Doncaster Metripolitan Council
Councillors:
56
Wards:
22
Committees:
25
Meetings (2025):
95
Meetings (2024):
113
Meeting
Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee - Doncaster
Meeting Times
Scheduled Time
Start:
Thursday, 26th June 2025
10:00 AM
Thursday, 26th June 2025
10:00 AM
End:
Thursday, 26th June 2025
2:00 PM
Thursday, 26th June 2025
2:00 PM
Meeting Status
Status:
Confirmed
Confirmed
Date:
26 Jun 2025
26 Jun 2025
Location:
Council Chamber, Civic Office, Waterdale, Doncaster DN1 3BU
Council Chamber, Civic Office, Waterdale, Doncaster DN1 3BU
Meeting Attendees
Committee Member
Conservative Group Leader
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
Agenda
0
A. Reports where the public and press may not be excluded.
1
Apologies for absence.
Minutes
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 on the agenda where the press and public were to be excluded from the meeting.
3
Declarations of Interest, if any.
Minutes
RESOLVED: That it be noted that Councillor Jane Kidd declared an interest because the organization she worked for was applying for Shared Prosperity Funding.
4
Minutes from the Meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee held on 27th March 2025, 10th February 2025 and 29th July 2024
Attachments:
- Document Minutes Public Pack, 27/03/2025 Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee 18 Jun 2025
- Document Minutes Public Pack, 10/02/2025 Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee 18 Jun 2025
- Document OSMC Printed Minutes 290724 18 Jun 2025
Minutes
RESOLVED: that the minutes of the meetings held on 27th March and 10th February 2025 and 29th July 2024, be agreed as a correct record and signed by the 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
Mr Doug Wright a resident of Doncaster and member of the Health and Social Care Party made a statement requesting that the Committee considers moving the Public Statement item of the agenda to later on in the agenda in future. He explained that this was because what was to be discussed at the meeting was relevant to everybody and hopefully more people would come and listen to them speaking. He said that they would make statements and make response or find out what you have said after it has been discussed. He said he understood that this item was not part of the rules and regulations and it was the councillors’ choice to have it early in the agenda or late on the agenda.
He said he would continue to outline something that he thought was more complex, and did not understand the issue relating to the Terms of Reference for the South Yorkshire, Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire Joint Health Scrutiny Committee. He stated that it was not something new and forgotten that it existed and had no information about it apart from what was contained in the agenda. He stated, what can it tell the Committee, never mind members of the public what is going on and did not tell you anything but talks about the usual basic things. He questioned what was going on with the South Yorkshire meetings. He stated if someone could look at it and in the first instance explain to him and new Councillors what it all means, what it is supposed to do and a simple point when are the meetings.
He finalised by saying that, he will leave it there and doubted if anyone knew and that was genuine, find out, perhaps send him a line, and more importantly for the committee to understand what is going on.
The Chair thanked Mr Wright for his statement and asked the Senior Governance Officer to respond.
The Senior Governance Officer explained that the document Mr Wright was referring to were the Terms of Reference for the South Yorkshire Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee. She explained the meetings were set separately by Sheffield City Council, advertised on the website when the meetings were arranged.
At this point in the meeting the Chair moved to the next item of business.
He said he would continue to outline something that he thought was more complex, and did not understand the issue relating to the Terms of Reference for the South Yorkshire, Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire Joint Health Scrutiny Committee. He stated that it was not something new and forgotten that it existed and had no information about it apart from what was contained in the agenda. He stated, what can it tell the Committee, never mind members of the public what is going on and did not tell you anything but talks about the usual basic things. He questioned what was going on with the South Yorkshire meetings. He stated if someone could look at it and in the first instance explain to him and new Councillors what it all means, what it is supposed to do and a simple point when are the meetings.
He finalised by saying that, he will leave it there and doubted if anyone knew and that was genuine, find out, perhaps send him a line, and more importantly for the committee to understand what is going on.
The Chair thanked Mr Wright for his statement and asked the Senior Governance Officer to respond.
The Senior Governance Officer explained that the document Mr Wright was referring to were the Terms of Reference for the South Yorkshire Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee. She explained the meetings were set separately by Sheffield City Council, advertised on the website when the meetings were arranged.
At this point in the meeting the Chair moved to the next item of business.
6
City of Doncaster Council 2024-25 Quarter 4 Finance and Performance Improvement Report
Attachments:
- Document OSMC PAPERS - Q4 Finance and Performance Report - OSMC 18 Jun 2025
Minutes
The Executive Director, Chief Executives Directorate and Service Director for Corporate resources introduced the report highlighting the following:
Performance
· Overall the Council’s performance remained good reflecting the continued focus on delivery of high quality services that residents need and expect;
· The challenge within which the Council was operating was complex, for example, global instability the impact on oil prices, cost of living and less confidence in the UK national economy;
· Successes included 555 homes had received energy retrofit particularly for the most vulnerable tenants, persistent absence in secondary schools had dropped, increased recruitment of social workers and within target of people moving into residential care.
It was stressed that there were always challenges and things that could be done better. Challenges included the number of children being educated at home, spend with local companies average 64% against a target of 70% and the number of people receiving a carers assessment had reduced over the last quarter.
Budget
· Balanced financial position for 2024/25;
· Overspend of £1.1m being consistent with what was reported at Quarter 3 monitoring, funded by earmarked reserves as set out in the report;
· Several significant overspends that had been offset by contingency funding including adult social care, particularly supporting people in residential care and increased supported living;
· Homelessness £1.1m overspend due to the position relating to housing benefit costs that were not covered by subsidy and temporary accommodation;
· Capital funding of approximately £120M to support 502 schemes with a caution that work could slip into future years;
· Dedicated schools grant (DSG) – this was stressed as a significant risk and national challenge. An overspend of £12m in 2024/25 with the overall deficit of just over £37m. The ability to carry over the deficit had been extended by Central Government from March 2026 to March 2028, meaning when the override expired the deficit could no longer be carried over. Concern was expressed that 2 years was not a long period of time to mitigate this position and be updated over the next 24 months with proposals and noted that it would continue to be addressed through the continued monitoring and budget setting process.
· Stressed the budget was closely monitored and managed.
The following areas were addressed in detail by the Committee:
Reduction in the Council’s CO2 Emissions – In response to a question, it was explained that a 10% annual reduction had been set for each year and in 2023/24 this target had been achieved but as set out in the report it was not achieved in 2024/25 due to a number of contributing factors. It was noted that the Authority’s Gas and water consumption and business miles for staff to undertake their work had increased but seen a reduction in electricity usage. Improvement over the next financial year should be seen through 70 EV vehicles being added to the transport fleet (next financial year) that would reduce vehicle emissions, energy efficiency of buildings to drive down energy consumption, onsite renewable energy and work with staff to understand their work travel patterns being taken forward by a new post through external funding “Heat and Energy Manager”. It was stressed that following the staff survey investigations were being undertaken to possibly introduce a salary sacrifice scheme to help staff purchase electric vehicles.
Children in Elective Home Education (EHE) – it was noted that the Children and Young People Scrutiny Panel had identified this as an area to address. It was explained that Doncaster held a robust register of children who were electively home educated and highlighted that this was not a statutory requirement. Doncaster cross referenced the percentage of children in EHE with other areas and was important to set against national and regional figures and found that in Autumn Doncaster’s rate was 1.9%, comparable to Barnsley and Calderdale at 2% and North East Lincolnshire at 1.9%. It was above the Yorkshire and Humber percentage but noted Hull had not declared its percentage reducing the regions percentage figures.
The Local Authority was ambitious and wished to see this cohort receive a good and positive education in a safe environment. It was outlined that when parents were asked why they home educated their children they would tick the “other” box and they were not required to provide a reason why.
Analysis showed that 12% of parents actively removed their child/ren from school because they felt they were able to provide a better education and not in agreement with the education curriculum. 4.1% of EHE cohort had an EHCP with consideration from parents that the right resources were not in place for their child. It was stressed that no parents reported that they were encouraged to provide home education but there was a small cohort that chose this when being addressed through the attendance pathway.
It was noted that there was a lot of work to do to understand why EHE was chosen by parents and that hard work was always undertaken to get children back into an education setting. If there were safeguarding issues then this would be actively addressed through the correct processes.
With regard to the cultural element referred to in the report it was explained that this related to traditions by the Gypsy and Roma Traveller community where young girls were withdrawn from education in years 5 and 6 when issues including the sexual education curriculum were addressed.
It was reported that the Multi-agency group would investigate the levers around what good EHE was, including it being a proactive rather than reactive choice for parents, maximising support to families and ensure the partnership was aware of and supporting the EHE system. It was confirmed that persistent absence was challenged and addressed with schools.
SEND – in response to a question relating to the failures that may have pushed families out of the system, it was explained that the SENCO practice guidance outlines the legal framework Local Authorities and schools have to provide for children with SEND. With regards to accountability, schools were accountable to Ofsted, with system accountability placed with Local Authorities. Doncaster was very passionate to provide the best support it could for young people, but highlighted that was undertaken against huge national pressures, and the demand that had increased by 123% request for EHCPs, in the last 18 months equating to 1,400 additional plans. The complexity and need was increasing significantly and additional financial constraints, with the DSG being highlighted earlier in the meeting. A progress plan has been established for Doncaster with the vision to keep children with SEND educated in Doncaster. It was noted that this issue would be considered further by the Children and Young People Scrutiny Panel later in the year.
With regard to late advice delays it was explained that the report referred to where professionals across the system could not provide their statutory advice on an EHCP within a 6 week period to the local authority, eg. a consultant psychologist. The delays could be due to complexities. Where there was a delay this in turn delays the SEND officers completing the plans within the statutory 20 weeks. Delays were addressed with partners at weekly meetings.
Shared Prosperity Fund – In response to a question relating to work being undertaken with both employers to get people into work and people who required opportunity assistance, it was explained that there were many areas of work being undertaken to address the position. For example, employment managers were maintaining strong links with local businesses including Polypipe, Amazon, Yorkshire Wildlife Park and Yorkshire Ambulance Service (YAS). A new Senior Employment manager had been appointed to help drive the issue forward.
It was stressed that the majority of businesses in Doncaster were small or charitable organisations therefore work was being undertaken to understand what would help their efficiency with regards to human resource and health and well-being support. The need to ensure the support system was working effectively was also being addressed to ensure all support was better used locally based on businesses and residents.
New jobs created over £31,000 – In response to concern that the target was not being met, it was explained that the Team would not physically create the jobs but worked with businesses that wanted to provide employment and had been impacted by the economic climate. Generally and in more recent years businesses had delayed or scaled back their recruitment plans due to a lack of confidence in the economy.
It was therefore stressed that the demand on the team had been focusing on safeguarding jobs rather than creating new employment. It was noted that 195 new jobs were supported both over and under £31,000.
Members requested that further information be provided following the meeting outlining where the jobs had been created and type of job.
Sexual Health Service: Percentage of contraception that is LARC (Long Acting Reversible Contraceptives) – It was outlined that sexual health services was a service that Public Health must commission for the Doncaster population, with the sexual and contraceptive service being provided by Solutions for Health. It was acknowledged that contraception could also be accessed through GP practices.
It was explained that the indicator measured against for LARCs, was in relation to intrauterine devices that were more reliable and could last up to a 10 year period. The full programme of contraception would include pills, patches and condoms, the latter of which only protects again sexually transmitted diseases.
It was monitored to address service provision uptake, ensure it was sufficient for the population and to promote the services, all of which were available at East Laith Gate in the City Centre and hubs across the Doncaster area.
With regard to the lower uptake it was noted that to achieve a better understanding of contraception in Doncaster a survey had recently been produced seeking peoples attitudes towards contraception. It was highlighted that there had been a change in attitudes eg. concern around side effects of using a hormone, less invasive contraception rather than the implant in an arm and use of less effective methods. LARC would continue to be promoted via Women’s Health Hubs and different opportunities to access LARC would be built into the service.
It was questioned if there was a gap in service once a patient had received a GP consultation and it was explained that the Sexual Health Service was a direct service and people would not have to receive a referral from a GP. It was noted however that a lady may request a specific method from a GP and they may not provide that service and therefore be referred to where they could receive support.
The Sexual Health Service was available 4 days a week, Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday with staff working in neighbourhoods on Wednesday, therefore there shouldn’t be too much of a delay in receiving assistance.
Health on the High Street – it was noted that with regard to the siting of the actual building progress was being made and hopefully would be finalised very soon.
Disabled Facilities Grants (DFG) – it was clarified that there was not an overspend on DFG’s and they were grants that supported people who were not in St Leger tenancies. The overspend was in relation to adaptations in St Leger properties and due to the national rules relating to DFG the funding could not be used to support St Leger tenancies.
With regard to the actual overspend, work was being undertaken to rebase the budget with cost pressures worsening due to 3 main reasons:
1. The Council and St Leger Housing had improved the way the Accessible Housing Register operated. Previously there was a very large number of people on the register who were awaiting a move that might never materialise. Now there was a greater emphasis on adapting existing properties where this was appropriate and desirable;
2. The Council had significantly sped up both its Occupational Therapy assessments and organisation of adaptations themselves. This means that Doncaster people were having to wait less time for adaptations to happen, creating a surge in spend. Work to rebase the budget would need to take this into account;
3. There had been significant inflationary pressures in the last three years in relation to both labour and material costs affecting the price of installations.
Therefore with regard to forecasting, in April 2025 management reporting was integrated onto one electronic system from multiple manual systems. Management information was now available for all current and outstanding cases, including forecasting on estimated budgets required for each adaptation – performance reports have been created to allow service and finance colleagues to monitor spend across all areas.
Carer Assessments – with regard to a question relating to the number of assessments reduction, it was explained that the annual number of Carers Assessments completed increased fivefold in number between 2021 and the end of 2024 because it was recognised it required an increased focus and between 2023 and the end of 2024 the average time was reduced by 25%.
It was noted that in spite of this progress a decision was made to change the model of delivery for Carers Assessments at the end of March 2025, when the previous contract expired. Extending the previous arrangement would only have gone so far in the Local Authority being able to recognise and support carers earlier, providing preventative support that improved their wellbeing and delayed an increase in need. Rather than invest in a specialist service supporting carers, which effectively created a bottleneck because of its relatively small size, there was a wish to invest in an arrangement where carers were the business of a larger staffing group, reflecting the huge numbers of people in Doncaster caring for family members, friends and neighbours. The “Think Carer” campaign that’s encouraging carers to come forward was highlighted to the Committee.
Quarter 4 of the last financial year, between January and March 2025, saw a drop off in Carers Assessments as the Council approached the end of the previous contract and some staff from the organisation providing the service at that time chose to move on. It was also expected that performance would be low in Quarter 1 of this financial year while the new arrangements were bedding in. Measures in place to get back up to speed again with a number of great examples already highlighting the way the Wellbeing team was supporting carers, better then the previous model. For example, recently following an enquiry by a carer who wanted advice and support it was established that the carer’s husband was a veteran, and the brilliant connections that the Wellbeing Team have with veterans support opened a number of doors that the previous provider would not have known existed.
A Member commented that it made sense that Well-being Teams were locality based to assist carers and people who required smaller aids and adaptations and questioned if the waiting lists were monitored. It was explained that they had experienced increased demand and were not assessing people as quickly as they wished. It was explained that that care must be taken to ensure the Well-being Team were not becoming “all things to all people”. It was stressed that with regard to Caring, it was everyone’s responsibility and to receive good quality support. It was noted that once all staffing and partner connections were in place then the service would be as good as it could to provide preventative support.
Adult Safeguarding risks – with regard to the repeat in a 12 month period it was explained that Adult Safeguarding involved protecting adults with care and support needs from abuse or neglect. When a concern was identified work was undertaken with the affected adult, family members and any involved services to address issues to reduce future risks. At the end of an investigation and necessary actions put in place, the person affected (or their advocate if they don’t have mental capacity to provide a meaningful response) would be asked if they feel safer as a result.
Over the last quarter 89% said yes, which was reassuring but at the same time Adult Safeguarding could not eliminate all risks for all people. This was part of the reason why safeguarding risks could repeat. Sometimes people may make what was considered an “unwise decision” that exposed them to further risk. This ability to make decisions for yourself was obviously a human right that being subject to Adult Safeguarding would not remove. On other occasions a concern could arise again after a relatively short period because the actions carried out to safeguard the person were not sustained. One example of this over the last quarter was somebody who fell in a care home on a couple of occasions, for avoidable reasons that could potentially have been averted with stronger supervision and precautionary measures. These examples were investigated to ensure issues were not compounded further. This includes, in care settings, quality monitoring conversations linked to contract management. Information was triangulated so that if any one setting was experiencing a number of issues, proportionate action would be taken.
Recycling rate for household domestic waste – It was explained that figures were collected in arrears and therefore the figure contained within the report was a Quarter 3 figure with the actual figure for Quarter 4 being 48.7 comparing well with neighbouring authorities. Members were asked to note the geographical differences between the neighbouring authorities.
It was acknowledged that a long standing contract had been held with Suez to collect Doncaster’s domestic waste, and it was performing well with the contract extending for a 2 year period to 2028. It was stressed that future discussion with Members with regard to the service was therefore required.
The committee noted that at the time of contract extension a long standing problem with the blue bin collection was addressed following some residents accidentally putting the wrong things in the wrong bin, ultimately leading to less issue of contamination.
The 6 household waste recycling centres were being retained in partnership with Barnsley.
Education on access to information on the website had been undertaken with information on how to change disposal habits is they had accidentally contaminated the wrong bin, with for example a yoghurt pot.
With regard to the “world of waste” it was outlined that this was very complex and changing, with referenced being made to extended producer regulations, simply meaning that people who make waste and packaging that ultimately ends up with the consumer, were not having to pay for that waste production. That money would be provided to Local Authorities, to be used not for how it wished but if the Government was of the opinion that if an authority was not recycling as well as it should do but incinerating waste that could be recycled, then there would be a penalty.
The Committee was reminded that the Community and Environment Scrutiny Panel would be addressing these issues throughout its workplan.
In response to a question relating to when a contaminated bin, it was explained that when waste was contaminated it was taken away but could not be processed in the designated place, with costs then being generated to take it somewhere else for it to be segregated. Within the waste collection contract there were clauses that required the Local Authority to pay for the increased contamination. Therefore warning notices were placed on residents bins to try and modify waste disposal behaviour.
Fly-tipping – the fly tipping percentages could not be provided at this point in the meeting, however it was explained that the Local Authority’s ability to address the situation had improved collecting 98 to 99% of waste. The service standard was noted however, not all fly tipping could be collected within 7 days due to the nature of some of the waste, for example, asbestos required specialist removal, gas canisters or was waste to be collection from private land. Good enforcement processes were in place achieving positive results. Due to the rural nature of the City’s large rural area provided a unique problem with occasional fly tippers making a living out of the illegal action.
External residential placements for children – In connection to trying to bring the City’s young children back within the area, it was explained that 503 children were currently being looked after by the Local Authority and those currently out of area is higher than wished for but had reduced over recent years. The children may still be placed in Doncaster but through a private provider. Placement sufficiency was recognised as the major issue, particularly as children grow and their needs change over time. Hard work had been undertaken in recent years to find the right places for children and young people but in the recent months it had become more of a challenge. It was noted that nationally approximately 8000 more foster placements were required. Doncaster Currently held 132 fostering families registered.
Nineteen inhouse residential placements were available with 2 x 2 bed homes due to be opened in October. To try and offer a break to parents a short term emergency care placement for teenagers was being investigated, to avoid more children entering the care system.
It was highlighted that residential care was not a destination but a powerful intervention providing a positive journey for the City’s children and young people offering choices, for example, moving to semi-independent living. It was stressed that the Local Authority was persistent in finding the right care not just value for money for its children.
Assets sale – in response to a question relating to a specific asset it was explained that the information was commercially sensitive.
RESOLVED:- That the report and discussion, be noted.
Performance
· Overall the Council’s performance remained good reflecting the continued focus on delivery of high quality services that residents need and expect;
· The challenge within which the Council was operating was complex, for example, global instability the impact on oil prices, cost of living and less confidence in the UK national economy;
· Successes included 555 homes had received energy retrofit particularly for the most vulnerable tenants, persistent absence in secondary schools had dropped, increased recruitment of social workers and within target of people moving into residential care.
It was stressed that there were always challenges and things that could be done better. Challenges included the number of children being educated at home, spend with local companies average 64% against a target of 70% and the number of people receiving a carers assessment had reduced over the last quarter.
Budget
· Balanced financial position for 2024/25;
· Overspend of £1.1m being consistent with what was reported at Quarter 3 monitoring, funded by earmarked reserves as set out in the report;
· Several significant overspends that had been offset by contingency funding including adult social care, particularly supporting people in residential care and increased supported living;
· Homelessness £1.1m overspend due to the position relating to housing benefit costs that were not covered by subsidy and temporary accommodation;
· Capital funding of approximately £120M to support 502 schemes with a caution that work could slip into future years;
· Dedicated schools grant (DSG) – this was stressed as a significant risk and national challenge. An overspend of £12m in 2024/25 with the overall deficit of just over £37m. The ability to carry over the deficit had been extended by Central Government from March 2026 to March 2028, meaning when the override expired the deficit could no longer be carried over. Concern was expressed that 2 years was not a long period of time to mitigate this position and be updated over the next 24 months with proposals and noted that it would continue to be addressed through the continued monitoring and budget setting process.
· Stressed the budget was closely monitored and managed.
The following areas were addressed in detail by the Committee:
Reduction in the Council’s CO2 Emissions – In response to a question, it was explained that a 10% annual reduction had been set for each year and in 2023/24 this target had been achieved but as set out in the report it was not achieved in 2024/25 due to a number of contributing factors. It was noted that the Authority’s Gas and water consumption and business miles for staff to undertake their work had increased but seen a reduction in electricity usage. Improvement over the next financial year should be seen through 70 EV vehicles being added to the transport fleet (next financial year) that would reduce vehicle emissions, energy efficiency of buildings to drive down energy consumption, onsite renewable energy and work with staff to understand their work travel patterns being taken forward by a new post through external funding “Heat and Energy Manager”. It was stressed that following the staff survey investigations were being undertaken to possibly introduce a salary sacrifice scheme to help staff purchase electric vehicles.
Children in Elective Home Education (EHE) – it was noted that the Children and Young People Scrutiny Panel had identified this as an area to address. It was explained that Doncaster held a robust register of children who were electively home educated and highlighted that this was not a statutory requirement. Doncaster cross referenced the percentage of children in EHE with other areas and was important to set against national and regional figures and found that in Autumn Doncaster’s rate was 1.9%, comparable to Barnsley and Calderdale at 2% and North East Lincolnshire at 1.9%. It was above the Yorkshire and Humber percentage but noted Hull had not declared its percentage reducing the regions percentage figures.
The Local Authority was ambitious and wished to see this cohort receive a good and positive education in a safe environment. It was outlined that when parents were asked why they home educated their children they would tick the “other” box and they were not required to provide a reason why.
Analysis showed that 12% of parents actively removed their child/ren from school because they felt they were able to provide a better education and not in agreement with the education curriculum. 4.1% of EHE cohort had an EHCP with consideration from parents that the right resources were not in place for their child. It was stressed that no parents reported that they were encouraged to provide home education but there was a small cohort that chose this when being addressed through the attendance pathway.
It was noted that there was a lot of work to do to understand why EHE was chosen by parents and that hard work was always undertaken to get children back into an education setting. If there were safeguarding issues then this would be actively addressed through the correct processes.
With regard to the cultural element referred to in the report it was explained that this related to traditions by the Gypsy and Roma Traveller community where young girls were withdrawn from education in years 5 and 6 when issues including the sexual education curriculum were addressed.
It was reported that the Multi-agency group would investigate the levers around what good EHE was, including it being a proactive rather than reactive choice for parents, maximising support to families and ensure the partnership was aware of and supporting the EHE system. It was confirmed that persistent absence was challenged and addressed with schools.
SEND – in response to a question relating to the failures that may have pushed families out of the system, it was explained that the SENCO practice guidance outlines the legal framework Local Authorities and schools have to provide for children with SEND. With regards to accountability, schools were accountable to Ofsted, with system accountability placed with Local Authorities. Doncaster was very passionate to provide the best support it could for young people, but highlighted that was undertaken against huge national pressures, and the demand that had increased by 123% request for EHCPs, in the last 18 months equating to 1,400 additional plans. The complexity and need was increasing significantly and additional financial constraints, with the DSG being highlighted earlier in the meeting. A progress plan has been established for Doncaster with the vision to keep children with SEND educated in Doncaster. It was noted that this issue would be considered further by the Children and Young People Scrutiny Panel later in the year.
With regard to late advice delays it was explained that the report referred to where professionals across the system could not provide their statutory advice on an EHCP within a 6 week period to the local authority, eg. a consultant psychologist. The delays could be due to complexities. Where there was a delay this in turn delays the SEND officers completing the plans within the statutory 20 weeks. Delays were addressed with partners at weekly meetings.
Shared Prosperity Fund – In response to a question relating to work being undertaken with both employers to get people into work and people who required opportunity assistance, it was explained that there were many areas of work being undertaken to address the position. For example, employment managers were maintaining strong links with local businesses including Polypipe, Amazon, Yorkshire Wildlife Park and Yorkshire Ambulance Service (YAS). A new Senior Employment manager had been appointed to help drive the issue forward.
It was stressed that the majority of businesses in Doncaster were small or charitable organisations therefore work was being undertaken to understand what would help their efficiency with regards to human resource and health and well-being support. The need to ensure the support system was working effectively was also being addressed to ensure all support was better used locally based on businesses and residents.
New jobs created over £31,000 – In response to concern that the target was not being met, it was explained that the Team would not physically create the jobs but worked with businesses that wanted to provide employment and had been impacted by the economic climate. Generally and in more recent years businesses had delayed or scaled back their recruitment plans due to a lack of confidence in the economy.
It was therefore stressed that the demand on the team had been focusing on safeguarding jobs rather than creating new employment. It was noted that 195 new jobs were supported both over and under £31,000.
Members requested that further information be provided following the meeting outlining where the jobs had been created and type of job.
Sexual Health Service: Percentage of contraception that is LARC (Long Acting Reversible Contraceptives) – It was outlined that sexual health services was a service that Public Health must commission for the Doncaster population, with the sexual and contraceptive service being provided by Solutions for Health. It was acknowledged that contraception could also be accessed through GP practices.
It was explained that the indicator measured against for LARCs, was in relation to intrauterine devices that were more reliable and could last up to a 10 year period. The full programme of contraception would include pills, patches and condoms, the latter of which only protects again sexually transmitted diseases.
It was monitored to address service provision uptake, ensure it was sufficient for the population and to promote the services, all of which were available at East Laith Gate in the City Centre and hubs across the Doncaster area.
With regard to the lower uptake it was noted that to achieve a better understanding of contraception in Doncaster a survey had recently been produced seeking peoples attitudes towards contraception. It was highlighted that there had been a change in attitudes eg. concern around side effects of using a hormone, less invasive contraception rather than the implant in an arm and use of less effective methods. LARC would continue to be promoted via Women’s Health Hubs and different opportunities to access LARC would be built into the service.
It was questioned if there was a gap in service once a patient had received a GP consultation and it was explained that the Sexual Health Service was a direct service and people would not have to receive a referral from a GP. It was noted however that a lady may request a specific method from a GP and they may not provide that service and therefore be referred to where they could receive support.
The Sexual Health Service was available 4 days a week, Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday with staff working in neighbourhoods on Wednesday, therefore there shouldn’t be too much of a delay in receiving assistance.
Health on the High Street – it was noted that with regard to the siting of the actual building progress was being made and hopefully would be finalised very soon.
Disabled Facilities Grants (DFG) – it was clarified that there was not an overspend on DFG’s and they were grants that supported people who were not in St Leger tenancies. The overspend was in relation to adaptations in St Leger properties and due to the national rules relating to DFG the funding could not be used to support St Leger tenancies.
With regard to the actual overspend, work was being undertaken to rebase the budget with cost pressures worsening due to 3 main reasons:
1. The Council and St Leger Housing had improved the way the Accessible Housing Register operated. Previously there was a very large number of people on the register who were awaiting a move that might never materialise. Now there was a greater emphasis on adapting existing properties where this was appropriate and desirable;
2. The Council had significantly sped up both its Occupational Therapy assessments and organisation of adaptations themselves. This means that Doncaster people were having to wait less time for adaptations to happen, creating a surge in spend. Work to rebase the budget would need to take this into account;
3. There had been significant inflationary pressures in the last three years in relation to both labour and material costs affecting the price of installations.
Therefore with regard to forecasting, in April 2025 management reporting was integrated onto one electronic system from multiple manual systems. Management information was now available for all current and outstanding cases, including forecasting on estimated budgets required for each adaptation – performance reports have been created to allow service and finance colleagues to monitor spend across all areas.
Carer Assessments – with regard to a question relating to the number of assessments reduction, it was explained that the annual number of Carers Assessments completed increased fivefold in number between 2021 and the end of 2024 because it was recognised it required an increased focus and between 2023 and the end of 2024 the average time was reduced by 25%.
It was noted that in spite of this progress a decision was made to change the model of delivery for Carers Assessments at the end of March 2025, when the previous contract expired. Extending the previous arrangement would only have gone so far in the Local Authority being able to recognise and support carers earlier, providing preventative support that improved their wellbeing and delayed an increase in need. Rather than invest in a specialist service supporting carers, which effectively created a bottleneck because of its relatively small size, there was a wish to invest in an arrangement where carers were the business of a larger staffing group, reflecting the huge numbers of people in Doncaster caring for family members, friends and neighbours. The “Think Carer” campaign that’s encouraging carers to come forward was highlighted to the Committee.
Quarter 4 of the last financial year, between January and March 2025, saw a drop off in Carers Assessments as the Council approached the end of the previous contract and some staff from the organisation providing the service at that time chose to move on. It was also expected that performance would be low in Quarter 1 of this financial year while the new arrangements were bedding in. Measures in place to get back up to speed again with a number of great examples already highlighting the way the Wellbeing team was supporting carers, better then the previous model. For example, recently following an enquiry by a carer who wanted advice and support it was established that the carer’s husband was a veteran, and the brilliant connections that the Wellbeing Team have with veterans support opened a number of doors that the previous provider would not have known existed.
A Member commented that it made sense that Well-being Teams were locality based to assist carers and people who required smaller aids and adaptations and questioned if the waiting lists were monitored. It was explained that they had experienced increased demand and were not assessing people as quickly as they wished. It was explained that that care must be taken to ensure the Well-being Team were not becoming “all things to all people”. It was stressed that with regard to Caring, it was everyone’s responsibility and to receive good quality support. It was noted that once all staffing and partner connections were in place then the service would be as good as it could to provide preventative support.
Adult Safeguarding risks – with regard to the repeat in a 12 month period it was explained that Adult Safeguarding involved protecting adults with care and support needs from abuse or neglect. When a concern was identified work was undertaken with the affected adult, family members and any involved services to address issues to reduce future risks. At the end of an investigation and necessary actions put in place, the person affected (or their advocate if they don’t have mental capacity to provide a meaningful response) would be asked if they feel safer as a result.
Over the last quarter 89% said yes, which was reassuring but at the same time Adult Safeguarding could not eliminate all risks for all people. This was part of the reason why safeguarding risks could repeat. Sometimes people may make what was considered an “unwise decision” that exposed them to further risk. This ability to make decisions for yourself was obviously a human right that being subject to Adult Safeguarding would not remove. On other occasions a concern could arise again after a relatively short period because the actions carried out to safeguard the person were not sustained. One example of this over the last quarter was somebody who fell in a care home on a couple of occasions, for avoidable reasons that could potentially have been averted with stronger supervision and precautionary measures. These examples were investigated to ensure issues were not compounded further. This includes, in care settings, quality monitoring conversations linked to contract management. Information was triangulated so that if any one setting was experiencing a number of issues, proportionate action would be taken.
Recycling rate for household domestic waste – It was explained that figures were collected in arrears and therefore the figure contained within the report was a Quarter 3 figure with the actual figure for Quarter 4 being 48.7 comparing well with neighbouring authorities. Members were asked to note the geographical differences between the neighbouring authorities.
It was acknowledged that a long standing contract had been held with Suez to collect Doncaster’s domestic waste, and it was performing well with the contract extending for a 2 year period to 2028. It was stressed that future discussion with Members with regard to the service was therefore required.
The committee noted that at the time of contract extension a long standing problem with the blue bin collection was addressed following some residents accidentally putting the wrong things in the wrong bin, ultimately leading to less issue of contamination.
The 6 household waste recycling centres were being retained in partnership with Barnsley.
Education on access to information on the website had been undertaken with information on how to change disposal habits is they had accidentally contaminated the wrong bin, with for example a yoghurt pot.
With regard to the “world of waste” it was outlined that this was very complex and changing, with referenced being made to extended producer regulations, simply meaning that people who make waste and packaging that ultimately ends up with the consumer, were not having to pay for that waste production. That money would be provided to Local Authorities, to be used not for how it wished but if the Government was of the opinion that if an authority was not recycling as well as it should do but incinerating waste that could be recycled, then there would be a penalty.
The Committee was reminded that the Community and Environment Scrutiny Panel would be addressing these issues throughout its workplan.
In response to a question relating to when a contaminated bin, it was explained that when waste was contaminated it was taken away but could not be processed in the designated place, with costs then being generated to take it somewhere else for it to be segregated. Within the waste collection contract there were clauses that required the Local Authority to pay for the increased contamination. Therefore warning notices were placed on residents bins to try and modify waste disposal behaviour.
Fly-tipping – the fly tipping percentages could not be provided at this point in the meeting, however it was explained that the Local Authority’s ability to address the situation had improved collecting 98 to 99% of waste. The service standard was noted however, not all fly tipping could be collected within 7 days due to the nature of some of the waste, for example, asbestos required specialist removal, gas canisters or was waste to be collection from private land. Good enforcement processes were in place achieving positive results. Due to the rural nature of the City’s large rural area provided a unique problem with occasional fly tippers making a living out of the illegal action.
External residential placements for children – In connection to trying to bring the City’s young children back within the area, it was explained that 503 children were currently being looked after by the Local Authority and those currently out of area is higher than wished for but had reduced over recent years. The children may still be placed in Doncaster but through a private provider. Placement sufficiency was recognised as the major issue, particularly as children grow and their needs change over time. Hard work had been undertaken in recent years to find the right places for children and young people but in the recent months it had become more of a challenge. It was noted that nationally approximately 8000 more foster placements were required. Doncaster Currently held 132 fostering families registered.
Nineteen inhouse residential placements were available with 2 x 2 bed homes due to be opened in October. To try and offer a break to parents a short term emergency care placement for teenagers was being investigated, to avoid more children entering the care system.
It was highlighted that residential care was not a destination but a powerful intervention providing a positive journey for the City’s children and young people offering choices, for example, moving to semi-independent living. It was stressed that the Local Authority was persistent in finding the right care not just value for money for its children.
Assets sale – in response to a question relating to a specific asset it was explained that the information was commercially sensitive.
RESOLVED:- That the report and discussion, be noted.
7
St Leger Homes of Doncaster Limited (SLHD) performance and delivery update Quarter 4 2024-25
Attachments:
- Document SLHD Q4 OSMC Perf. Rep 2024-25 Final Version 18 Jun 2025
Minutes
The Committee gave consideration to a report setting out the key quarterly performance indicators (KPIs) report and annual Value for Money statement. It was noted from the report that 17 KPIs had been met or within agreed tolerances of the target.
Members addressed the following issues in detail:
Targets for non-emergency repairs – it was explained that non-emergency repairs were contained within the whole schedule of repairs and possibly plastering or bricklaying was the issue the Councillor may have been referring to. It was explained that for standard repairs they should be adhered to within 20 days but unfortunately the business was slightly outside that target due to demand on the service but current performance was improving.
Travel time between repair appointments – Members questioned how travel time was being minimised to maximise service delivery. It was explained that the DRS scheduling system was used which was similar to that used by the Ambulance Service. The tracker and system within the vehicles determined how quickly an operative could undertake the current appointment and where the next scheduled job was to be undertaken. The scheduled job may not be within a couple of hundred yards but would be, for example, in the next village. With regard to an emergency perspective a priority repair may be received meaning the operatives would be required to travel some distance. The DRS software had recently been updated and a health check undertaken with improvements recommended. These were in the process of being undertaken to the system, the changes were being monitored and improvements could already been identified with regards to travel time. It was noted that over 75,000 repairs per annum were undertaken and would ultimately mean that operatives were crossing paths at some point during their working day.
Void rent loss – A review was currently being undertaken on the void property process addressing how keys were retrieved from an outgoing tenant and execution of the work profile. It was stressed that the voids service was demand led with the condition of properties when handed back to St Leger Homes being the main challenge over the last 2 years.
Members noted that there were a couple of reasons for the poor condition and were reminded that it was some time since “Decent Homes 1” was introduced with components now failing and more broad repairs required to ensure a property was up to the decent homes standard. The frequency of voids, as expected, was not in line with expected numbers.
Over 100 property acquisitions had been undertaken during 2024/25 additional to the normal voids, therefore utilising the same amount of staff to undertake more work, but noted that there was only so much that could be carried out before work became saturated. It was noted that the target was ambitious but the organisation was continuing to drive towards meeting the target.
It was confirmed that tenants were recharged for work that had been created through damage but not wear and tear. The recharge figures requested would be provided following the meeting.
With regard to St Georges Court, it was noted that it would be retained as flats with an investment programme in place including replacing the roof, building fire safety works and aesthetic works. It was noted that the same number of flats would remain.
The term non-lettable voids was explained and outlined that that any property that required substantial investment would not be let until works had been undertaken. There were currently 7 properties that sat within this profile.
Decent Homes programme – A Member stressed that this had been ongoing for 25 years but it was outlined that the current programme was not the original decent homes standards. It was explained that when consumer standards were introduced organisations were encouraged to increase the level of stock condition surveys being undertaken. St Leger Homes were undertaking 4000 to 5000 surveys per annum and therefore as part of the surveys if category 1 hazards were identified, for example, tripping hazard or a cracked socket then the property was categorised as non-decent. Additionally, when works were undertaken then issues including faults with roofs or new windows were required then they would be programmed into the repairs programme and the properties classified as non-decent until the work was completed.
Key Performance Indicators not on target and worsening – in response to concern expressed, it was explained that 12 of the red performance indicators required attention. With regard to complaints it was explained that the Ombudsman required all organisations to make complaints or a dissatisfaction (classed as a complaint) as easy as possible for people to submit, and as a result numbers has increased. From the complaints received the themes were addressed and analysed to determine any changes that may be required.
It was also noted that the organisation was delivering in a very challenging environment with high demand and ambitious targets.
Energy efficiency – With regard to some stock being too expensive to make energy proficient it was explained that it was cost prohibitive and difficult to undertake the works in some scenarios, for example, non-traditional stock, for example, the Swedish timber framed, steel framed and poured concrete properties. It was noted that the main strategy was to address thermal comfort for tenants.
With regard to future technology this required future discussion on what mechanisms should be used. The Panel noted, for example, the expense associated with air source heat pumps and solar installation, with no grant funding available, would provide a guestimate of £400m to £500M expenditure. Therefore this was a challenge for all social housing and any proposals for more efficient systems would need to be in consultation with tenants and the Local Authority. It was noted that due to technology advancement it was considered that it would not be long before an air source heat pump would be more efficient than a gas boiler with costs reducing over time.
RESOLVED that the discussion and report, be noted.
Members addressed the following issues in detail:
Targets for non-emergency repairs – it was explained that non-emergency repairs were contained within the whole schedule of repairs and possibly plastering or bricklaying was the issue the Councillor may have been referring to. It was explained that for standard repairs they should be adhered to within 20 days but unfortunately the business was slightly outside that target due to demand on the service but current performance was improving.
Travel time between repair appointments – Members questioned how travel time was being minimised to maximise service delivery. It was explained that the DRS scheduling system was used which was similar to that used by the Ambulance Service. The tracker and system within the vehicles determined how quickly an operative could undertake the current appointment and where the next scheduled job was to be undertaken. The scheduled job may not be within a couple of hundred yards but would be, for example, in the next village. With regard to an emergency perspective a priority repair may be received meaning the operatives would be required to travel some distance. The DRS software had recently been updated and a health check undertaken with improvements recommended. These were in the process of being undertaken to the system, the changes were being monitored and improvements could already been identified with regards to travel time. It was noted that over 75,000 repairs per annum were undertaken and would ultimately mean that operatives were crossing paths at some point during their working day.
Void rent loss – A review was currently being undertaken on the void property process addressing how keys were retrieved from an outgoing tenant and execution of the work profile. It was stressed that the voids service was demand led with the condition of properties when handed back to St Leger Homes being the main challenge over the last 2 years.
Members noted that there were a couple of reasons for the poor condition and were reminded that it was some time since “Decent Homes 1” was introduced with components now failing and more broad repairs required to ensure a property was up to the decent homes standard. The frequency of voids, as expected, was not in line with expected numbers.
Over 100 property acquisitions had been undertaken during 2024/25 additional to the normal voids, therefore utilising the same amount of staff to undertake more work, but noted that there was only so much that could be carried out before work became saturated. It was noted that the target was ambitious but the organisation was continuing to drive towards meeting the target.
It was confirmed that tenants were recharged for work that had been created through damage but not wear and tear. The recharge figures requested would be provided following the meeting.
With regard to St Georges Court, it was noted that it would be retained as flats with an investment programme in place including replacing the roof, building fire safety works and aesthetic works. It was noted that the same number of flats would remain.
The term non-lettable voids was explained and outlined that that any property that required substantial investment would not be let until works had been undertaken. There were currently 7 properties that sat within this profile.
Decent Homes programme – A Member stressed that this had been ongoing for 25 years but it was outlined that the current programme was not the original decent homes standards. It was explained that when consumer standards were introduced organisations were encouraged to increase the level of stock condition surveys being undertaken. St Leger Homes were undertaking 4000 to 5000 surveys per annum and therefore as part of the surveys if category 1 hazards were identified, for example, tripping hazard or a cracked socket then the property was categorised as non-decent. Additionally, when works were undertaken then issues including faults with roofs or new windows were required then they would be programmed into the repairs programme and the properties classified as non-decent until the work was completed.
Key Performance Indicators not on target and worsening – in response to concern expressed, it was explained that 12 of the red performance indicators required attention. With regard to complaints it was explained that the Ombudsman required all organisations to make complaints or a dissatisfaction (classed as a complaint) as easy as possible for people to submit, and as a result numbers has increased. From the complaints received the themes were addressed and analysed to determine any changes that may be required.
It was also noted that the organisation was delivering in a very challenging environment with high demand and ambitious targets.
Energy efficiency – With regard to some stock being too expensive to make energy proficient it was explained that it was cost prohibitive and difficult to undertake the works in some scenarios, for example, non-traditional stock, for example, the Swedish timber framed, steel framed and poured concrete properties. It was noted that the main strategy was to address thermal comfort for tenants.
With regard to future technology this required future discussion on what mechanisms should be used. The Panel noted, for example, the expense associated with air source heat pumps and solar installation, with no grant funding available, would provide a guestimate of £400m to £500M expenditure. Therefore this was a challenge for all social housing and any proposals for more efficient systems would need to be in consultation with tenants and the Local Authority. It was noted that due to technology advancement it was considered that it would not be long before an air source heat pump would be more efficient than a gas boiler with costs reducing over time.
RESOLVED that the discussion and report, be noted.
8
Overview and Scrutiny Work Plan 2025-26 and Council's Forward Plan of Key Decisions
Attachments:
- Document OSMC approved Work Plan 202526 Report 18 Jun 2025
- Document MASTER WORK PLAN DRAFT 202526 18 Jun 2025
- Document OSMC Forward Plan 1st July to 31st Oct 25 Cabinet 18 Jun 2025
- Document Terms of Reference for the South Yorkshire as of 100625 18 Jun 2025
Minutes
The Senior Governance Officer presented the Overview and Scrutiny Work Plan for the period 2025/26. It was explained that additional work was required to populate the Community and Environment Scrutiny work areas and this would be undertaken in July.
The Forward Plan of Key Decisions and Terms of Reference for the Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee were presented for information.
A Committee Member suggested that an update be provided on the Shared Prosperity Fund and requested that it be added to the work plan.
RESOLVED that:
1. The Overview and Scrutiny Work Plan for the period 2025/26 be agreed;
2. An update on the Shared Prosperity Fund be added to the Work Plan, be agreed;
3. The Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee Terms of Reference, be noted; and
4. The Council’s Forward Plan of Key Decisions, be noted.
The Forward Plan of Key Decisions and Terms of Reference for the Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee were presented for information.
A Committee Member suggested that an update be provided on the Shared Prosperity Fund and requested that it be added to the work plan.
RESOLVED that:
1. The Overview and Scrutiny Work Plan for the period 2025/26 be agreed;
2. An update on the Shared Prosperity Fund be added to the Work Plan, be agreed;
3. The Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee Terms of Reference, be noted; and
4. 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