scrutiny - monmouthshire€¦ · web viewself-evaluation of the scrutiny function during the autumn...

Scrutiny Service Plan 2016-2017Service: Scrutiny

Service Manager: Hazel Ilett

Directorate: Local Democracy

Head of service Will Mclean

MCC Priority: Not applicable

MCC Outcome: All - Support Service

Single Integrated Plan Outcome: All MCC Contribution - Support Service

Our Purpose

Our purpose is to manage the scrutiny process effectively to ensure openness, transparency and accountability in the Council’s decision-making. We provide support to elected Members to enable them to constructively challenge policy and decision-making, improving public service delivery to Monmouthshire citizens.

Our customers are wide ranging: elected Members, officers within the authority, citizens, public sector organisations and external auditors. We ensure that the scrutiny function is the mechanism through which the public and key stakeholders can become involved in the work of the Council.

Our customers need to be satisfied that the scrutiny function is effectively performing its role in ensuring the Council and partners deliver outcomes to Monmouthshire citizens.

Evaluation of performance during 2015-16

Activity Progress Impact Evidence

Scrutiny Training

Delivered a bespoke Scrutiny Development Programme for Members to provide them with core competency skills to perform the Scrutiny Member role effectively.

Ensured senior officers understood the role of scrutiny and the need to respond effectively to scrutiny requests through concise and balanced reporting.

A range of training sessions were provided to Members on:

- The Scrutiny Challenge- Scrutinising Performance- Financial Scrutiny - Effective presentations and

questioning strategies in a Modern Council Environment

An additional session was provided to Senior Management Team (recommended by Members): - The Scrutiny Opportunity / Raising

the Bar in Scrutiny

The Children and Young People’s Directorate also received training on Political Report Writing. A guidance note on political report writing was produced as a specific outcome of the training.

Both Member and officer training sessions were well attended and feedback indicates attendees found the sessions very useful.

The addition of officer training during 2015-16 has improved the quality of reports being produced for scrutiny.

There has been a marked improvement in Member’s questioning and their analysis of performance and financial information.

Investing in Member development and officer training delivers a vital, yet intangible, return on investment through more effective scrutiny.The WAO peer evaluation on scrutiny completed on 29th May 2014 evidenced our “comprehensive training programme” for scrutiny and study observations of scrutiny meetings reflected “excellent questioning skills by Members” and “effective chairing”.

The WAO Corporate Assessment 2015 evidences that Members are clearly supported, the report stating that “a range of guidance and training is made available to Members. An area where this is clearly demonstrated is in relation to the scrutiny function. Select Committee Members say they are well supported by training opportunities but that take-up is low. Extensive training is provided for scrutiny members, which is organised and co-ordinated by the Scrutiny Manager”.



Scrutiny Self-evaluation

The Scrutiny Chairs Liaison Group led a stocktake of our scrutiny arrangements to ensure scrutiny processes were effective prior to our Corporate Assessment.

Ensured all Forward work programmes are publicly accessible on the Council website.

Reduced agenda size for Select Committees

Special meetings to manage workload / scrutinise emerging issues

Pre-meetings for all Select Committees

Improved the quality, timeliness, relevance of information being brought to Scrutiny

Introduced a more focussed scrutiny approach

Produced a Scrutiny Handbook Implemented a Scrutiny and

Executive Protocol Developed a Scrutiny website

The group agreed that the key improvements made to the function during 2013 and 2014 were proving effective as follows:

Greater co-ordination between political arenas is enabling scrutiny activity to align to corporate priorities

Pre-meetings ensuring more constructive challenge and ability to hold to account

Better balance of scrutiny activity - pre-decision scrutiny and holding to account

Additional meeting enabling the opportunity for in-depth scrutiny

Greater public attendance and participation in scrutiny work.

Scrutiny was reflected positively in the WAO Corporate Assessment 2015, the WAO stating “Scrutiny is improving and has come a long way from an earlier low base. In 2010 a Wales Audit Office review of Monmouthshire’s scrutiny arrangements concluded that ‘Scrutiny is beginning to provide a more robust challenge and is starting to have a positive impact on the business of the Council’.

The WAO acknowledge in the Corporate Assessment the range of scrutiny guidance (which includes the Council’s Scrutiny and Executive protocol and the Scrutiny Handbook) which “provides practical support” for Members.

Scrutiny Chairs Liaison Group

Ensured that the group played a fundamental role in agreeing the direction and focus of scrutiny development.

The group met every 8 weeks and assisted the Scrutiny Manager by agreeing:

the Budget Scrutiny Process the Process for Scrutiny of the Risk

Log Areas for joint scrutiny The Joint Scrutiny Handbook The Scrutiny Website

The Scrutiny Manager has benefited from an agreed focus for scrutiny development.

Chairs have advised that these meetings are highly effective in terms of agreeing scrutiny processes and exchanging practice and experience.



Joint Scrutiny

Launched the Joint Scrutiny Handbook

The Joint Scrutiny Handbook produced by Cardiff Business School is the output of a Joint Scrutiny Development Fund bid to Welsh Government by Caerphilly, Monmouthshire and Blaenau Gwent Councils. The guide is an electronic handbook on joint scrutiny that will be updated with new and emerging practice.

The launch was attended by every Welsh Council, the Wales Audit Office, Estyn and CSSIW.

Monmouthshire’s Scrutiny Manager having led the first Joint Scrutiny Inquiry in Wales gave a presentation on Successful Joint Scrutiny of Prosiect Gwyrdd.

The Joint Scrutiny of Prosiect Gwyrdd has been a best practice case study for a WAO conference Scrutiny under the Spotlight and also for a Joint Scrutiny Conference in Essex in March 2016.

Partnership Working

The Adults Select Committee’s work with the Aneurin Bevan University Health Board initiated the ‘Live Well Bwy Nawr’ Pilot Project for Monmouthshire.

The Adults Select Committee have worked with the Aneurin Bevan University Health Board to progress a project titled ‘Live Well / Bwy Nawr’ which focuses on encouraging people to have important conversations about their arrangements in later life.

The Committee has forged a productive working relationship between the public health sector and the scrutiny function and this has paved the way for future partnership working on other issues, in addition to the joint project Bwy Nawr.

The Aneurin Bevan University Health Board has brought forward a report for full Council to agree a formal partnership for the initiative which was instigate by the scrutiny undertaken by the Adults Select Committee.

The Future Generations Act

Scrutiny has worked with an expert to define roles and responsibilities for the function.

The first meeting with the consultant identified the need to establish a formal Public Service Board scrutiny arrangement by April 2016. The Scrutiny Chairs Liaison Forum agreed for further research into potential scrutiny arrangements to hold the evolving Public Service Board to account for its performance. The new Public Service Board Scrutiny Committee was trained and has met and agreed its governance structure and its draft terms of reference. Training for the other Select Committees was provided in June 2016.

Council agreed in January 2016 to establish a new and bespoke scrutiny arrangement for scrutiny of the Public Service Board, to comprise the four select Committee Chairs and other Members according to political balance.

The Council is one of very few early adopters of the Future Generations Act to have agreed to establish bespoke scrutiny arrangements. Monmouthshire’s scrutiny function is leading others in terms of having fully implemented the Acts’ requirements of the scrutiny function and advice is being sought from other Councils on the approach we have adopted.


Objective Progress Impact Evidence

Scrutiny of Performance

Scrutiny has added value to the Council’s self-evaluation, performance management and improvement arrangements.

The committees have been able to challenge officers and partners on the performance of several key services, through the knowledge and understanding gained through regular performance scrutiny.

Officers, Cabinet Members and external partners are being held to account for their performance.

E.g. Challenge of EAS to ensure outcomes for young people, namely an improvement in educational attainment for all pupils.

E.g. Challenge of the Aneurin Bevan University Health Board in delivering key services in terms of Stroke Rehabilitation, Minor Injuries.

Budget Scrutiny

Enabled Scrutiny Committees to engage much earlier in the budget setting process and to meet as a joint Committee to scrutinise the entire budget.

The Scrutiny Chairs Group agreed a revised process for scrutiny of the budget, focussing on key mandates of significant concern. This proved to be a highly effective procedure for scrutinising the budget, Scrutiny Members working with officers to develop budgetary proposals and to provide a clear steer on difficult financial decisions.

Public engagement in scrutiny was highly successful, key stakeholders sharing their views with Scrutiny Committees and offering innovative budgetary solutions.

Several proposals developed by scrutiny Members were implemented as part of the Council’s final budget. Solutions developed through the scrutiny process demonstrate the return on investment of the scrutiny activity and justifies the ‘added value’ of the function.

Quality of Reporting to Scrutiny

Ensured that information brought to Members is detailed and relevant and enables Members to undertake effective scrutiny.

Estyn Inspection feedback had highlighted Members did not always have the necessary performance information to enable them to challenge constructively (too detailed information in too many formats). The Scrutiny Manager has worked closely with officers to address this and performance reports are now jointly drafted with the Education Achievement Service to avoid duplication or inconsistency in key messages.

Members are being provided with high quality relevant information in a timelier manner, although tis remains a key area for improvement, acknowledged by the WAO in the Corporate Assessment 2015.

Members have advised that the quality of reports to scrutiny have improved and their ability to understand the information presented has increased. Estyn’s final report evidenced the improvement in performance reporting performance to Members.

http://thepoint.monmouthshire.gov.uk/Doc_Lib/Corp_Brand/Logo%20images/Landscape%20-%20primary%20logo%20set/Landscape%20colour%20logo%20CMYK%20-%20for%20print.jpg


Objective Progress Impact Evidence

Raising Scrutiny’s Profile

The role and value of scrutiny have been promoted to the Executive and officers to ensure an understanding of the scrutiny role.

Training sessions have been undertaken at DMT’s and SMT to assist officers in their understanding the scrutiny role and how to respond to scrutiny requests and challenge. The ‘Scrutiny Executive Protocol’ provides clarity on the roles and responsibilities in relation to scrutiny. A Scrutiny Webpage and a Scrutiny Handbook are publicly accessible.

There has been an improvement in terms of Officer’s understanding of scrutiny – requests to bring items forward for scrutiny are more frequent.

There has been a continued reduction in the number of ‘call-in’ meetings during 2015-2016 in comparison with 2013-2014 and an increase in requests to table issues for pre-decision scrutiny.


Areas for Continued Focus:

Significant focus will be given to ensuring the new Public Service Board Scrutiny Committee plays its role in holding the Public Service Board to account for shared objectives in line with the Future Generations Act. Time and resources will be dedicated to this Committee to ensure Members understand their role and remit and that appropriate terms of reference are developed. The Committee will need to develop a work programme that reflects key milestones for the Public Service Board and they may also need to consider whether to co-opt any individuals onto the Committee. Training on the requirements of the Act will be provided to the other Select Committees to ensure they are equipped to robustly challenge officers and portfolio holders.

Early Estyn Inspection feedback had highlighted that Members did not always have the necessary performance information to enable them to challenge constructively and feedback from the ‘Ministerial Recovery Board’ had suggested Scrutiny Members were receiving too detailed information in too many different formats. The Scrutiny Manager has worked with officers to improve performance reporting and Estyn’s final feedback concluded that progress had been made in this regard. The WAO Corporate Assessment 2015 acknowledges the need to improve this, stating;

“Our observations showed examples where reports were not clear enough for members to understand important issues; members expressed concern about the perceived over-positivity of reports and the lack of objectivity” “Well-managed risk taking and the quality of decision making are sometimes hindered by a lack of strategic direction, poor data quality”“The Council is taking steps to improve scrutiny but progress is sometimes hampered by poor quality of information and inconsistently robust challenge”

Therefore, ensuring the information brought to Members is high quality, relevant and timely will remain an area for continued focus.

Whilst scrutiny has been promoted internally to the Executive and to officers via presentations/training to Departmental Management Team meetings, there is a clear need to further promote the role and value of scrutiny. A scrutiny website has been developed, however this would benefit from further development to become an online scrutiny resource for elected Members, officers and the public. A scrutiny newsletter may also help to raise the profile of the service and the Scrutiny Annual Report will highlight added value provided by the function.


Objective: To support Members in scrutinising the Strategic Risk Register and holding Cabinet Members and officers to account for actions taken to mitigate risks wherever possibleStrategy: Strategic Risk Assessment ProcessTimescale: OngoingFunding: NoneOfficer Hazel IlettKey Actions: To work with the committees to identify follow-up actions arising from scrutiny of key risk areas and to schedule annual risk management into the work programmes

To ensure scrutiny activity is clearly organised, Cabinet Members and officers are clear as to what is expected of them by clarifying roles and responsibilities, ensuring an opportunity for the scrutiny of risksOutcome: Those responsible for risk management are held to account and key risks relating to the committees’ remit are managedQ1 Performance appraisal Q2 Performance appraisal Q3 Performance appraisal Q4 Performance appraisal

Each Select Committee has discussed the Risk Assessment during its December/January cycle, however, I will assist Select Committees in scrutinising the Strategic Risk Assessment Process for 2016-17 by holding Risk Challenge sessions during the autumn 2016 meeting cycle with the relevant Cabinet Members present to explain how they will mitigate key risks. In order for Members to robustly challenge Cabinet Members and officers on key risks, I will refresh Members’ training on risk management.Objective: Support Members in reviewing the new and existing policy to ensure the appropriate policies are adoptedStrategy: ConstitutionTimescale: OngoingFunding: NoneOfficer: Hazel IlettKey Actions: To work with the Senior Democratic Services Officer to ensure the Cabinet Forward Plan is updated and is accessible to Members

To assist the chairs in identifying topics for pre-decision scrutiny and prioritising their work effectivelyTo work with senior officers to encourage them to consider early pre-decision scrutiny of issues to avoid call-ins and the subsequent delay in decision-making

Outcome: New and existing policies are fit for purpose and meet citizens’ needThe right policies are scrutinised at the right time to achieve maximum impactScrutiny Members have the appropriate information upon which to challenge policy

Q1 Performance appraisal Q2 Performance appraisal Q3 Performance appraisal Q4 Performance appraisal

Inadequate notice from officers of items requiring scrutiny is a recurrent problem despite training for SMT and SLT in January 2015. To address this, I continue to attend meetings of Senior Management Team and Departmental Management Teams as necessary to discuss the impact of poor planning on scrutiny and have redistributed my guidance note on agenda despatch deadlines to all staff. I will continue to monitor the Cabinet and Council planner to ensure items that require scrutiny are identified to avoid the unnecessary calling-in of decisions.

I have met with some of the key chief officers through July to identify issues for future scrutiny at an early stage, highlighting potential lines of inquiry to assist officers to provide clear and concise reports for scrutiny.Objective: Support Members in holding the Cabinet and officers to account for decisions and for their performance in delivering services, major initiatives and collaborative activity




Gather information, organise key witnesses, assist with lines of inquiry and ensure a clear ‘way forward’ for the scrutiny Strategy: ConstitutionTimescale: OngoingFunding: NoneOfficer: Hazel IlettKey Actions: To assist Members at pre-meetings by setting the context for discussion and offering guidance on questioning technique

To work with the Policy and Performance Officer to ensure that Departmental Management Teams nominate an appropriate officer to attend select committees and respond to any challengeTo liaise with the relevant Cabinet Member to ensure clarity of purpose, responsibility and rationale for their attendance at select committee meetingsTo work with the chairs of select committees to ensure they agree a clear “way forward” at scrutiny meetings to ensure there are clear outcomes of the scrutiny

Outcome: The best use is made of resources and project aspirations are realisedThe longevity, performance and risks associated with the projects are managed ensuring value to the public purse


I am assisting Members in undertaking pre-decision scrutiny of major policies, a recent example being the Carers Strategy, whereby key stakeholders were invited to take part in the scrutiny of the policy. The approach was successful in terms of enabling service users to influence the debate and it identified several individuals who were interested in taking part in future scrutiny activity.

Select Committees continue to scrutinise the appropriate topics to ensure delivery against key outcomes. Scrutiny of collaborative services such as recent scrutiny of the Shared Resource Service ensures that outcomes are delivered and that services are held accountable for their performance.

Following the Corporate Assessment undertaken in February 2016, I have worked with Scrutiny Chairs, Scrutiny Members, Cabinet Members and Officers to clarify roles and responsibilities around scrutiny in line with the Scrutiny and Executive Protocol.

I have also worked with the Select Committees to ensure clear questioning of the Executive Member on policy direction / rationale for a decision and of officers on technical matters ~ this has enhanced the Scrutiny / Executive working relationship and each party is now clearer as to their role and responsibilities.




I have formalised the reporting of scrutiny’s recommendations to Cabinet Members through the drafting of Chairs letters and I am ensuring formal responses are received (a WAO recommendation). I am working closely with Democratic Services to ensure chairs’ summaries are captured in Select Committee minutes and I compile a record of scrutiny’s conclusions and recommendations for regular reporting to Cabinet.

Objective: Support Members in analysing performance information to enable them to hold responsibility holders to account for performance and outcomesStrategy: Constitution and Performance Management FrameworkTimescale: OngoingFunding: NoneOfficer: Hazel IlettKey Actions: To ensure the content of reports and presentations is clear and pitched correctly

To ensure further information requests are coordinated and acted uponTo work with officers in education to strengthen the level of scrutiny of schools, the EAS and the Council through holding regular meetings to identify areas of underperformance and identify key issues for scrutinyTo work with the improvement officers to establish a rolling programme of training on performance management in order to develop a more in-depth understanding of performance data and to encourage robust questioning

Outcome: Cabinet and officers achieve satisfactory performance and continuous improvement in line with targets and performance indicators set nationallySchools perform at a high level and deliver continuous and demonstrable improvementThe EAS raises educational attainment in schools and delivers value for money ~ for the Council in terms of school improvement and for young people in terms of raising their attainment and chances of success


I am continuing to work with Scrutiny members to assist them in identifying where challenge should be levied. An example of this is the recent scrutiny of the Quality Assurance report for the Education Achievement Services (EAS). Clear challenge was levied at the Children and Young People’s department and the Cabinet Member to ensure that the EAS is delivering an effective School Improvement Service, is offering value for money and is demonstrating clear outcomes for young people in Monmouthshire. The Select Committee will continue to scrutinise the EAS to ensure it focusses on raising educational attainment across all pupil groups, closing the gap between the ‘Free School Meal’ pupils and ‘non Free School Meal’ pupils. The level of questioning by Members is improving but their understanding of where appropriate challenge should be levied is a continual area for my focus.




I am working with Members to ensure they gain a better understanding of issues they are scrutinising and another example of this is the Economy and Development Select Committee’s recent inquiry into business support. The committee engaged businesses and stakeholders and identified policy areas that require in-depth scrutiny. This example demonstrates the added value of scrutiny activity in driving improvement in performance.

I am guiding Members to probe deeper into issues to ensure there is evidence behind statements made. An example of this is the pre-decision scrutiny of Future Play Models which raised concern amongst Members as to how safeguarding would be ensured. Members were not satisfied to rely on officer assurances, which led to a deeper level of scrutiny that required officers to demonstrate and evidence safeguarding activities. . This is an example of how scrutiny can be effective through being a ‘critical Friend’.

I will continue to work with external auditors to highlight relevant areas for scrutiny. The Care and Social Services Inspectorate for Wales (CSSIW) have suggested that scrutiny focusses on the implementation of the Social Services Act, so this has been factored into work programmes on an on-going basis and has been subject to detailed scrutiny by the Adults and Children and Young People’s Select Committees.

I am planning to repeat the rolling Scrutiny Member Development Programme Training from September onwards to refresh Members in their final year of the current administration. Objective: Enable effective scrutiny of the Medium Term Financial PlanStrategy: ConstitutionTimescale: OngoingFunding: NoneOfficer: Hazel IlettKey Actions: Continue to implement the redesigned “Budget Scrutiny Process 2014-15”Outcome: Scrutiny of the Council’s budget is transparent and democratic, the early consideration of proposals enabling the public to assist in seeking innovative financial solutions





I will ensure that the Select Committees have the opportunity during October/November for detailed scrutiny of the relevant budget proposals for 2017-18. I will liaise with key officers to ensure that this is coordinated. A final Joint Scrutiny Meeting following the community consultation events will be arranged to provide an opportunity to scrutinise any revised mandates.

I will ensure challenge is levied appropriately at Cabinet Members and that a clear questioning strategy is adopted by Members to ensure the portfolio holder is held accountable for budgetary decisions. Objective: Ensure the scrutiny function holds the Public Service Board to account

Ensure effective scrutiny in line with the expectations of the Future Generations ActStrategy: ConstitutionTimescale: OngoingFunding: NoneOfficer: Hazel IlettKey Actions: To establish fit for purpose scrutiny arrangements, including drafting terms of reference, developing a forward plan and ensuring Members are appropriately supported through training and scrutiny supportOutcome: The Public Service Board is effectively held to account for its performance in delivering shared objectives

Future generations are taken into account in decision-making and policyQ1 Performance appraisal Q2 Performance appraisal Q3 Performance appraisal Q4 Performance appraisal

I have ensured that the Council has fit for purpose scrutiny arrangements in place via the establishment of a bespoke Select Committee to scrutinise the Public Service Board.

I have ensured that all Members of the new Public Service Board Select Committee have had the necessary training in order to equip them to perform the scrutiny role and provided sessions during March and June 2016. I worked with the new Select Committee at their first meeting on 28th June to draft a suitable terms of reference and have assisted them in identifying key lines of inquiry and developing a forward work programme. I have also ensured that all scrutiny Members have been




provided with opportunities to receive bespoke scrutiny training to enable them to challenge officers and the Cabinet on Future Generations in line with the expectations of the Act. Objective: To perform the general functions of the Scrutiny Manager role:

Drive the wider scrutiny agenda Manage the scrutiny workload Provide advice on scrutiny to Members and officers Manage the operational aspects of the scrutiny function Coordinate and deliver scrutiny training

Strategy: ConstitutionTimescale: OngoingFunding: NoneOfficer: Hazel IlettKey Actions: Work with the Select Chairs to:

Ensure proper implementation of the Scrutiny and Executive Protocol to support the interface between scrutiny and the Cabinet To review the ‘Terms of Reference’ of the Select Committees to ensure they are relevant and take account of changes to scrutiny’s responsibilities Continue to refine the Scrutiny Website to provide easy access to scrutiny information to Members and to the public

Outcome: An efficient well organised scrutiny function that supports elected Members in ensuring openness, transparency and accountability in decision-makingQ1 Performance appraisal Q2 Performance appraisal Q3 Performance appraisal Q4 Performance appraisal

The scrutiny function undertook a self-evaluation ahead of the Wales Audit Office Corporate Assessment 2016 and in line with feedback from the WAO, the function has implemented the following key changes:

- I am working with Scrutiny Chairs and Cabinet Members to ensure that Cabinet Members draft formal responses to Chairs Letters, to be formally reported at Select Committee meetings under agreement of the work programme. This will ensure that responses made to scrutiny’s recommendations can be evidenced, ensuring accountability and transparency.

- I am working with the Scrutiny Chairs and the Communications Team to raise the profile of the scrutiny function, by devising a scrutiny newsletter and by improving the visibility and interest of the scrutiny website. I will be seeking to include short videos of




Scrutiny Chairs explaining the role and purpose of their Select Committee during the autumn.

I will lead a further self-evaluation of the Scrutiny Function during the autumn of 2016 using the ‘Characteristics of Good Scrutiny’ agreed through the WAO Scrutiny Study 2014 to ensure a continual improvement in the service being provided. This will include a questionnaire for Members and officers based to assess:

whether scrutiny is adding value the extent to which Members feel they are

supported in their non-executive role whether there are key improvements to be made to

enhance the scrutiny function

The self-evaluation will highlight any weak areas and will provide an evidence base upon which to judge the success of the function.

Following feedback from members that the Scrutiny Website was not easy to locate from the Council’s Homepage, I have ensured that there is a direct link from the Council’s main homepage ‘Your Council’ to the Scrutiny Website. Feedback has been positive in terms of the content offered, however, I plan to develop the website further in order to provide an online scrutiny resource for Members.

I have presented the Scrutiny Service Plan 2015-2016 (which is the Council’s WAO Scrutiny Action Plan) to the Audit Committee in January 2016 to ensure they are satisfied with the arrangements in place and will return to the Audit Committee to report progress on 2016-2017 during December 2016. I have also attended the Democratic Services Committee in June 2016 to be held to account on the performance of the function.


A balanced scorecard to measure service performance / impact (Some standard measures of performance on staff, finance and customers have been included that all services must report)

Staff (Key infrastructure) Indicator Actual

2013/14Actual 2014/15

Actual 2015/16

Wales Av 2015/16

Target 2016/17

Actual 2016/17 Q1

Actual 2016/17 Q2

Actual 2016/17 Q3

Actual 2016/17 Q4

Context/ Comment

Sickness Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil No sickness absence Budget (Key infrastructure)

Indicator Actual 2012/13

Actual 2013/14

Actual 2014/15

Wales Av 2014/15

Target 2015/16

Actual 2015/16 Q1

Actual 2015/16 Q2

Actual 2015/16 Q3

Actual 2015/16 Q4

Context/ Comment

N/A There is no budget for scrutiny. All training is delivered in-house by the Scrutiny Manager with support from colleagues across the organisation. E.g. The Policy and Performance Team and the Finance Team. Grant funding from Welsh Government has been utilised for training the Public Service Board Select Committee.

Processes (How Much and How Well?)Indicator Actual

2012Actual 2013

Actual 2014

Actual 2015

Target 2015/16

Actual 2015/16 Q1

Actual 2015/16 Q2

Actual 2015/16 Q3

Actual 2015/16 Q4

Context/ Comment

Number of Scrutiny Meetings held each year (January to January):

Ordinary Meetings:

- Adults- Children and Young People’s- Economy and Development- Strong Communities

Special Meetings:

- Adults- Children and Young People’s- Economy and Development- Strong Communities- Joint

Call-ins


39

26

6668

9

2430N/A

4

0103

51

30

7797

17

4643N/A

4

1102

52

40

711139

10

1522N/A

2

0002

53

31

8887

22

54544

3

1002

N/A N/A as measured annually

N/A as measured annually



Perceptions of scrutiny’s performance will differ, however, the function seeks to add value through critical friend challenge to decision-makers. There is no local or national target for the number of scrutiny meetings per year. Select Committees usually hold 8 ordinary meetings per committee per year, however, the workload of scrutiny has increased significantly. The decision to no longer undertake Task and Finish Groups has a direct impact on this figure. The benefit of additional meetings over Task and Finish Groups are timelier completion of scrutiny activity, more opportunity for Member involvement and greater opportunity for public involvement (meetings being held in public and live-streamed).

The number of call-ins per year remains low, which is likely to be due to more pre-decision scrutiny being undertaken. In line with the action plan, I am working to reduce the number of ‘call-in meetings’ by ensuring advance notice of decisions, which affords Members the opportunity to have early sight of reports.

Number of policies presented for pre-decision scrutiny:

- Adults- Children and Young People’s

43

32

51

23

N/A N/A as measured annually




The workload of the 4 Select Committees is varied with some committees being more policy focussed, however it is clear that the Children and Young People’s Select Committee is performance driven, due to a greater emphasis on holding to account in relation


- Economy and Development- Strong Communities

47

24

39

47

to the performance of education.

Number of Crime and Disorder referrals via the Councillor Call for Action (CCfA) Process:

0 0 0 0 N/A

Number of topics suggested for scrutiny by the public:

0 1 3 3 N/A

Customers (Outcome / Is anyone better off?)Indicator Actual

2013Actual 2014

Actual 2015

Wales Av 2015

Target 2016

Actual 2014/15 Q1

Actual 2014/15 Q2

Actual 2014/15 Q3

Actual 2014/15 Q4

Context/ Comment

Number of scrutiny meetings where there was public involvement during each year:


Number of hits on the Scrutiny Website during January 2015 and January 2016:

403 hits, of which, 301 are ‘unique’ hits

N/A was not measured

N/A was not measured

2013

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A We cannot require members of the public to sign an attendance register or to provide us with their personal details. Observations of select committees indicates public attendance at scrutiny meetings is increasing, with members of the public wishing to speak formally at meetings upon issues that interest or concern them. The public contribute to scrutiny in different ways: Some provide formal evidence, some attend meetings and some hold conversations with elected Members in advance of meetings. It is therefore not possible to quantify public engagement.

Examples of Select Committee public engagement include Select Committees meeting key stakeholders in advance of considering policy. Specific instances of engagement are the scrutiny of Gypsy and Traveller Needs and the scrutiny of a Community Asset Transfer. Select Committees have also received written contributions from the public on Community Education and Mardy Park.

Ensuring the public “have the opportunity to be involved in the work of scrutiny” is one of the fundamental principles of scrutiny. Direct involvement by the public and stakeholders in select committees such as the scrutiny of the Carers Strategy has enabled the public to take part in the questioning and ensured that policy is fit for purpose.

Public attendance at meetings suggests that the public are aware of what Select Committees are scrutinising and that they attend meetings where there subjects of particular interest to them are debated. This suggests they have accessed the Scrutiny Forward Work Programme via the website. The Select Chairs and the Scrutiny Manager have been contacted directly by members of the public regarding scrutiny activity, so this further suggests


Customers (Outcome / Is anyone better off?)Indicator Actual

2013Actual 2014

Actual 2015

Wales Av 2015

Target 2016

Actual 2014/15 Q1

Actual 2014/15 Q2

Actual 2014/15 Q3

Actual 2014/15 Q4

Context/ Comment

that the website is becoming effective in raising the profile of the function. The website went live in January 2016 and data will be collected to monitor usage, particularly as the site is further developed as an online scrutiny resource.

% attendance at Select Committees N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A% attendance at Scrutiny training N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A There is no concrete information to support these

indicators to date; however, the new Modern.gov system should enable future collection of this data. This will assist in drawing assumptions as to whether Members are engaged in scrutiny, whether training is reaching all members and how interested the public are in the work of scrutiny.

Number of YouTube views N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A


Risk Register 2015-18

Risk Strategic Operational

Reason why identified (evidence)

Risk Level (High, Medium or Low) Based on a score assessing both probability & impact

Respon - sibleOfficer

Actions proposed to mitigate the risk

Progress & impact of actions 2016/17

Q1


Q2


Q3


Q4

Year LevelPotential that the Scrutiny Function performs so ineffectively that it becomes a risk to the Council.

O The Council’s Scrutiny Function was considered a high risk area in 2006 due to its ineffectiveness.

2015/162016/172017/18

LowLowLow

Hazel Ilett, Scrutiny Manager

The Scrutiny Function has been reviewed by the Scrutiny Manger three times in 5 years and also by the Wales Audit office 4 times in 7 years. Recommendations made by both reviews were accepted and we can evidence that we have actioned all of the recommendations made.

The Scrutiny Function is challenged internally via the Scrutiny Service Plan and externally by regulators (the Scrutiny Service Plan is also the WAO Scrutiny Action Plan produced in response to the WAO Scrutiny Study’s recommendations to all Councils in 2014). The plan is challenged specifically by the Council’s policy and Performance Team, the Scrutiny Chairs Liaison Group and the Head of Democratic Services.

The service strives to continuously improve and feedback from Members, officers, partners and inspectors informs whether it is progressing in the right direction. The function self-evaluates annually and will use the national ‘Characteristics of Good Scrutiny’ developed in 2014 as a future benchmark.

The Council’s Wales Audit Office Corporate Assessment undertaken in February 2015 reflected positively on the function and a follow-up review undertaken in February 2016 evidenced that key actions identified by the Scrutiny Manager to further improve scrutiny in Monmouthshire had been delivered.

The Scrutiny Service Plan has been scrutinised by the Council’s Audit Committee (14th Jan 2016) which was satisfied that the Council has appropriate and








Q1


Q2


Q3


Q4

Year Leveleffective scrutiny arrangements in place. The function was also scrutinised by the Democratic Services Committee in June 2016, which was also satisfied with its performance. The risk therefore continues to be LOW.

Potential that the Council fails in terms of its safeguarding responsibilities in respect of children and vulnerable adults as a result of ineffective scrutiny of policy and performance.

O It relates specifically to the responsibility of Scrutiny Members and is therefore volatile.

2015/162016/172017/18

LowLowLow


The appropriate Select Committees review the performance within their remits on a quarterly basis to ensure any concerns are highlighted at an early stage. The Council’s Annual Reporting Framework allows a joint presentation to Scrutiny upon the performance within Social Services as a whole, which seeks to prevent issues falling between the remit of the scrutiny committees.

Improvements to the way in which Select Committees monitor risk (holding Cabinet Members directly to account) should ensure that performance is monitored robustly to ensure that actions are taken to mitigate key risks.

Following the Estyn inspection, the Council has revised its Safeguarding Policy, which has been scrutinised several times over the last 2 years and the Children and Young People’s Select Committee receive quarterly reports on safeguarding practice.

The Select Committees are ensureign that Safeguarding is prioritised and is considered across the wrok of the COucnil. E.g. The Future Play Model Porposal was referred back tio Oficers for further work to enaure safeguarding protection sctivities could be evidenced.

Potential that Members fail to challenge effectively and hold Cabinet Members, Officers and Partners to account for decision-

O It relates specifically to the responsibility of Scrutiny Members and is therefore volatile.

2015/162016/172017/18

MedMedMed


The Scrutiny Member Development Programme is a rolling programme of training specifically designed for MCC’s Scrutiny Members and

I








Q1


Q2


Q3


Q4

Year Levelmaking and performance.

they are encouraged to attend. The WAO Corporate Assessment evidenced that attendance at training is an area for concern, so the the self-evaluation to be undertaken during the autum of 2016 will seek to identify training needs and training preferences in roder to raise attendance levels. The Scrutiny Mnaager provides advice during Select Committee pre-meetigns as to how to levvy challenge in the approptruiate direction – e.g. Rationale and justificnation for decisions being taken to Cbaient Members with officers only providing technical support. Members are encouraged to seek evidence to collaborate staements made about our performance rather than rely on reassurances.

The Future Generations Act places wider responsibilities and specific duties for the scrutiny function, for which it will not be directly funded or supported. The risk level was high in previous years because legislation that was being considered at that time placed a wider duty on scrutiny to scrutinise the

S The Future Generations Act requires local government scrutiny to hold the Public Service Board to account. The new responsibilities have implications for the scrutiny function, in that it has required a designated appropriate arranagement (a new Select Committee) to

2015/162016/172017/18

HighHighMed


It is too early to speculate the ramifications of the legislation, so the Scrutiny Manager will keep a watching brief and advise as and when necessary.








Q1


Q2


Q3


Q4

Year Levelpublic sector. This has not materialised and as such, this risk has lowered, however, officer and member capacity remains an issue to be monitored.

be established. This will have implications for Members in terms of their capacity and also for scrutiny support.


scrutiny - monmouthshire€¦ · web viewself-evaluation of the scrutiny function during the autumn...

Documents