Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Corporate Resources the purpose of which was to present the Corporate Risk Register for approval and to provide an update on Counter Fraud initiatives and the launch of the Cyber Assessment Framework for local government.  A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 9’ is filed with these minutes.

As part of this item, the Committee also received a presentation from the Head of People Services regarding the risks related to recruitment pressures and the costly use of agency staff.  A copy of the presentation slides is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussion, the following points were made:

Presentation

(i)               The shortage in staff particularly in children’s social care, was a national problem and authorities were competing for the same resources, offering different types of incentives to encourage recruitment.  The County Council was seeking to position itself in the middle of the pack and so did not seek to offer higher salaries than other authorities.  However, it did emphasise other benefits offered and the Leicestershire brand and culture of the organisation as a high performing County Council.

(ii)              Members noted that new agency social work rules were due to come into force to address longstanding challenges in this sector which would include a cap on what agencies could charge local authorities for agency social workers. It was hoped that this would result in a shift in the market with some agency staff choosing to move back to work directly for local authorities which offered wider employment benefits.

(iii)            A Member questioned what was being done to address the pressures around SEND and delays in the completion of education and health care plans which stemmed, in part, from the limited availability of educational psychologists.  The Director undertook to provide more information on work being undertaken by the Children and Family Services Department to address this pressure after the meeting.

(iv)            It was noted that as workforce costs increased, the Council had to find new ways of working which often reduced the Council’s ability to give the same level of personal service that might have been provided in the past with named officers allocated to provide support to specific service areas and to external partners. 

(v)             A Member commented on the need for the Council to ‘grow its own’ workforce through apprenticeships and questioned if opportunities were being missed because recruitment relied too heavily on graduates.  The Director reported that the Council was good at recruiting to roles that required a degree qualification.  However, entry level recruitment was where much of the Council’s efforts were being targeted, apprenticeships being a key part of this.  This had been particularly successful in the Environment and Transport and Public Health Departments and lessons were being shared to expand this across other departments.  The Director further advised that work was being undertaken with Departments where recruitment was proving difficult to seek to redesign roles to better support a wider recruitment approach.

(vi)            A Member questioned if, given that a third of the Council’s workforce was within 10 years of retirement age, artificial intelligence (AI) might be part of the solution to address this in the future.  It was noted that whilst AI was being used to reduce some of the administrative burden placed on officers, it was not seen as a solution to addressing possible gaps in knowledge and areas of specialism and expertise at the current time.

Report

(vii)          Work to raise awareness of cyber security, particularly within maintained schools was welcomed. 

(viii)         A Member raised concern at the number of adult social care providers that had exited the market.  It was suggested that changes to national insurance payments would likely have a further impact on the sector.  The Director explained that the Council each year assessed its fees for adult social care and the national living wage and national insurance payments were taken into account as part of that process.  The Council’s fee rates were also compared against other local authorities and overall sufficiency in the market.  Members were reassured that at the current time, whilst some providers were leaving the market, others were joining.

(ix)            Provision would be made in the MTFS to cover additional costs arising from the rise in national insurance (NI).  For adult social care, providers would incur the costs of the NI increase and this would need to be considered as part of the annual fee uplift process which would likely increase the Council’s costs. As current grant allocations were not sufficient to cover all costs, it was likely that there would be a financial impact to the Council from the NI increase, both for direct costs and social care provider costs. Members noted that this was a matter being monitored by the Council’s Adults and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

(x)             A Member suggested that risk 7.3 regarding developing and maintaining a stable, sustainable and quality social care market, should also reference the lack of nursing funding provided by the NHS, which was having a particular impact in Leicestershire, this being something the NHS funded in other areas.  The Director undertook to liaise with the Director of Adults and Communities to review this risk.

(xi)            Members noted that whilst not meeting current targets, the Council’s sickness absence levels were reasonably good when compared to other local authorities.  Members were reassured that this was regularly reviewed by managers and at senior and chief officer level and regular reports taken to the Council’s Employment Committee.

RESOLVED:

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

(b)  That risk 7.3 regarding developing and maintaining a stable, sustainable and quality social care market, be reviewed with the Director of Adults and Communities to review this risk;

(c)   That the presentation on risks related to recruitment pressures and the costly use of agency staff be noted;

(d)  That the launch of the Cyber Assessment Framework for local government be noted and that a presentation be provided at the next meeting of the Committee regarding cyber security risks;

(e)  That the emerging risks and updates regarding counter fraud be noted.