Agenda item

The Lead Member for Resources, Mr H. Fowler CC has been invited to attend for this item.

The Commission considered a report of the Director of Corporate Resources, the purpose of which was to provide an update on the 2025/26 revenue budget and capital programme monitoring position as at the end of period 10 (the end of January 2026).  A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda item 10’ is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussion, the following points were made:

(i)               Members noted the overall budget position which had improved since the previous report to the Commission. An underspend of £700,000 had now been forecast compared to an expected £2.9m overspend at period 6.  Based on the current forecast, the anticipated requirement to draw on reserves to balance the budget would no longer be needed which Members welcomed.

(ii)              Demand led pressures continued, despite the improved budget position in the short term. This was particularly so for children’s and adult’s social care services.  For children’s social care, residential placement pressures and a sharp rise in looked-after children earlier in the year continued to be an issue.  Adult social care continued to report pressures around rising supported living costs. 

(iii)            The Commission expressed significant concern about the SEND High Needs Block deficit currently forecast at £43m against a budget of £15m. The Director confirmed that the current strategy of setting aside resources in the MTFS to cover part of this deficit continued. The Government had also announced that up to 90% of national SEND deficits as at 31 March 2026 would be covered centrally, but clarity on how this would be calculated was still awaited.

(iv)            Members noted the slippage in completion of the Melton Mowbray Distributor Road due to recent adverse weather.  The Director reported that the project remained on track for completion in May, representing only a minor delay.

(v)             Concerns were raised about the level of slippage generally in the capital programme and it was questioned if there were lessons to be learnt given this appeared to be an annual problem.  It was noted that the level of slippage was not unusually high when compared to previous years.  External factors, particularly regarding planning and the weather remained material constraints that were outside the control of the County Council.  The Director undertook to carry out an internal review to confirm slippage costs remained reasonable and to provide an update to members after the meeting.

(vi)            In response to questions raised, the Director reported that the ‘Mosaic’ graphs on page 76 of the report related to an internal IT system operated in Children’s Social Care Services.  The annual ‘dip’ in the graph reflected the accounting treatment related to the number of weeks it was based on rather than a performance related trend, and the stepped increases represented the typical provider uplift seen at the start of each financial year.

(vii)          There had been a slight shortfall in income from the Council’s office estate.  This had largely been due to voids and additional maintenance work being carried out before the financial year end.

(viii)         Members raised concerns regarding ongoing pressures relating to children placed in secure accommodation, noting that three children were currently placed under court ordered arrangements, costing in excess of £35,000 per week in some cases.  It was noted that the costs were largely unavoidable due to these being court ordered placements and the costs reflected the intensive staff to child ratio support required for such children who often had very complex needs.  A Member emphasised the unsustainable financial burden this placed on the Council and requested clarity on the number of children affected and up to date details of the costs being incurred. 

(ix)            Members raised wider concerns about the national shortage of secure placements, forcing councils to seek high cost, out of county provision.  It was recognised that this was a national issue, and that the County Council had raised its concerns regionally through East Midlands Councils with a view to strengthening lobbying of central government.  The Chairman of the Children and Families Overview and Scrutiny Committee assured the Commission that this was being looked at and monitored by this scrutiny on a regular basis.  A Member requested that an update be sought from the Lead Member for Children and Family Services regarding actions being taken locally to reduce costs and improve local provision. 

(x)             A Member questioned whether the projected overspend of £0.5m across the high needs block funded specialist teaching services aligned with posts previously proposed for removal.  The Director undertook to check and report back to Members after the meeting.

(xi)            Clarification was sought regarding whether the net underspend of £5.9m on the Early Years Block could be retained or if this had to be repaid to central government.  It was noted that the forecasted underspend was partly due to timing issues of DfE payments and would likely reduce by the year end and that this was reflective of previous years.  It was noted that any underspend was retained and early years funding remained ring-fenced.

(xii)          Members noted the TSIL Programme previously reviewed by Newton was not in scope for the ongoing efficiency review, this being an area recently looked at and likely to change as a result of the Government’s forthcoming white paper.

RESOLVED:

(a)  That the 2025/26 revenue budget and capital programme monitoring position as at the end of period 10 (the end of January 2026) be noted;

(b)  That the Director be requested to:

(i)               carry out an internal review of the capital programme to confirm slippage costs were not unusually high this year and to provide an update to members after the meeting;

(ii)              clarity the number of children in secure accommodation and up to date details of the costs being incurred for this service; 

(iii)            seek from the Lead Member for Children and Family Services an update regarding actions being taken locally to reduce costs and improve local provision around children placed in secure accommodation.