Members of the Committee are requested to bring their copy of the agenda for the Executive meeting on 24th May 2017.
Minutes:
The Committee looked at the following reports on the Part 1 agenda for the Executive meeting on 24th May 2017.
(4) Minutes of the Executive meeting held on 22nd March 2017
Reference was made to Minute 198 of the Minutes of the Executive’s meeting held on 22nd March 2017, in particular reference to Executive concern at the projected overspend of £124k on the Coroner’s Service, a statutory service managed by L B Croydon on behalf of four local authorities. The Council had an obligation to meet its share of the costs but Executive Members wanted reassurance that expenditure was being controlled and managed effectively.
No specific update could be provided to the Committee although it was necessary for the Coroner’s Service (South London) to leave the St Blaise building on the Civic Centre site in view of strategic plans for the site. The service had accordingly moved to a new building co-located with the Coroners Court and in so doing extra costs would have been incurred and details could be provided. There was however an obligation to pay the costs and this being the reason for the projected overspend assurance was given that such a level of expenditure would not be repeated in subsequent years.
(6) Update on Children’s Services
Report CS17130
A second update report to the Executive outlined progress on the Children’s Services Improvement agenda.
Concerning the appointment of three lawyers starting in June and July it was explained that one appointment was to cover a senior lawyer who would be retiring shortly; one was to cover a vacancy in the legal team; and one was an additional post in the team – the additional post being necessary to cover increased workload/cases.
It was also noted that of 236 actions needing to be started or completed between May 2016 and the end of March 2017, 15 had not progressed within the published timescale and RAG rated red. An enquiry was made on whether missing the deadline would have an impact and the Chairman asked for an officer response - it was not possible to advise at the meeting. Ultimately, it was suggested that of crucial importance was the forthcoming OFSTED assessment. For Appendix 1 to Report CS17130 it was also suggested that an update be provided to the Executive covering April 2017. Additionally, the Chairman was concerned that the reportprovided no financial commentary for monitoring purposes and asked for financial details to be included in the next update report.
RESOLVED that the report be noted.
(7) Local Government Ombudsman Public Report
Report CS18004
Members considered a Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) report concerning a break in respite care for a young person, The Ombudsmen recommended the Council pay a sum equivalent to the cost of missed respite care and support amounting to £5,032.10. An additional award of £1,000 was made to the young person’s parents for distress and inconvenience caused by the service failure.
Having observed an increased level of LGO complaints in his ward, a Member asked for a monthly report on their numbers so the position can be formally monitored. The Chairman of the General Purposes and Licensing Committee had been considering a complaints report for his Committee; a report could also identify a complaint by service and whether it was upheld. Some LGO recommendations were also understood to find maladministration on the part of an authority as well as making recommendations on a policy.
A Member was interested to know whether the break in respite care for the young person reflected an isolated case or a flaw in the process; however, it was thought likely to be an isolated case given the number of successful transitions from children’s services to adult care without complaint.
The Chairman suggested the case be reviewed by Care Services PDS possibly as a Part 2 report with more detail.
RESOLVED that Executive be recommended to refer the case to the Care Services PDS Committee for review.
(8) Gateway Zero Report – Procurement Strategy for L B Bromley CCTV Service
Report ES17020
With redevelopment proposals for the Civic Centre site it was necessary to identify an alternative location or service delivery for the CCTV Control Room and approval was sought to market test the CCTV service.
To accommodate a tender process the current contract extension would need to be increased by 14 months and Report ES17020 outlined a strategy for continuing the service including an outline procurement strategy/proposed project plan.
The Civic Centre also hosted the control room for monitoring parking enforcement and commissioning specifications would ask for delivery options to include innovation and service improvement, including CCTV monitoring for parking enforcement if required in future (allowing for any changes to parking enforcement legislation).
Although no alternative control room location could be found at the Civic Centre, accommodation could be provided at the Waldo Road Depot where fibre cabling was already installed. The Chairman asked that capital costs for such a move be put to the Executive along with capital costs for the three options already identified namely:
· Option 1 – Relocation of the CCTV Control Rooms to another location locally;
· Option 2 – Partnering with another local authority or other public sector organisation;
· Option 3 – Outsourcing the service to a third party provider
On Option 3 soft market testing indicated that contractors were unlikely to own buildings to provide control rooms and would need to rent or hire facilities. As such capital costs could vary significantly. It was also suggested that other boroughs partner with L B Bromley to achieve revenue income but this could only be considered with an alternative location.
RESOLVED that:
(1) the recommendations be supported; and
(2) capital costs be provided to the Executive for Options 1 to 3 (paragraphs 3.9 to 3.16 of Report ES17020) as well as the option to provide control room accommodation at the Waldo Road Depot.
(9) Gateway Review – Adults and Young People Substance Misuse Services
Report CS18005
Proposals were considered to extend the current contracts for the Adult and Young People’s Substance Misuse Services from 1st December 2017 to 30th November 2018. It was also proposed to exempt from tendering the Community Pharmacy services related to Needle Exchange (NEX) and Supervised Administration of Methadone Services (SAM) for an eight month period from 1st April 2018 to 30 November 2018 enabling the contracts to be aligned with the Adult and Young People’s Substance misuse contracts. All the substance misuse contracts could then be tendered to commence on 1st December 2018 for a three-year period with an optional two year extension (3+1+1 years).
Details were circulated of the legal basis for providing substance misuse services. The significance of the Health and Social Care Act 2012 was particularly highlighted with local authorities subsequently becoming commissioners for substance misuse services. The World Health Organisation classified both drug and alcohol dependencies as diseases for which there was a responsibility to address.
The six month period following treatment was considered critical. Not returning for treatment during this period provided a good indicator of success and the basis for a key service performance measure.
In response to Member questions further background was provided on matters such as the effectiveness of services and the perceived extent of drug and alcohol related problems within the borough including comparison with the national position. An increase in the use of “legal highs” nationally was anticipated to present a significant problem in future.
RESOLVED that the recommendations to the Executive be noted.
(10) Draw-down and Carry Forward of Contingency Government (New Burdens) Grant Funding to Support the Local Authority in implementing the Special Educational Needs Reforms and the Continued role of Bromley (in partnership with L B Enfield) as SEND Regional Lead for London
Report ED15082
Executive approval was sought for draw-down of:
· SEND Implementation (New Burdens) Grant 2017/18 covering the final year of CSEC 104/2016 grant of £224,975;
· SEND Implementation (New Burdens) Grant 2016/17 covering the remainder of the 2016/17 grant of £20,508 kept in contingency; and
· London SEND Regional Lead Grant 2017/18 covering the final year of S31 Grant funds of £27,522 (shared with partner L B Enfield).
The SEND (Special Educational Needs and Disability) New Burdens Grant supported local authorities deliver the SEND reforms over a statutory four year period. Statements of Special Educational Needs and Learning Difficulty Assessments were being transitioned into Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCP) as appropriate with the conversion taking place during the current fourth year period. This was in addition to work in everyday SEND processes. Further development work included robust systems to cover an extension of age range within the system from 19 years to 25 years.
In partnership with the Department for Education, Council for Disabled Children, London Councils and L B Enfield, L B Bromley led and delivered the London Regional Programme, funding for which ensured statutory compliance of the SEND aspects of the Children and Families Act 2014, consistent accountability, and OFSTED and CQC readiness through information and training. This had enabled the local authority to access high quality workforce training to deliver the reforms. The further resource would enable the transition process to continue to ensure statutory compliance and prevent further delay in progressing the transitions.
It was understood that employing staff on temporary contracts for a period of one year presented no undue liabilities for the Council; however, a temporary worker continuing employment after a two-year period could incur a number of additional rights for the worker.
RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported.
(11) Capital Funding for Property Disposal/Feasibility Works
Report DRR17/024
A new Earmarked Reserve of £250k would enable Cushman and Wakefield to undertake feasibility works on sites (listed in Report DRR17/024) to assess their suitability for:
· disposal (generating a capital receipt);
· re-development to provide new facilities;
· development to generate efficiencies and/or economic growth.
An Executive decision to dispose or re-develop a site would then be made on a case by case basis and the allocation would be monitored as part of the Capital Programme monitoring process. Funding the new Reserve would reduce the Growth Fund uncommitted balance to £4,776k.
Where possible, the feasibility works would be funded by receipts generated from site sales; alternatively, re-development costs would be capitalised. Recent practice in seeking offers subject to planning had led to offers being made for unrealistic schemes but obtaining planning permission for a scheme prior to re-marketing a site could potentially generate a larger and guaranteed receipt.
By using Cushman and Wakefield savings would be made in procurement and officer time with tender costs avoided for each site. Cushman and Wakefield could move forward at pace on the feasibility works. Formerly, capital costs would have been incurred. The rate for Cushman and Wakefield to process was less than would be the case if each site went separately to a consultant. The listed sites could also be commissioned at the same time given the capacity now available through Cushman and Wakefield.
The Chairman enquired of the priority for each site suggesting they be listed under a Phase 1 or Phase 2. However, most were a priority including the Depots review (information needed for Environmental Services commissioning e.g. condition of depots and availability for the future) and the Glades Department store. Phasing could delay progress and also have adverse revenue implications (it was necessary to tender the waste contract by September 2017 to avoid a contract extension). The Chairman suggested that such costings for sites (including any capital costings) be presented to the Executive and he maintained that the site list should be prioritised. The Chairman also suggested that work for an alternative Aviation College site at Biggin Hill be removed, the Chairman having understood that BHAL would undertake the work.
On the basis of work on the sites being necessary, two Members expressed a preference for seeing no delay in Cushman and Wakefield proceeding. The Portfolio Holder highlighted the opportunity now opened by Cushman and Wakefield who were undertaking a rigorous review of sites. This had not been possible to progress in-house. Cushman and Wakefield also had significant resource and the Portfolio Holder felt that work on all the sites listed should be progressed at the same time.
A Member suggested a further recommendation to ensure that Cushman and Wakefield maintain pace on the work with updates provided to the Contracts Sub-Committee. Another Member felt that it would be helpful for the Executive to have time frames on the listed projects and when they are expected to come through.
The Portfolio Holder highlighted the importance of accountability to ensure the Earmarked Reserve sum is not exceeded. This included monitoring/review by the Strategic Asset Management Group and reporting to the Contracts Sub-Committee and E&R PDS Committee. Ward Members would also be thoroughly apprised of progress with each site.
RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported with additional recommendations that:
(1) progress be monitored by the Contracts Sub-Committee;
(2) the list of sites for feasibility work be prioritised; and
(3) an alternative Aviation College site at Biggin Hill be removed from the list of sites for feasibility work.
(12) Formal Consultation on Outline Service Proposals and Procurement Strategy for Temporary Accommodation Modular Home Provision
Report CS18006
With demand for temporary accommodation for homeless households forecast to increase, approval was sought to invite bids for piloting the use of modular homes as part of an overall strategy to reduce costly nightly paid provision.
Although it was intended to regenerate and develop (for residential and commercial opportunities) a number of sites, actual development could take a number of years with the land remaining dormant. As such, approval was sought to utilise the sites during this period for temporary accommodation using good quality modular homes installed quickly on grant of planning permission and dismantled ready for development work to start. An initial pilot site had been identified at York Rise to accommodate some 30-36 family sized units, subject to full feasibility and consultation.
On 11th January 2017 the Executive approved the appointment of Cushman and Wakefield to develop a scheme achieving best consideration for the York Rise site by: a) submission of a planning application; b) on achieving planning permission, exploring the possibility of a joint venture and re-marketing the site on a non-conditional basis (potentially generating a larger capital receipt); and c) post marketing, evaluating the bids received, and recommending a prospective purchaser for the site via a report to the Portfolio Holder seeking approval for its disposal to the recommended purchaser. It was also agreed to meet the estimated £46k cost from the Investment Fund.
Using the site for 30-36 units would not prevent development of the scheme for disposal and subsequent planning permission. Planning consent would last for three years and provide a window of opportunity to use the site in this period for temporary housing.
It was proposed to seek a housing provider partner for the modular units, undertaking a full range of services including assembly, management and dismantling at the end of the term in return for guaranteed use of the land during the defined period and guaranteed nominations from the Council. The provider could lease such units with running costs met through the rental stream, charged to tenants and the applicable temporary accommodation management fee grant. As this would be an initial pilot scheme with the potential to utilise further sites, it was proposed to ask bidders to provide details for a three-year, one site only scheme together with five and ten years in the event that further sites could be identified to which the homes could be moved.
A number of Members considered the York Rise suitable for a modular home development. The Chairman felt the site should either be used for modular homes on a longer term basis (more than three years) if needed for temporary accommodation or disposed of quickly in line with the Executive’s decision on 11th January 2017. The Chairman’s preference was to halt disposal of the site and use it for temporary accommodation over a longer period of time. The particular condition of the land suggested it would be worth less than other land nearby supporting a case to retain the modular homes on site; the land was also good as a trial site.
The proposal indicated that York Rise did not have to be used as an initial modular home site but rather act as prototype for future development of the concept elsewhere. The Portfolio Holder considered York Rise ideal as a temporary site for modular homes and a quick feasibility study could be undertaken.
Supporting the site for modular housing and looking to see it used as such for longer than three years, a Member felt that it was probably not good to have a three-year time limit suspecting the site would be needed for some time for temporary accommodation. The Member encouraged action to be taken quickly for the modular homes. Another Member supporting the site for the homes saw an opportunity to lead in this area and if the concept proved unviable the site could be sold.
Further support was expressed for temporary accommodation at the site and a Member proposed the initiative be taken forward and developed for moving around the borough. The Member felt that it was also necessary to provide permanent homes. Another Member supporting the approach recommended full consultation with all Farnborough and Crofton Ward Members on the initiative’s benefits. The Portfolio Holder also highlighted the importance of taking on Ward Member views.
How the site was to be marketed was also considered important with care taken on terms used for the accommodation – modular homes being a preferred descriptor.
Supporting modular homes for York Rise, Members agreed that an additional recommendation should be provided to reflect that the sale of the site should be delayed and the modular accommodation provided longer than three years with no restrictions made to remove it from site.
RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported with an additional recommendation that the sale of the site be delayed and the modular accommodation provided longer than three years with no restrictions made to remove it from site.
(13) Homeless Contingency Draw-down for Early Intervention and Visiting Resources
Report CS18007
Drawdown from contingency was requested to (i) pilot an early intervention model in preparation for the Homeless Reduction Act and (ii) establish a dedicated visiting fraud prevention service to avoid unnecessary financial costs for non-occupation of temporary accommodation.
More limited occupancy checks by landlords in private rented accommodation secured nightly presented a higher risk of rent arrears, abandonments and sub-letting. With much of the accommodation out of borough, increased risks were also presented from limited contact. Households remaining longer in temporary accommodation also presented a greater risk of changed circumstances and a higher potential for non-occupation and fraud. Additionally, rent arrears could increase under universal credit - the housing element of benefits no longer being paid via housing benefit. A more intensive response was necessary so that managed payments are made direct to the local authority from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).
A sufficient affordable supply of accommodation and reduction in household numbers reaching homeless crisis was sought by a three-strand approach:
· prevention:
· increasing temporary accommodation supply, preventing fraud, ensuring best use of available units, and promoting move-on: and
· longer-term supply options to remove pressure through extra move-on options and temporary accommodation flow.
The report outlined early intervention details of the one-year pilot along with details of costs and costs avoided.
To boost visiting (mainly to out-of-borough placements) and fraud prevention, each of two officers would undertake 140 visits per year. A one-year pilot was proposed to assess the impact of the initiative and options for future delivery.
The proposal at £80K per year would be self-financing through savings achieved in identifying non-occupation which were expected to be significantly in excess of the cost of resources required.
RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported.
(14) Locally Administered Business Rates Relief Scheme
Report FSD17040
Report FSD17040 outlined a local discretionary relief scheme for businesses facing significant increases in Business Rates liability as a result of the 2017 revaluation. The Government would make £300m available over the next four years from 2017/18 to support businesses with the steepest increases in Business Rates. Government would allocate the funding by reviewing the number of properties with a 2017 Rateable Value less than £200k and experiencing an increase in liability of more than 12.5% before any other relief is applied.
It was necessary to consult with the GLA before adopting a scheme and it was also best practice to have further consultation so reducing the risk of any challenge to the scheme design.
RESOLVED that the recommendation to undertake a consultation exercise - with the scheme outlined in Report FSD17040 recommended for adoption – be supported.
(15) Contract Award for 0-4 Years Health Visiting Service (Incorporating Family Nurse partnership)
Report CS18008/1
The report provided a Part 1 summary to the corresponding Part 2 report on the Executive’s agenda.