timely way.

Risk Register

(iii)        Risk 4.2 (concessionary travel appeal by Arriva) had not been resolved but was nearing a conclusion.  A further update would be provided to the Committee at its next meeting.

(iv)       The Council insured its own property assets and where these were let, the cost of such insurance was recharged to the tenant in line with their lease agreement.

(v)         In light of the expected cost to the Council to clean up Firs Farm (a farm estate owned and let by the Council where large amounts of potentially hazardous waste had been found) it was noted that consideration would be given to insuring against such incidents in the future.  The Director commented that there was a general exclusion for environmental matters in such policies and there would therefore need to be a balance between the added cost of such insurance with the perceived level of risk noting that this case was an exception. 

(vi)       Members noted that a report would be provided to the Council’s Scrutiny Commission regarding the Investing Leicestershire Programme performance in September.  This would include an update on the Council’s property inspection approach, in particular the frequency of those inspections.  The Director of Law and Governance advised Members that farms owned by the Council would be subject to a standard agricultural tenancy which would include a right for the Council to inspect at appropriate intervals, but that this could not interfere with a tenant’s rights to free enjoyment of the land.  It was suggested that as part of the report to the Scrutiny Commission details of the standard terms for inspection included within such agreements be explained.

RESOLVED:

(a)  That the updates provided regarding the emerging risks and issues, the Risk Management Policy Statement and Strategy and the Insurance Policy be noted;

(b)  That the presentation provided on risk 7.6 (If Adults & Communities fail to provide robust evidence of good practice for the CQC inspectors, then this will result in a poor inspection outcome and incur reputational risk alongside extra resources and possible external governance to undertake any actions required to make the improvements necessary to fulfil statutory requirements) be noted;

(c)   That the current status of the strategic risks facing the County Council be approved;

(d)  That an update on risk 4.2 (concessionary travel appeal by Arriva) be provided at the next meeting of the Committee;

(e)  That the annual report on the Investing in Leicestershire Programme performance to be presented to the Council’s Scrutiny Commission in September include details of the frequency of inspections undertaken of its farm properties and outline the provisions contained in farm tenancy agreements regarding the regularity of the Council’s right to inspect.