Agenda item

Report RES13153

The Committee considered the following reports on the agenda for the meeting of the Executive on 11^th September 2013.

(5) Budget Monitoring

Report RES13148

The Committee considered the second budget monitoring report for 2013/14 based on activity and expenditure levels up to July 2013. The report also highlighted significant variations which would impact on future years and early warnings that could affect the final year end position. 

The Chief Executive summarised the causes for some of the projected overspends and the action being taken to balance the budget. The largest variations were in Environment (car parking income not achieved), Resources (rental income not achieved) and Care Services, where a number of different pressures were being addressed including placements budgets, people with no recourse to public funds, young people on remand and homelessness provision.  The Chief Executive assured Members that with better gatekeeping, compensatory savings and provisions in contingency the overspend would be significantly reduced by the end of the financial year.

A Member raised concerns that projected savings were sometimes too optimistic, and that there was often too much of a delay between decisions being taken and implemented. 

RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported. 

(6) 2013/14 Planned Highway Maintenance Programme – Street Services Reinstatement Fund

Report RES13156

It was proposed to use £483k held in the Street Services Reinstatement Fund (included in the Council’s earmarked reserves) to fund a number of additional highway maintenance schemes. The money had originally been set aside in 2003 for the purposes of remedial works for cable television infrastructure. 

RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported. 

(7) Glebe Foundation Special School (Capital Works)

Report ED13078

A statutory consultation had been carried out on proposals to enlarge the Glebe Foundation Special School by 104 places, and permission was sought to engage a consultant to undertake initial feasibility and planning work. 

RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported. 

(8) Adoption Reform Grant (Part A) Drawdown

Report CS13032

In January 2013 the Department for Education had announced grant funding for local authorities to support adoption reform. The Executive had already approved proposals for Part B of the grant, ring-fenced specifically for the recruitment of adopters. Permission was sought to draw down funding of £140,100 of the £547,752 available from Part A, which was not ring-fenced.  The report also outlined possible spend for 2014/15 and 2015/16.

RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported. 

(9) Formal Consultation on Outline Service Proposals and Procurement Strategy – Customer Services 

Report RES13157

At its meeting in November 2012 the Executive had asked officers to explore opportunities for outsourcing Customer Services, whilst recognising the importance of maintaining service standards and retaining well-trained staff with local knowledge. It was now proposed to award a contract to Liberata commencing on 1^st November 2013 enabling annual savings of £68,000 on Customer Services operations and additionally £28,000 from the Capita IT contract if the number of computers decreased by 100.  A one-off investment of £330k from the Invest to Save Fund was also proposed to deliver further savings of between £125,000 and £200,000pa. It was confirmed that current service standards would apply, there would be no job-losses and all staff would transfer to Liberata. 

The proposals would consolidate existing front-line services under one provider and would enable more services to be transferred to the Customer Service Centre (CSC). Portal development would increase accessibility of services, allow more self-service and reduce the use of other more expensive customer service channels. 

The Chairman invited Glenn Kelly, as Staff-side Secretary, to address the Committee. He argued that the proposals were too hasty and would only produce minimal savings. He drew attention to the accommodation costs of £107,000 which had been excluded from the bid – he argued that these should have been included making Liberata’s bid more expensive than retaining the service in-house. He criticised the report for not providing enough detail, and questioned whether the channel-shift approach was appropriate in the borough with the highest population in London of people over 85 years.

Officers confirmed that the accommodation costs had been excluded as this was the cheapest approach and reflected existing in-house recharges. If an element of rent was included Liberata would simply charge a corresponding increase in their bid price. The Liberata contract had three and a half years to run, and it was anticipated that further savings could be achieved when it was re-tendered, along with savings from IT and channel shift which could amount to as much as £300,000 in total. 

Some Members felt that there was not sufficient detail in the report on issues such as how failure-demand could be reduced, and that the savings targets were not sufficiently ambitious.  Fix my Street was mentioned as an example of an effective and innovative online service that the Council should be using and emulating – it was confirmed that was having an impact already and which would increase when it was publicised in future. The portal would be key to addressing failure demand; this would not be developed by Capita as the IT support provider, but the Council would take advantage of Liberata’s expertise in this field.  It was confirmed that there were targets for answering phone calls, but call duration was not targeted as resolving the customer’s issues was the aim. 

The Committee supported the principle of channel shift, and it was confirmed that further development of online services such as school admissions and free school meals applications would be within the contract. 

Members asked for further details of the proposals, such as a project specification or draft contract, and sought more substance and evidence of how the additional savings could actually be achieved. It was also noted that the contract needed to allow the Council to vary and reduce service standards if necessary – officers confirmed that the contract contained this flexibility, and that the default clauses in the existing contract would apply should Liberata fail to perform to the required standards. Officers agreed to circulate further information including the service level agreement (SLA).

Members asked why Bromley Social Services Direct (BSSD) was not being included in the proposed contract. It was explained that BSSD was a discreet service separate from the main part of the CSC; as Adult Social Care services were being re-modelled the Education, Care and Health Services Department preferred the BSSD service to transfer back to them to manage the changes they required. 

The Committee concluded that the Executive should be informed that the recommendations should be supported, but considered that more information was needed to support the anticipated savings.

RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported.