Agenda item

For the Committee to consider and comment on the Quarter 2 Integrated Performance Report 2024/25.

Shade Agboola presented a summary of the Council’s performance at Quarter 2, which covered the period April to September 2024, against the strategic priorities and areas of focus set out in the Council Plan 2022-2027. The report provided a combined picture of the Council’s delivery, performance, finance and risk, enabling scrutiny and transparency for the organisation, partners, and the public.

The detail of the report and supporting appendices comprised:

•        Progress against the Council Delivery Plan (CDP)

•        Performance assessed against the Key Business Measures (KBMs) contained within the agreed Performance Management Framework (PMF)

•        Management of financial resources; and

•        Management of risk.

The CDP and PMF had been refreshed to focus on key priorities. Members could monitor performance via the Power BI platform. Of the activities in the CDP, nine were attributed to this committee and all were currently on track. There were eleven KBMs within the committee’s remit, with nine available for reporting in this quarter. A table within the report showed that four of these were not ‘on track’ at quarter two. Context was provided in the report detail on the direction of travel for each of the nine KBMs and key influencing factors of the current operating environment.

Shade Agboola spoke about the KBM for provision of safe accommodation units which was currently not on track. The position had been static, due to changes required in the leases between the provider Refuge and a third party, meaning that no new properties were able to be onboarded. This seemed to have been resolved and should be reflected in the next quarterly performance update showing eighteen completed units instead of the reported twelve. A service review was being undertaken to look at performance overall, highlighting areas of success and challenges, with Shade reporting some of the successes and positive activity not captured by the ‘red’ rating of this indicator.

Reference was made to the financial pressures and the mitigation measures to help stabilise this in year. In common with the whole sector, significant medium-term financial challenges remained. A forecast overspend of £15.04m was reported, equivalent to 6.1% of the revenue budget. Saving targets were forecast to be underachieved by £0.204m, 3% of the current year’s target. The delivery of the planned capital programme remained on track. 

Two of the strategic risks related to the work of this committee. These were being able to keep children and vulnerable adults safe and a mismatch between demand and resources. At the service level, fourteen risks related to this committee, with detail of each area being reported.

Members submitted questions and comments:

• The Chair asked if the position at quarter three was expected to improve, which was confirmed.
• Councillor Shenton commented that the total overspend on Social Care was £17.3m or 8.2% when including the use of reserves. There had been some savings, but he was unsure if the shortfall would reduce, when services were likely to be more in demand. Becky Hale stated the significant service demands and complexity of support needs. The overspend had been shown at £15m all this financial year, being driven by demand and the required packages of care. Despite best efforts, it was unlikely the figures would reduce by the financial year-end. It was clarified that the some of the reserves were specifically for Adult Social Care and reference was made to the government’s financial settlement and specific support for this service area.
• The Chair referred to the presentation from UHCW asking Becky Hale if she was encouraged by the model adopted in Coventry and the potential impact it could have for Social Care in Warwickshire. Becky confirmed the team had visited Coventry. She explained the joint working arrangements already in place in Warwickshire with SWFT. There were some interesting aspects from the Coventry approach which could be learned from and developed as part of the new community integrator arrangements. The Chair acknowledged the differences in a two-tier council structure in a rural county.
• A councillor referred to the services delivered by HEART (home environment assessment and response team), which had a waiting list and she questioned whether it was under-resourced. An example was used to emphasise the challenges being faced by an individual. Becky Hale confirmed that HEART was hosted by Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council on behalf of the County. She would seek a briefing on the current position with activity and waiting lists. On the specific case she offered to provide assistance.
• It was confirmed that HEART was funded through the Better Care Fund and Disabled Facilities Grants.
• Similar concerns had been raised in Warwick District with a report to that Council’s scrutiny committee. It was requested that the findings from these enquiries be shared.

The Committee noted the Quarter 2 report for 2024/25, submitting the comments above in response.