Doncaster Metripolitan Council
Councillors:
56
Wards:
22
Committees:
25
Meetings (2025):
88
Meetings (2024):
113
Meeting
Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee - Doncaster
Meeting Times
Scheduled Time
Start:
Thursday, 12th September 2024
10:00 AM
Thursday, 12th September 2024
10:00 AM
End:
Thursday, 12th September 2024
2:00 PM
Thursday, 12th September 2024
2:00 PM
Actual Time
Started:
Thursday, 12th September 2024
12:00 AM
Thursday, 12th September 2024
12:00 AM
Finished:
Thursday, 12th September 2024
12:00 AM
Thursday, 12th September 2024
12:00 AM
Meeting Status
Status:
Confirmed
Confirmed
Date:
12 Sep 2024
12 Sep 2024
Location:
Council Chamber, Civic Office, Waterdale, Doncaster DN1 3BU
Council Chamber, Civic Office, Waterdale, Doncaster DN1 3BU
Meeting Attendees
Co-Optee
Antoinette Drinkhill
Church of England Education representative
Present, as expected
Co-Optee
Bernadette Nesbit
Diocese of Hallam Roman Catholic Church
Apologies
Council Staff
AHW_PA
Expected
Vice-Chair
Councillor Andrea Robinson
Present, as expected
Committee Member
Councillor Leanne Hempshall
Present, as expected
Committee Member
Councillor Richard A Jones
Present, as expected
Committee Member
Councillor Glynis Smith
Present, as expected
Agenda
1
Apologies for absence.
Minutes
Apologies were received from Chair - Councillor Jane Kidd, Councillor Majid Khan, Steve Cox and Bernadette Nesbit.
2
To consider the extent, if any, to which the public and press are to be excluded from the meeting.
Minutes
There were no items where the public and press would be excluded from the meeting.
3
Declarations of Interest, if any.
Minutes
There were no declarations made.
4
Minutes from the Meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee held on the 20th June 2024.
Attachments:
- Document Minutes , 20/06/2024 Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee 04 Sep 2024
Minutes
That the minutes of the meetings held on 20th June 2024, be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Vice Chair.
5
Public Statements.
[A period not exceeding 20 minutes for statements from up
to 5 members of the public on matters within the
Committee’s remit, proposing action(s) which may be
considered or contribute towards the future development of
the Committee’s work programme].
to 5 members of the public on matters within the
Committee’s remit, proposing action(s) which may be
considered or contribute towards the future development of
the Committee’s work programme].
Minutes
There were no public statements made.
6
St. Leger Homes of Doncaster Limited (SLHD) Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and Tenant Satisfaction Measures (TSMs) update for Quarter 1 (Q1) and year ended 30 June 2024 (24/25)
Attachments:
- Document SLHD Q1 OSMC Perf Rep 2024-25 FINAL 04 Sep 2024
Minutes
A report was presented to the Committee by the Director of Corporate Services, St Leger Homes of Doncaster and the following areas were discussed:
KPI4: Average Number Of Nights In Hotel Accommodation - In respect of residents placed in hotel accommodation for more than 100 days, the Vice-Chair of the Committee raised concerns about the personal cost to those in such a position. Reference was made to the homelessness legislation and what was in place to help those at risk of becoming homeless and when they present as homeless. It was explained how efforts were made to find suitable accommodation which ideally combined both a place to live and access to support. The Committee heard that this was a new indicator for 2024/25 and had been skewed by a couple of cases in long-term accommodation. It was recognised that this was also a result of difficulties around the provision of housing across Doncaster. It was outlined that work was being undertaken with the private rent sector and efforts were being made to help people pay deposits and bonds.
The % of Local Revenue and Capital Expenditure - It was clarified that this was the same target that the Council had in place (although SLHD calculated it differently by including capital expenditure) with a procurement process in place for large contracts from £0.5 million to £10 million. Members were informed that to achieve better consistency, the calculation would be corrected for Quarter 2. It was explained that this issue was around the availability of local businesses that were able to bid for this level of contract. Members heard that SLHD as a contractor itself carried out £28 million of contracting which was excluded from the performance figures as it was classed as a council-owned business. It was considered important to spread the business locally, so it was not all with one local contractor.
The Executive Director explained how the Council found this to be a very challenging target because the specialised services being purchased meant there was less flexibility around costs and where services were delivered. It was commented that the Council were looking to build stronger relationships with local buyers and develop a better understanding of processes. It was continued that engagement work was taking place through avenues such as Doncaster Chamber.
Para 7.6: KPI 6: Stage 1 and 2 -Concern was raised around complaints received which were increasing. Further information was sought around the types of complaints received, and the difference between stage 1 and stage 2 complaints. It was explained that work had been carried out nationally by the Housing Ombudsman that included changes concerning regulations and greater publicity undertaken. It was added that SLHD had published and publicised how complaints could be made and now logged everything as a complaint. Members heard that complaints had been separated and were now in line with new tenant satisfaction measures. It was recognised that across the board, complaints had risen, and examples of policy complaints were provided. In terms of themes, it was explained that policy was the biggest area of complaints and examples were provided. It was clarified that stage 1 referred to the first time a complaint was issued, and stage 2 was the appeal process.
It was responded that the Council held SLHD to account through holding regular monitoring meetings when considering performance and as part of the housing standards work (of which complaints was one of the standards). It was viewed that an increase in complaints was seen as a positive and confirmed that monitoring was ongoing. Officers expressed that they were satisfied that they were meeting standards as set out by the regulator.
7.20. KPI 21: % of properties not meeting the Decent Home Standard - Concern was raised around how SLHD could improve this KPI for meeting the Decent Home Standard. Members were provided with some background and heard how SLHD was working their way through a small number of properties being built into the maintenance programme. It was explained that coming out of the Regulation of Social Housing, all landlords needed to understand the condition of their stock and undertake a stock conditions survey. It was detailed that there was a rolling programme in place where 20% of stock was surveyed every 5 years. It was explained that many of the 4000 houses surveyed had been identified with Category 1 hazards. Clarification was made that any house with a Category 1 hazard could not be classed as a decent home explaining the performance of this indicator. Members heard that all those homes had been scheduled for repairs.
7.3. KPI 3 : Average Days to Re-let Standard Properties (Target 24 days) – it was clarified that although it was possible to separate long-term repairs from these figures, they were required to be included for consistency purposes.
RESOLVED: that the Panel note the progress of St Leger Homes of Doncaster performance and the contribution St Leger Homes of Doncaster make to supporting the City of Doncaster’s strategic priorities, be noted.
KPI4: Average Number Of Nights In Hotel Accommodation - In respect of residents placed in hotel accommodation for more than 100 days, the Vice-Chair of the Committee raised concerns about the personal cost to those in such a position. Reference was made to the homelessness legislation and what was in place to help those at risk of becoming homeless and when they present as homeless. It was explained how efforts were made to find suitable accommodation which ideally combined both a place to live and access to support. The Committee heard that this was a new indicator for 2024/25 and had been skewed by a couple of cases in long-term accommodation. It was recognised that this was also a result of difficulties around the provision of housing across Doncaster. It was outlined that work was being undertaken with the private rent sector and efforts were being made to help people pay deposits and bonds.
The % of Local Revenue and Capital Expenditure - It was clarified that this was the same target that the Council had in place (although SLHD calculated it differently by including capital expenditure) with a procurement process in place for large contracts from £0.5 million to £10 million. Members were informed that to achieve better consistency, the calculation would be corrected for Quarter 2. It was explained that this issue was around the availability of local businesses that were able to bid for this level of contract. Members heard that SLHD as a contractor itself carried out £28 million of contracting which was excluded from the performance figures as it was classed as a council-owned business. It was considered important to spread the business locally, so it was not all with one local contractor.
The Executive Director explained how the Council found this to be a very challenging target because the specialised services being purchased meant there was less flexibility around costs and where services were delivered. It was commented that the Council were looking to build stronger relationships with local buyers and develop a better understanding of processes. It was continued that engagement work was taking place through avenues such as Doncaster Chamber.
Para 7.6: KPI 6: Stage 1 and 2 -Concern was raised around complaints received which were increasing. Further information was sought around the types of complaints received, and the difference between stage 1 and stage 2 complaints. It was explained that work had been carried out nationally by the Housing Ombudsman that included changes concerning regulations and greater publicity undertaken. It was added that SLHD had published and publicised how complaints could be made and now logged everything as a complaint. Members heard that complaints had been separated and were now in line with new tenant satisfaction measures. It was recognised that across the board, complaints had risen, and examples of policy complaints were provided. In terms of themes, it was explained that policy was the biggest area of complaints and examples were provided. It was clarified that stage 1 referred to the first time a complaint was issued, and stage 2 was the appeal process.
It was responded that the Council held SLHD to account through holding regular monitoring meetings when considering performance and as part of the housing standards work (of which complaints was one of the standards). It was viewed that an increase in complaints was seen as a positive and confirmed that monitoring was ongoing. Officers expressed that they were satisfied that they were meeting standards as set out by the regulator.
7.20. KPI 21: % of properties not meeting the Decent Home Standard - Concern was raised around how SLHD could improve this KPI for meeting the Decent Home Standard. Members were provided with some background and heard how SLHD was working their way through a small number of properties being built into the maintenance programme. It was explained that coming out of the Regulation of Social Housing, all landlords needed to understand the condition of their stock and undertake a stock conditions survey. It was detailed that there was a rolling programme in place where 20% of stock was surveyed every 5 years. It was explained that many of the 4000 houses surveyed had been identified with Category 1 hazards. Clarification was made that any house with a Category 1 hazard could not be classed as a decent home explaining the performance of this indicator. Members heard that all those homes had been scheduled for repairs.
7.3. KPI 3 : Average Days to Re-let Standard Properties (Target 24 days) – it was clarified that although it was possible to separate long-term repairs from these figures, they were required to be included for consistency purposes.
RESOLVED: that the Panel note the progress of St Leger Homes of Doncaster performance and the contribution St Leger Homes of Doncaster make to supporting the City of Doncaster’s strategic priorities, be noted.
7
2024-25 Quarter 1 Finance and Performance Improvement Report
Attachments:
- Document Q1 Finance & Performance OSMC Meeting Pack ver 2 04 Sep 2024
Minutes
The Committee considered a report that provided the 2024-25 Quarter 2 Finance and Performance information. It was explained that 15% of the 75 performance indicators were red and that in terms of the Councils financial position, there was a £8.6 million overspend in comparison with other Councils which was viewed as positive. In waiting for the Government’s budget announcement at the end of October, it was shared that there was optimism that the Council would deliver a balanced position.
The Vice Chair acknowledged the Committee’s appreciation of the work undertaken and expressed pleasure that residents were benefiting from the delivery of services as demonstrated through the reports key performance indicators.
The Committee asked questions relating to the following areas:
Elective Home Education – Regarding the increase in children educated at home, Councillor Hempshall referenced the figures and how they had risen substantially since before the pandemic. The Executive Director of Children, Young People and Families explained that school funding went direct from the Dedicated Schools Grant to schools. It was confirmed that when there were a reduced number of placements within schools, the funding received from the Department was reduced and therefore the Council did not see any savings.
Mandatory Training Not Completed by Staff - Concern was raised regarding the number of staff not completing the mandatory training and in particular equalities training. The Committee was reminded of arrangements currently offered through a structured approach such as through the training portal, notifications to Managers and it was noted that timing was a key issue. It was also outlined how there were regular reviews of the dashboard, and that monitoring took place through PDRs and 1:1s. It was explained that data was taken at that moment in time which presented challenges such as staff not being at work due to sickness. It was explained that there were different types of workforces within the Council who could not complete the training due to the nature of the job and therefore a more tailored approach was required to ensure that Doncaster was a more inclusive Council. It was commented that Managers had a role in supporting their workforce to complete this training. Reference was made to data cleansing activity as this record for workforce is separate to the HR portal.
High Number Vacancies - Members were informed that efforts were being made to evolve processes to make the recruitment process simpler, for example, shortening the application form. It was noted that Doncaster Council was not alone in experiencing issues around recruitment and that the Council’s turnover rate was lower than it was nationally. It was outlined that the Council’s package of retention was being looked at that and promotion was taking place around why it was good to work for Doncaster and what could be expected.
In terms of employing lower levels of staff with disabilities at the Council, it was acknowledged that this was an area of challenge, and it was explained that reporting could appear low as for example, the individual did not always want to report or see themselves as having a disability. It was noted that individuals were encouraged to input their personal details on the HR portal to capture more data and that the Council had networks in terms of supporting individuals around the accessibility and disability framework so that they feel more supported. A Member commented that undertaking the training may help the individual to identify themselves as having a disability and it was considered positive that the Council had signed a Disability Charter.
It was noted that the Staff Disability Network had greater visibility and that there was more attention on people who were neurodiverse. Within Adult Social Care, it was explained that there was focus in employing individuals with a learning disability into Council roles. Members were told how the Principle Social Worker had taken a lead role to help the Councils Social Worker workforce become more representative and that the recruitment process considers groups with protected characteristics and was more accessible.
Councillor Sarah Smith - Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care
Overspend in Adult Social Care – Concern was raised around the overspend in adult social care due to a higher number of older people now living in care homes and supported living for adults. It was stated that the overall performance for people to stay at home and not move into a care home had improved significantly in the 2nd half of 2023-24 and been sustained for the rest of the year.
The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care provided an outline of what was being done to help reduce the number of people moving into a care home, which included.
1. Increased availability of homecare for Doncaster people to live in their own home.
2. Improved the way we respond to people in an emergency.
3. Improved the speed of following up when an individual is moved into a care home on a temporary basis to support people to move back home rather than turn into a permanent arrangement.
4. Intermediate Care - It was noted that although services were highly rated, work was taking place to make them more efficient so that a greater number of people can benefit from them.
5. Changes in practice – Colleagues meet to discuss residents and make sure they get right care and support.
6. That the reported overspend was a legacy of higher numbers of people moving into care homes and contributing to financial pressures. It was noted that the current pressure was from older people being discharged from hospitals to Care Homes which required a partnership effort to address that.
Concern was raised about the time it took to access the quality of place required and it was felt that there were less provisions in the North than in the South. It was acknowledged that there was a lack of capacity around nursing homes which was being looked at by the Integrated Care Board. Members were informed that the Housing Strategy was due to be refreshed in 2025 and it had been identified that older person’s accommodation and other special housing provisions (for care leavers and other young people) were some of the key elements that needed to be addressed in the new strategy going forward. It was noted that although there was a good supply of older and disabled persons accommodation, it was not always geographically spread. It was commented that there would be an opportunity to look at what was required and to consider sites and what funding was available. Reference was made to the importance of the person being able to remain in their local area with the right facilities in place rather than having to moving away.
Members heard that Social Workers who had been previously centralised, were now working on a locality basis to support people and support within their communities and address social isolation.
Reference was made to the assisted living provision, Charles Court in Armthorpe and how it would be beneficial to have something similar in place for care leavers. The Director of Children, Young People and Families, confirmed that there were supported living arrangements in place for care leavers to prepare those young people for independence. Following this, post 18 could move into the Keys to the Future (a successful project ran in partnership with SLHD). It was commented that it was when they moved from Keys to the Future into independent living which presented a significant pressure on the housing stock, and in turn could block other care leavers to be supported into independence. Members were assured that work was taking place around the Housing Strategy as to how we ensure that there were sufficient places. Reference was made to a recent Peer Review on the Council’s Care Leaver offer, undertaken by a DFE Consultant, that was complimentary about the housing support in place for care leavers.
Support for Carers – An outline of what had been achieved to support carers included.
· That the Carers journey had been co-produced with carers on the priorities that mattered to them and looked at how work can be undertaken with partners and the Council to make improvements across Doncaster for carers.
· Revival of the Carers Strategic Oversight Board.
· Several carers’ events taking place.
· Carers being integrated into more strategic working groups across partnerships.
· Strengthening communication around carers rights and other information.
· Carers network for staff and partners and getting the Council carers accredited in supporting its employees.
Concern was raised about children and young people who were missing out on their education due to caring responsibilities. Members were informed that there was an active carers group, supported by a team within the Council to access education and make schools aware of the issues they faced daily. It was continued that young carers and their families were encouraged to attend events together to build a network. It was explained that innovative work was being done to break down the isolation of young carers at home. It was acknowledged that more could be done in identifying and encouraging young carers to come forward so that support could be offered. It was relayed that there were 350-400 on the young carers register, yet there were an estimated 800 young carers in the city. To reach those not on the register, it was explained that work was being done to promote the young carers offer and help them to identify that they were a young carer, by actively working in schools and forming conversations amongst young people.
Promote Borough / Sports / Culture
Michael Hart (Chief Executive) from Doncaster Culture Leisure Trust (DCLT) was in attendance to respond to questions from the Committee. There was a discussion around the following areas.
Childhood Obesity – An outline was provided of what the DCLT was doing to address childhood obesity, influencing changing, supporting positive behaviours and offering an accessible approach. An overview was provided of the programme, its pathways and approach in addressing social isolation (with the Trust leading on Social Isolation Alliance) by bringing in partners who can be signposted to. Reference was made to the work being done with Youth Focus Groups and youth services within the Council on how they can localise and inform what people might see as a physical activity and what a good youth service might look like. It was noted that a barrier in young people accessing facilities were often parents due to various reasons. Information was provided relating to rehabilitation which feeds into the wider Health Care Strategy (to be launched in October 2024). Members heard that 20% of the programme were SEND which had experienced positive results. It was explained that as centres were being opened, programmes were being looked at to draw from valuable insight on what was happening within communities. Also, in terms of education and skills, there were opportunities around work experience and volunteering, providing free lifeguard and swimming instructor courses. It was explained how work was being undertaken with education partners to bring it to a whole service offer and some great successes were already being seen. Reference was made to recruitment and what activity was being done to engage with people at an early age and by taking them through a Learning Management System. This would also introduce them to learning around Equality Diversity and Inclusion, to develop behavioural changes within the workforce. Finally, an outline was provided of activity streams and targeted interventions working again with partners and drawing down funding to promote those healthier lifestyles wherever possible.
An outline was provided regarded what the Council and its partners were doing in contributing to addressing childhood obesity and what is being done.
Action: Due to time constraints the Vice Chair requested that a detailed response be circulated to the Committee outside of the meeting.
In terms of issues around children and young people using gym facilities, it was explained that several gyms did not allow children to use them. It was noted that in total there had been 120 complaints, with one complaint escalating further.
In respect of the online booking system for swimming and accessing the CDC funded initiative of £1 swim, Members heard that issues experienced earlier on had been responded to. Regarding the booking system it was explained that the leisure provider software used was used by 80% of leisure centres. Reference was made to funding and how it had been split with the offer still available until October 2024. It was clarified that this could be done at site although registration was needed to capture the appropriate data.
Safer, Stronger, Cleaner Greener Communities
Total number of Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) and Community Protection Notices (CPN's) – Further detail was provided on these notices issued by the Neighbourhood Response Team. It was explained that information on Fixed Penalty Notices, Community Protection Notices, and breaches of Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPOs) were collected quarterly, and the total number of all notices were combined (which formed a total of 496 over the last 12 months). It was explained that the reasons the notices were served was for noise nuisance, that FPN was normally issued for illegal parking and PSPO for breaches of a Public Space Order. It was explained that variations in figures occurred because of targeted action. Not being able to provide a breakdown between the different types of notice served was referred to and the External Manager for Strategic Housing Property and Safer Communities, offered to take this issue back to be considered for the future.
Action: To look at being able to provide a breakdown between the different types of notices served for future consideration.
It was confirmed that the Neighbourhood Response Team (NRT) did not operate on a Bank Holiday. It was explained that monitoring calls during this period had not indicated a high volume of calls. It was stated that there was a current review of NRT management arrangements that will consider bank holiday workings as part of it.
Recycling Rate - It was noted that questions on the Recycling Rate for Household Domestic Waste indicator, would be asked by the Communities and Environmental Overview and Scrutiny Panel, when it considers the Waste Contract as part of its workplan.
Homelessness and Rough Sleepers - It was commented that the Regeneration and Housing Overview and Scrutiny Panel would be considering homelessness and rough sleepers as part of its workplan and it was therefore agreed to defer this question.
Best Place to do Business
New Jobs Over £31,000 - It was commented that the Regeneration and Housing Overview and Scrutiny Panel would be considering a report coming from Business Doncaster in October 2024 (which would include employment). It was therefore agreed that this question about the performance indicator “No. of new jobs FTE equivalent jobs created in the borough with a salary level of over £31k per year through Business Doncaster inward investment, property, and key account activity” which was showing red in terms of its target, would be asked at that time.
Transport and Digital
Shared Prosperity Fund - It was agreed that a question around the Shared Prosperity Fund be deferred to OSMCs next Finance and Performance meeting.
Tackling Climate Change
It was agreed that questions on the following be deferred to OSMCs consideration of the Quarter 2 Finance and Performance Report.
· Homes being retrofitted to improve energy efficiency.
· Solar installations
· Naturalisations
· Trees
Healthier, Happier and Longer Lives
Home Adaptations - Considering the significant variations in performance around adaptations it was asked what could be done to increase the speed of home adaptations. It was responded that there was a Service Manager in place that would overlook both the Adaptation Service and Occupational Therapy Team and was working to a Rapid Improvement Plan due to long waits for adaptions. It was continued that staff capacity had been increased to process applications more quickly and consideration had been given to the previous flow of work within the service to make it more efficient. It was explained that communication with those waiting for adaptations had improved to understand whether their circumstances had changed. Regarding people who were new to the service, it was explained that a more consistent system was being developed alongside an information pack (including whether they need to make a financial contribution) and finally, by improving the ordering of equipment. It was commented that it would eventually improve waiting times and be quicker for those new to this service.
Child and Family Friendly Borough
Not in Education, Employment and Training (NEET) - It was noted that around 50% of care leavers were not in employment, education, or training (of which 50% of the numbers were not able to work for various reasons). It was explained that the Inspiring Futures Team was actively developing work experience for young people and supporting them into employment, education, or training. Reference was made to recent success in setting up a partnership with the White Bred Group, which for example helped young people into hospitality. It was noted that staff capacity had increased and it was recognised that further work needed to be undertaken around work experience and engaging with employers and also with vulnerable groups including young carers. It was clarified that NEET figures across the city reported low at 4% which was lower than Doncaster’s statistical neighbours, South Yorkshire and nationally.
Skills to Thrive in Life and Work
Early Help Care Plans (EHCP) - Regarding the 187 requests to assess for an EHCP (of which 60 were parental or self-referral), it was noted that there had only been a slight increase over time in parental applications for ECHP. It was commented that this could be due to the introduction of a portal which had made support and applications for EHCP assessments more accessible and straightforward. It was explained that approximately 70% of applications progressed through to assessment. Reference was made to how prior to the pandemic around 600 EHCPs were being managed compared to around 2000 at this current time. It was felt that whilst this demonstrated the significant pressure being placed on this service, capacity had increased to address those demands where possible.
It was noted that the Code of Conduct for SEND had not changed so would need to be continued in the same way in terms of the process followed for children to access and be granted an EHCP. It was outlined that what sits before EHCP, was the SEND support plan within schools, and that there was a SEND transformation plan managed by the SEND Transformation Board and other pieces of work such as a toolkit for parents and professionals. It was stated that the GDA pathway had been delayed for a neurodiversity diagnosis and work would be undertaken with the ICB colleagues to address that. Reference was made to preventative measures being placed in school and that there would be investment placed into alternative provision to allow young people to remain as close as possible to mainstream schools where the ECHP was issued. It was noted that specialist schools were currently oversubscribed and therefore out of authority placements needed to be considered. Mention was made of the overspending of the Dedicated Schools Grant High Needs Block which was being managed as best as it could be. Members heard that the Government was looking at what that meant and how they could address the issues being faced around Special Educational Needs.
Regarding children with SEND (as part of the in EHE cohort), it was explained that support was provided in accessing specialist provision. It was clarified that parents of SEND children could apply for EHE but there needed to be school education psychology interventions and observations which could prove to be a challenge when children were not being educated in school.
Suspensions – A Member asked what work was being undertaken with Doncaster Secondary Headteachers to challenge suspensions. It was responded that although work was being undertaken with partners and considered as positive, high numbers of suspensions were still being experienced. Some of the work included a toolkit, support being provided with SENCOs and Social Emotional Mental Health Hubs and training workforce within schools to develop the right skills. Reference was made to work being undertaken with the Pupil Referral Unit to make sure that it was fit for purpose and a review was being undertaken of outreach services to provide the right service to schools. Examples were made of how an alternative provision was being developed to support young people to remain in mainstream education such as the Big Picture learning provision, and the development of the Vega School.
Dedicated Schools Grant – It was explained a contribution from the DSG HNB supported the educational placement for children who were placed out of authority and needed an education. An outline of this and how it was being budgeted for was provided.
In terms of mitigation, it was explained that the impact on the general fund was included in the projection that was incorporated into the overspend. Reference was made to the relationship between the DSG and the general fund. It was felt that getting the right contributions was considered important and what was being done throughout year was to make sure that the DSG was being used correctly towards the placements that were required.
Capital Programme for School Expansions – It was questioned why the capital programme for schemes for school expansions and increased pupil numbers had slipped by a combined £8.6m at Hatchell Grange, Hayfield, Rossington All Saints, Armthorpe and Dunsville. It was clarified that the slippage was due to procurement issues between providers and would presume that this was to increase places in schools and build capacity.
Action: Information on what the capital spend would be for each of the places.
Special Schools Overspend – In relation to a reported overspend in funding special schools, it was explained that this was done to meet demand This provided additional physical spaces for Special Schools and funded teachers and support staff to increase the number of classes to meet demand. It was explained that the overspend was due to an increased number of additional classes agreed for Northridge, Bader 9 and Pennine View 4 places. It was commented that there were not enough special school places locally and that steps were being taken to increase those places at pace as we were unable to build a special school ourselves. It was viewed that the overspend was as much a reduced spend in terms of placing children out of authority as well as better outcomes by supporting them locally.
It was clarified that it would not be possible to bid to build another special school because of the funding rounds that you can apply for and because there had recently been some special school developments within South Yorkshire. It was noted that it might therefore be a while before there was another opportunity to do that supported by a provider.
Regarding the 8 places at Northridge, it was confirmed that this was all that could be achieved.
Further to a question raised around whether there was still an ability to sponsor Free Schools or work with a partner to create a bid for a Free School that was a special school. It was responded that conversations with providers were currently taking place.
Children in Care Overspend – Currently part of the strategy was to provide Doncaster’s own residential provision and then to partner with ethical providers. It was noted that this was going well until it hit the national challenge of recruiting Residential Care Workers as part of the under 16 market and formed the underspend (that was offsetting the overspend). It was shared that the Council had partnered with a recruitment provider and had been promoting the Council’s retention strategy. It was continued that the post 16 provision had improved, and Residential Workers were being recruited to that. Members heard that the Sufficiency Plan was being updated to make sure that the ratios were correct, and that the Council was engaging with the market appropriately to meet the demand being faced.
RESOLVED that:
a) The information in the report, be noted.
b) That Supported Assisted Living be considered as part of the 2025/2026 scrutiny workplan across the relevant panels.
c) That OSMC continues to monitor progress of mandatory training completion rates.
The Vice Chair acknowledged the Committee’s appreciation of the work undertaken and expressed pleasure that residents were benefiting from the delivery of services as demonstrated through the reports key performance indicators.
The Committee asked questions relating to the following areas:
Elective Home Education – Regarding the increase in children educated at home, Councillor Hempshall referenced the figures and how they had risen substantially since before the pandemic. The Executive Director of Children, Young People and Families explained that school funding went direct from the Dedicated Schools Grant to schools. It was confirmed that when there were a reduced number of placements within schools, the funding received from the Department was reduced and therefore the Council did not see any savings.
Mandatory Training Not Completed by Staff - Concern was raised regarding the number of staff not completing the mandatory training and in particular equalities training. The Committee was reminded of arrangements currently offered through a structured approach such as through the training portal, notifications to Managers and it was noted that timing was a key issue. It was also outlined how there were regular reviews of the dashboard, and that monitoring took place through PDRs and 1:1s. It was explained that data was taken at that moment in time which presented challenges such as staff not being at work due to sickness. It was explained that there were different types of workforces within the Council who could not complete the training due to the nature of the job and therefore a more tailored approach was required to ensure that Doncaster was a more inclusive Council. It was commented that Managers had a role in supporting their workforce to complete this training. Reference was made to data cleansing activity as this record for workforce is separate to the HR portal.
High Number Vacancies - Members were informed that efforts were being made to evolve processes to make the recruitment process simpler, for example, shortening the application form. It was noted that Doncaster Council was not alone in experiencing issues around recruitment and that the Council’s turnover rate was lower than it was nationally. It was outlined that the Council’s package of retention was being looked at that and promotion was taking place around why it was good to work for Doncaster and what could be expected.
In terms of employing lower levels of staff with disabilities at the Council, it was acknowledged that this was an area of challenge, and it was explained that reporting could appear low as for example, the individual did not always want to report or see themselves as having a disability. It was noted that individuals were encouraged to input their personal details on the HR portal to capture more data and that the Council had networks in terms of supporting individuals around the accessibility and disability framework so that they feel more supported. A Member commented that undertaking the training may help the individual to identify themselves as having a disability and it was considered positive that the Council had signed a Disability Charter.
It was noted that the Staff Disability Network had greater visibility and that there was more attention on people who were neurodiverse. Within Adult Social Care, it was explained that there was focus in employing individuals with a learning disability into Council roles. Members were told how the Principle Social Worker had taken a lead role to help the Councils Social Worker workforce become more representative and that the recruitment process considers groups with protected characteristics and was more accessible.
Councillor Sarah Smith - Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care
Overspend in Adult Social Care – Concern was raised around the overspend in adult social care due to a higher number of older people now living in care homes and supported living for adults. It was stated that the overall performance for people to stay at home and not move into a care home had improved significantly in the 2nd half of 2023-24 and been sustained for the rest of the year.
The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care provided an outline of what was being done to help reduce the number of people moving into a care home, which included.
1. Increased availability of homecare for Doncaster people to live in their own home.
2. Improved the way we respond to people in an emergency.
3. Improved the speed of following up when an individual is moved into a care home on a temporary basis to support people to move back home rather than turn into a permanent arrangement.
4. Intermediate Care - It was noted that although services were highly rated, work was taking place to make them more efficient so that a greater number of people can benefit from them.
5. Changes in practice – Colleagues meet to discuss residents and make sure they get right care and support.
6. That the reported overspend was a legacy of higher numbers of people moving into care homes and contributing to financial pressures. It was noted that the current pressure was from older people being discharged from hospitals to Care Homes which required a partnership effort to address that.
Concern was raised about the time it took to access the quality of place required and it was felt that there were less provisions in the North than in the South. It was acknowledged that there was a lack of capacity around nursing homes which was being looked at by the Integrated Care Board. Members were informed that the Housing Strategy was due to be refreshed in 2025 and it had been identified that older person’s accommodation and other special housing provisions (for care leavers and other young people) were some of the key elements that needed to be addressed in the new strategy going forward. It was noted that although there was a good supply of older and disabled persons accommodation, it was not always geographically spread. It was commented that there would be an opportunity to look at what was required and to consider sites and what funding was available. Reference was made to the importance of the person being able to remain in their local area with the right facilities in place rather than having to moving away.
Members heard that Social Workers who had been previously centralised, were now working on a locality basis to support people and support within their communities and address social isolation.
Reference was made to the assisted living provision, Charles Court in Armthorpe and how it would be beneficial to have something similar in place for care leavers. The Director of Children, Young People and Families, confirmed that there were supported living arrangements in place for care leavers to prepare those young people for independence. Following this, post 18 could move into the Keys to the Future (a successful project ran in partnership with SLHD). It was commented that it was when they moved from Keys to the Future into independent living which presented a significant pressure on the housing stock, and in turn could block other care leavers to be supported into independence. Members were assured that work was taking place around the Housing Strategy as to how we ensure that there were sufficient places. Reference was made to a recent Peer Review on the Council’s Care Leaver offer, undertaken by a DFE Consultant, that was complimentary about the housing support in place for care leavers.
Support for Carers – An outline of what had been achieved to support carers included.
· That the Carers journey had been co-produced with carers on the priorities that mattered to them and looked at how work can be undertaken with partners and the Council to make improvements across Doncaster for carers.
· Revival of the Carers Strategic Oversight Board.
· Several carers’ events taking place.
· Carers being integrated into more strategic working groups across partnerships.
· Strengthening communication around carers rights and other information.
· Carers network for staff and partners and getting the Council carers accredited in supporting its employees.
Concern was raised about children and young people who were missing out on their education due to caring responsibilities. Members were informed that there was an active carers group, supported by a team within the Council to access education and make schools aware of the issues they faced daily. It was continued that young carers and their families were encouraged to attend events together to build a network. It was explained that innovative work was being done to break down the isolation of young carers at home. It was acknowledged that more could be done in identifying and encouraging young carers to come forward so that support could be offered. It was relayed that there were 350-400 on the young carers register, yet there were an estimated 800 young carers in the city. To reach those not on the register, it was explained that work was being done to promote the young carers offer and help them to identify that they were a young carer, by actively working in schools and forming conversations amongst young people.
Promote Borough / Sports / Culture
Michael Hart (Chief Executive) from Doncaster Culture Leisure Trust (DCLT) was in attendance to respond to questions from the Committee. There was a discussion around the following areas.
Childhood Obesity – An outline was provided of what the DCLT was doing to address childhood obesity, influencing changing, supporting positive behaviours and offering an accessible approach. An overview was provided of the programme, its pathways and approach in addressing social isolation (with the Trust leading on Social Isolation Alliance) by bringing in partners who can be signposted to. Reference was made to the work being done with Youth Focus Groups and youth services within the Council on how they can localise and inform what people might see as a physical activity and what a good youth service might look like. It was noted that a barrier in young people accessing facilities were often parents due to various reasons. Information was provided relating to rehabilitation which feeds into the wider Health Care Strategy (to be launched in October 2024). Members heard that 20% of the programme were SEND which had experienced positive results. It was explained that as centres were being opened, programmes were being looked at to draw from valuable insight on what was happening within communities. Also, in terms of education and skills, there were opportunities around work experience and volunteering, providing free lifeguard and swimming instructor courses. It was explained how work was being undertaken with education partners to bring it to a whole service offer and some great successes were already being seen. Reference was made to recruitment and what activity was being done to engage with people at an early age and by taking them through a Learning Management System. This would also introduce them to learning around Equality Diversity and Inclusion, to develop behavioural changes within the workforce. Finally, an outline was provided of activity streams and targeted interventions working again with partners and drawing down funding to promote those healthier lifestyles wherever possible.
An outline was provided regarded what the Council and its partners were doing in contributing to addressing childhood obesity and what is being done.
Action: Due to time constraints the Vice Chair requested that a detailed response be circulated to the Committee outside of the meeting.
In terms of issues around children and young people using gym facilities, it was explained that several gyms did not allow children to use them. It was noted that in total there had been 120 complaints, with one complaint escalating further.
In respect of the online booking system for swimming and accessing the CDC funded initiative of £1 swim, Members heard that issues experienced earlier on had been responded to. Regarding the booking system it was explained that the leisure provider software used was used by 80% of leisure centres. Reference was made to funding and how it had been split with the offer still available until October 2024. It was clarified that this could be done at site although registration was needed to capture the appropriate data.
Safer, Stronger, Cleaner Greener Communities
Total number of Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) and Community Protection Notices (CPN's) – Further detail was provided on these notices issued by the Neighbourhood Response Team. It was explained that information on Fixed Penalty Notices, Community Protection Notices, and breaches of Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPOs) were collected quarterly, and the total number of all notices were combined (which formed a total of 496 over the last 12 months). It was explained that the reasons the notices were served was for noise nuisance, that FPN was normally issued for illegal parking and PSPO for breaches of a Public Space Order. It was explained that variations in figures occurred because of targeted action. Not being able to provide a breakdown between the different types of notice served was referred to and the External Manager for Strategic Housing Property and Safer Communities, offered to take this issue back to be considered for the future.
Action: To look at being able to provide a breakdown between the different types of notices served for future consideration.
It was confirmed that the Neighbourhood Response Team (NRT) did not operate on a Bank Holiday. It was explained that monitoring calls during this period had not indicated a high volume of calls. It was stated that there was a current review of NRT management arrangements that will consider bank holiday workings as part of it.
Recycling Rate - It was noted that questions on the Recycling Rate for Household Domestic Waste indicator, would be asked by the Communities and Environmental Overview and Scrutiny Panel, when it considers the Waste Contract as part of its workplan.
Homelessness and Rough Sleepers - It was commented that the Regeneration and Housing Overview and Scrutiny Panel would be considering homelessness and rough sleepers as part of its workplan and it was therefore agreed to defer this question.
Best Place to do Business
New Jobs Over £31,000 - It was commented that the Regeneration and Housing Overview and Scrutiny Panel would be considering a report coming from Business Doncaster in October 2024 (which would include employment). It was therefore agreed that this question about the performance indicator “No. of new jobs FTE equivalent jobs created in the borough with a salary level of over £31k per year through Business Doncaster inward investment, property, and key account activity” which was showing red in terms of its target, would be asked at that time.
Transport and Digital
Shared Prosperity Fund - It was agreed that a question around the Shared Prosperity Fund be deferred to OSMCs next Finance and Performance meeting.
Tackling Climate Change
It was agreed that questions on the following be deferred to OSMCs consideration of the Quarter 2 Finance and Performance Report.
· Homes being retrofitted to improve energy efficiency.
· Solar installations
· Naturalisations
· Trees
Healthier, Happier and Longer Lives
Home Adaptations - Considering the significant variations in performance around adaptations it was asked what could be done to increase the speed of home adaptations. It was responded that there was a Service Manager in place that would overlook both the Adaptation Service and Occupational Therapy Team and was working to a Rapid Improvement Plan due to long waits for adaptions. It was continued that staff capacity had been increased to process applications more quickly and consideration had been given to the previous flow of work within the service to make it more efficient. It was explained that communication with those waiting for adaptations had improved to understand whether their circumstances had changed. Regarding people who were new to the service, it was explained that a more consistent system was being developed alongside an information pack (including whether they need to make a financial contribution) and finally, by improving the ordering of equipment. It was commented that it would eventually improve waiting times and be quicker for those new to this service.
Child and Family Friendly Borough
Not in Education, Employment and Training (NEET) - It was noted that around 50% of care leavers were not in employment, education, or training (of which 50% of the numbers were not able to work for various reasons). It was explained that the Inspiring Futures Team was actively developing work experience for young people and supporting them into employment, education, or training. Reference was made to recent success in setting up a partnership with the White Bred Group, which for example helped young people into hospitality. It was noted that staff capacity had increased and it was recognised that further work needed to be undertaken around work experience and engaging with employers and also with vulnerable groups including young carers. It was clarified that NEET figures across the city reported low at 4% which was lower than Doncaster’s statistical neighbours, South Yorkshire and nationally.
Skills to Thrive in Life and Work
Early Help Care Plans (EHCP) - Regarding the 187 requests to assess for an EHCP (of which 60 were parental or self-referral), it was noted that there had only been a slight increase over time in parental applications for ECHP. It was commented that this could be due to the introduction of a portal which had made support and applications for EHCP assessments more accessible and straightforward. It was explained that approximately 70% of applications progressed through to assessment. Reference was made to how prior to the pandemic around 600 EHCPs were being managed compared to around 2000 at this current time. It was felt that whilst this demonstrated the significant pressure being placed on this service, capacity had increased to address those demands where possible.
It was noted that the Code of Conduct for SEND had not changed so would need to be continued in the same way in terms of the process followed for children to access and be granted an EHCP. It was outlined that what sits before EHCP, was the SEND support plan within schools, and that there was a SEND transformation plan managed by the SEND Transformation Board and other pieces of work such as a toolkit for parents and professionals. It was stated that the GDA pathway had been delayed for a neurodiversity diagnosis and work would be undertaken with the ICB colleagues to address that. Reference was made to preventative measures being placed in school and that there would be investment placed into alternative provision to allow young people to remain as close as possible to mainstream schools where the ECHP was issued. It was noted that specialist schools were currently oversubscribed and therefore out of authority placements needed to be considered. Mention was made of the overspending of the Dedicated Schools Grant High Needs Block which was being managed as best as it could be. Members heard that the Government was looking at what that meant and how they could address the issues being faced around Special Educational Needs.
Regarding children with SEND (as part of the in EHE cohort), it was explained that support was provided in accessing specialist provision. It was clarified that parents of SEND children could apply for EHE but there needed to be school education psychology interventions and observations which could prove to be a challenge when children were not being educated in school.
Suspensions – A Member asked what work was being undertaken with Doncaster Secondary Headteachers to challenge suspensions. It was responded that although work was being undertaken with partners and considered as positive, high numbers of suspensions were still being experienced. Some of the work included a toolkit, support being provided with SENCOs and Social Emotional Mental Health Hubs and training workforce within schools to develop the right skills. Reference was made to work being undertaken with the Pupil Referral Unit to make sure that it was fit for purpose and a review was being undertaken of outreach services to provide the right service to schools. Examples were made of how an alternative provision was being developed to support young people to remain in mainstream education such as the Big Picture learning provision, and the development of the Vega School.
Dedicated Schools Grant – It was explained a contribution from the DSG HNB supported the educational placement for children who were placed out of authority and needed an education. An outline of this and how it was being budgeted for was provided.
In terms of mitigation, it was explained that the impact on the general fund was included in the projection that was incorporated into the overspend. Reference was made to the relationship between the DSG and the general fund. It was felt that getting the right contributions was considered important and what was being done throughout year was to make sure that the DSG was being used correctly towards the placements that were required.
Capital Programme for School Expansions – It was questioned why the capital programme for schemes for school expansions and increased pupil numbers had slipped by a combined £8.6m at Hatchell Grange, Hayfield, Rossington All Saints, Armthorpe and Dunsville. It was clarified that the slippage was due to procurement issues between providers and would presume that this was to increase places in schools and build capacity.
Action: Information on what the capital spend would be for each of the places.
Special Schools Overspend – In relation to a reported overspend in funding special schools, it was explained that this was done to meet demand This provided additional physical spaces for Special Schools and funded teachers and support staff to increase the number of classes to meet demand. It was explained that the overspend was due to an increased number of additional classes agreed for Northridge, Bader 9 and Pennine View 4 places. It was commented that there were not enough special school places locally and that steps were being taken to increase those places at pace as we were unable to build a special school ourselves. It was viewed that the overspend was as much a reduced spend in terms of placing children out of authority as well as better outcomes by supporting them locally.
It was clarified that it would not be possible to bid to build another special school because of the funding rounds that you can apply for and because there had recently been some special school developments within South Yorkshire. It was noted that it might therefore be a while before there was another opportunity to do that supported by a provider.
Regarding the 8 places at Northridge, it was confirmed that this was all that could be achieved.
Further to a question raised around whether there was still an ability to sponsor Free Schools or work with a partner to create a bid for a Free School that was a special school. It was responded that conversations with providers were currently taking place.
Children in Care Overspend – Currently part of the strategy was to provide Doncaster’s own residential provision and then to partner with ethical providers. It was noted that this was going well until it hit the national challenge of recruiting Residential Care Workers as part of the under 16 market and formed the underspend (that was offsetting the overspend). It was shared that the Council had partnered with a recruitment provider and had been promoting the Council’s retention strategy. It was continued that the post 16 provision had improved, and Residential Workers were being recruited to that. Members heard that the Sufficiency Plan was being updated to make sure that the ratios were correct, and that the Council was engaging with the market appropriately to meet the demand being faced.
RESOLVED that:
a) The information in the report, be noted.
b) That Supported Assisted Living be considered as part of the 2025/2026 scrutiny workplan across the relevant panels.
c) That OSMC continues to monitor progress of mandatory training completion rates.
8
Annual Complaint and Compliment Report 23/24
Attachments:
- Document Annual Complaint and Compliment Report 2324 OSMC Report ver 2 04 Sep 2024
- Document Appendix 1 Annual Complaint Compliment Report 20232024_ 04 Sep 2024
- Document Appendix 2 Annual LGSCO Letter 2324 04 Sep 2024
Minutes
The Committee was presented with a report setting out the annual complaints and compliment information relating to 2023/24 for the City of Doncaster Council (CDC), St Leger Homes of Doncaster (SLHD) and Doncaster Culture and Leisure Trust (DCLT). It also considered areas of complaints and measures that have taken place following feedback. An outline was provided of what was in place and how this was structured. The following areas were addressed by the Committee:
St Leger Homes of Doncaster (SLHD) – It was asked what support was in place to support a tenant’s experience of extreme anti-social behaviour issues and for them to report low level incidences such as fly tipping on SLHD land. In response, reference was made to the specialist Safeguarding and Anti-Social Behaviour Team to respond and manage high risk safeguarding and ASB cases. It was continued that the team was also set up to strategically develop the service in response to increased volume and complexity of cases and issues as well as upskilling staff with specialist skills and knowledge to deliver a joined-up approach and play a role with partners in regenerative neighbourhoods. It was shared that SLHD was feeling the pressure around a rise in cases. It was explained that low risk cases were being dealt with by Area Housing Teams and that new reports could be made via the Customer Access Team, through the tenant portal or the relevant housing office, if it was a case that was ongoing. A Member considered it important that work was being undertaken alongside the Police. It was advised that SLHD tenants or non SLHD tenants could call 862 862 to report incidents in respect of low levelling fly-tipping.
In relation to complaints from residents with housing concerns, Members were informed that the Council was constantly reviewing services across the organisation, around repairs and shift patterns to become more accessible. Regarding the reception in the Civic Building, a new procedure had recently been implemented to help streamline the process. It was shared that officers would be happy to investigate any customer concerns outside of the meeting.
It was added that reception facilities, online contact and the contact centre were all closely integrated into the housing regulation inspection as a significant area to be looked at. It was recognised that this was a key issue for the Council and SLHD to make sure that it is operating as best as it can be.
Service Improvement and Impact on Complaints – It was explained that licensing had previously experienced an increase in complaints. As a result of those complaints, work had been undertaken with customer experience resulting in the website being redesigned and an online offer being continually developed with complaints reduced by 45% during 2023/24. It was continued that planning was introducing changes such as improving report writing for officers, a case system management and improved capacity within the team which had seen a 37% reduction in complaints.
Next Steps – Members were informed that work would be undertaken with customer experience over the next few years, looking at the Council’s website which was the biggest access channel with customer accessing online and it was explained that this showed how customers were becoming more self-serving which in turn would also free staff to deal with more complex enquiries.
RESOLVED that: complaints and compliment report for the period 1st April 2023 to 31st March 2024 be noted.
St Leger Homes of Doncaster (SLHD) – It was asked what support was in place to support a tenant’s experience of extreme anti-social behaviour issues and for them to report low level incidences such as fly tipping on SLHD land. In response, reference was made to the specialist Safeguarding and Anti-Social Behaviour Team to respond and manage high risk safeguarding and ASB cases. It was continued that the team was also set up to strategically develop the service in response to increased volume and complexity of cases and issues as well as upskilling staff with specialist skills and knowledge to deliver a joined-up approach and play a role with partners in regenerative neighbourhoods. It was shared that SLHD was feeling the pressure around a rise in cases. It was explained that low risk cases were being dealt with by Area Housing Teams and that new reports could be made via the Customer Access Team, through the tenant portal or the relevant housing office, if it was a case that was ongoing. A Member considered it important that work was being undertaken alongside the Police. It was advised that SLHD tenants or non SLHD tenants could call 862 862 to report incidents in respect of low levelling fly-tipping.
In relation to complaints from residents with housing concerns, Members were informed that the Council was constantly reviewing services across the organisation, around repairs and shift patterns to become more accessible. Regarding the reception in the Civic Building, a new procedure had recently been implemented to help streamline the process. It was shared that officers would be happy to investigate any customer concerns outside of the meeting.
It was added that reception facilities, online contact and the contact centre were all closely integrated into the housing regulation inspection as a significant area to be looked at. It was recognised that this was a key issue for the Council and SLHD to make sure that it is operating as best as it can be.
Service Improvement and Impact on Complaints – It was explained that licensing had previously experienced an increase in complaints. As a result of those complaints, work had been undertaken with customer experience resulting in the website being redesigned and an online offer being continually developed with complaints reduced by 45% during 2023/24. It was continued that planning was introducing changes such as improving report writing for officers, a case system management and improved capacity within the team which had seen a 37% reduction in complaints.
Next Steps – Members were informed that work would be undertaken with customer experience over the next few years, looking at the Council’s website which was the biggest access channel with customer accessing online and it was explained that this showed how customers were becoming more self-serving which in turn would also free staff to deal with more complex enquiries.
RESOLVED that: complaints and compliment report for the period 1st April 2023 to 31st March 2024 be noted.
9
Overview and Scrutiny Work Plan 2024-25 and Councils Forward Plan of Key Decisions
Attachments:
- Document OSMC O&S Master Work Plan 120924 04 Sep 2024
- Document OSMC Forward Plan 1st Oct 24_31st Jan 25 Cab 120924 04 Sep 2024
Minutes
The Senior Governance Officer presented a report providing details of the Overview and Scrutiny Work Plan 2024/25 and the Council’s Forward Plan of Key Decisions.
RESOLVED That:
1. The Overview and Scrutiny Work Plan 2024/25, be agreed; and
2. The Council’s Forward Plan of Key Decisions, be noted.
RESOLVED That:
1. The Overview and Scrutiny Work Plan 2024/25, be agreed; and
2. The Council’s Forward Plan of Key Decisions, be noted.
Previous Meetings
Future Meetings
Join the Discussion
You need to be signed in to comment.
Sign in