Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 182 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN
Contact: Anne Gowing or James Stanton 020 8541 9938 Email: anne.gowing@surreycc.gov.uk
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies were received from Mrs Kemeny.
|
|
|
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING:
The minutes will be available in the meeting room half an hour before the start of the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 26 February 2013 were confirmed and signed by the Chairman.
|
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.
Notes: · In line with the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, declarations may relate to the interest of the member, or the member’s spouse or civil partner, or a person with whom the member is living as husband or wife, or a person with whom the member is living as if they were civil partners and the member is aware they have the interest. · Members need only disclose interests not currently listed on the Register of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests. · Members must notify the Monitoring Officer of any interests disclosed at the meeting so they may be added to the Register. · Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest. Additional documents: Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
PROCEDURAL MATTERS
Additional documents: |
|
|
Members' Questions
(i) The deadline for Member’s questions is 12pm four working days before the meeting (20 March 2013).
Additional documents: Minutes: No Member questions had been received. |
|
|
Public Questions
The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (19 March 2013).
Additional documents: Decision: One question had been received from a member of the public. The question and the response was tabled and is attached as Appendix 1.
Minutes: One question had been received from a member of the public. The question and the response was tabled and is attached as Appendix 1 to these minutes.
|
|
|
Petitions
The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting, and no petitions have been received.
Additional documents: Minutes: No petitions had been received.
|
|
|
Representations received on reports to be considered in private
To consider any representations received in relation why part of the meeting relating to a report circulated in Part 2 of the agenda should be open to the public. Additional documents: Minutes: No representations had been received.
|
|
· Environment and Transport Select Committee Task Group Report on Countryside Management (attached) · Environment and Transport Select Committee comments on the New Strategy for Highway Maintenance - to be considered as part of agenda item 11 · Children and Families Select Committee Task Group report on Supporting Families – to be considered as part of agenda item 13
Additional documents: Decision: A A report from the Environment and Transport Select Committee’s task group, concerning Countryside Management was included in the agenda. The Cabinet response was tabled at the meeting. (Appendix 2).
B Comments from the Environment and Transport Select Committee concerning the New Approach to Highways Maintenance was included in the agenda under item 10. The Cabinet response was tabled at the meeting. (Appendix 3).
C A report from the Children and Families Select Committee’s task group concerning Supporting Families was included in the agenda under item 12. The Cabinet response was tabled at the meeting. (Appendix 4).
Minutes: A A report from the Environment and Transport Select Committee’s task group, concerning Countryside Management was included in the agenda. The Cabinet response was tabled at the meeting. (Appendix 2).
The Cabinet Member for Transport and Environment thanked the task group for their comprehensive report and welcomed their comments and proposals.
The Chairman of the Environment and Transport Select Committee fully endorsed the comments of the Cabinet Member.
As the Chairman of the Environment and Transport Select Committee would be standing down at the forthcoming election, the Leader of the Council formally thanked for his hard work on this committee over the last few years.
B Comments from the Environment and Transport Select Committee concerning the New Approach to Highways Maintenance was included in the agenda under item 10. The Cabinet response was tabled at the meeting. (Appendix 3).
C A report from the Children and Families Select Committee’s task group concerning Supporting Families was included in the agenda under item 12. The Cabinet response was tabled at the meeting. (Appendix 4).
|
|
|
Medium Term Financial Plan 2013 - 2018
The report presents the detailed service revenue and capital budgets for 2013/14 and indicative budgets for the following four year period to 2017/18. Following approval by the Cabinet, the detailed budgets will be published as the 2013-18 Medium Term Financial Plan on the council’s website. This will enable users to either view budget details interactively on-line, or print hard copy by request. The report also provides an update on the fees and charges for the use of council services during 2013/14.
This report has been circulated separately.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee] Additional documents: Decision:
1. That the detailed service revenue and capital budgets for the years 2013-18, including amendments resulting from government funding changes announced after the 2013/14 budget be approved (Annex 1of the submitted report). 2. That the publication of the detailed service revenue and capital budgets as set out in the 2013-18 Medium Term Financial Plan be approved. 3. That the lower capital government grant to support the schools basic need programme be noted and the additional use of £2m internal or external borrowing in 2013/14 and 2014/15 be approved. 4. That the fees and charges approved under delegated powers be endorsed and other fee and charge proposals, as set out in Annex 2 of the submitted report, be approved. 5. That the Public Health Equalities Impact Assessment be brought back to the next Cabinet meeting on 23 April 2013. Reasons for Decisions
The 2013 – 18 MTFP is a five year budget that is aligned to the corporate and directorate strategies. It reflects assumptions about the current local and national financial, economic and political environment. Regular reporting through the year will enable progress to be effectively tracked and managed.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by The Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee] Minutes: The Leader presented the detailed service revenue and capital budgets for 2013/14 and indicative budgets for the following four year period to 2017/18. The report also provided an update on the fees and charges for the use of council services during 2013/14. He confirmed that the County Council would continue to invest in services and commended the Medium Term Financial Plan 2013 – 2018 to Members.
Other Cabinet Members were invited to comment on their individual portfolios:
· Savings in the Personal Care and Support Budget (within Adult Social Care) could only be achieved if the County Council worked with users and carers. · The Public Health Budget was new for 2013/14 and would fund the Council’s new Public Health responsibilities. · Successful joint working with East Sussex County Council in relation to Business Services is a flagship partnership. · Emphasis on particular commitments such as the provision of additional school places. · Reference to Annex 3, the Equalities Impact Assessments (EIAs) for all significant budget decisions and their impact on Surrey’s communities. It was agreed that the EIAs for Public Health, which were tabled at the meeting should be more robust and therefore should be resubmitted to the next Cabinet meeting for approval. Finally, the Leader confirmed that, since the County Council Budget meeting held on 12 February 2013, detailed directorate and service budgets had been considered at the relevant select committees and no major comments had been received from them. RESOLVED:
1. That the detailed service revenue and capital budgets for the years 2013-18, including amendments resulting from government funding changes announced after the 2013/14 budget be approved (Annex 1 of the submitted report). 2. That the publication of the detailed service revenue and capital budgets as set out in the 2013-18 Medium Term Financial Plan be approved. 3. That the lower capital government grant to support the schools basic need programme be noted and the additional use of £2m borrowing in 2013/14 and 2014/15 be approved. 4. That the fees and charges approved under delegated powers be endorsed and other fee and charge proposals, as set out in Annex 2 of the submitted report, be approved. 5. That the Public Health Equalities Impact Assessment be brought back to the next Cabinet meeting on 23 April 2013.
Reasons for Decisions
The 2013 – 18 MTFP is a five year budget that is aligned to the corporate and directorate strategies. It reflects assumptions about the current local and national financial, economic and political environment. Regular reporting through the year will enable progress to be effectively tracked and managed.
|
|
|
Budget Monitoring Forecast 2012/13 (period ending February 2013)
To note the year-end revenue and capital budget monitoring projections as at the end of February 2013.
Please note that Annex 1 to this report will be circulated separately prior to the Cabinet meeting.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee] Additional documents: Decision:
1. That the projected revenue budget underspend (Annex 1 – Section A of the submitted report) and the capital programme direction (Section B of the submitted report) be noted.
2. That government grant changes be reflected in directorate budgets (Section C of the submitted report).
3. That the use of the unused contingency for the Olympic Games be approved, to respond to the winter damage to roads.
Reasons for Decisions
To comply with the agreed strategy of providing a monthly budget monitoring report to Cabinet for approval and action as necessary.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee] Minutes: The Cabinet received an update on the year-end revenue and capital budget monitoring projections as at the end of February 2013.
The Leader of the Council highlighted the following points:
Revenue – That the council set this year’s budget on the basis of rising demand for its services and the need to make significant reductions in its’ spending. He was pleased that the County Council had successfully risen to these challenges and was expected to finish the year with a small net underspending of £3.5m, or 0.2% of the budget.
It also said that this achievement was due to the Council’s relentless focus on getting the most out of every pound it spent. As well as the excellent procurement this also included staffing spend where expenditure had been reduced through improved management of sickness and by reviewing the need to fill vacancies as they arise.
Managers were no longer spending budgets just because of an artificial deadline of the end of March. Sometimes there were schemes and projects that would straddle the end of the financial year and managers had identified £5.5m of projects and schemes that would not complete before this year end cut off so the Cabinet would then review these as a part of the final accounts and agree if funding continued in the next year.
Capital – The council’s capital programme not only improved and maintained our service delivery, but provided a welcome boost to the local economy in these times. It was therefore important that the aims of the capital budget were achieved, and where some schemes were delayed, others were brought forward. This had been done and the Council was on track to fully spend its’ capital budget.
He also said that, as a part of the investment in the local economy, this council had joined with Woking Borough Council in an innovative project to develop the town centre and that the council would also be looking to bring forward other projects that would provide a presence in other town centres from which services may be provided.
Finally, he considered that this year, the focus on the capital budget had demonstrated the council’s commitment to the local economy and working with partners to achieve the best outcomes for Surrey residents and businesses.
Members noted that the last sentence in paragraph 96, Annex1, Section A should read:
‘Additional commitments are planned but it is unlikely that all will be completed by 31 March 2013 due to the lead time for procurement.’
Other Cabinet Members made the following points:
· Delight that this was the third year running that the County Council had come in just below its estimated budget. · Good management of the capital budget this year. · Thanks to staff, and in particular finance staff for controlling a tough budget. · Praise for close working relationships between services, such as Property and School Places Commissioning and also the partnership working with Districts and Boroughs. · Congratulating the local committees for their partnership working with district and boroughs in ... view the full minutes text for item 53/13 |
|
|
Strengthening the Council's Approach to Innovation: Update on our Innovation Journey
On 27 November 2012 the Cabinet approved the development of a strategic framework to achieve a strong “One Team” approach to innovation (“ideas into action to improve lives in Surrey”). This recognises that over the coming years the Council will need to continue to strengthen its capacity and capability to innovate in order to continue improving outcomes and value for money for Surrey’s residents.
Significant progress has been made to establish the strategic innovation framework and begin developing new ideas and approaches. This progress was recognised by a small team of expert peers who visited the Council in February to assess progress and plans on innovation. The peer team shared some helpful recommendations and this report describes how they will be incorporated into the continued work to strengthen the Council’s innovation capacity and capability.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Additional documents: Decision: 1. That the good progress made so far to strengthen innovation capacity and capability be acknowledged and the findings from the peer challenge be welcomed.
2. The Chief Executive and Strategic Director for Change and Efficiency continue to work with colleagues to develop and implement the strategic framework for innovation, incorporating the recommendations from the peer challenge. 3. The learning and evaluation from innovation work be reported back to Cabinet and Council via the Chief Executive’s six monthly progress reports, the next of which will be published in summer 2013. Reasons for Decisions
To further refine and strengthen the Council’s approach to innovation so it can exploit new opportunities, navigate significant challenges and achieve improved outcomes and value for money for Surrey’s residents.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and scrutiny Committee] Minutes: The Leader of the Council introduced the report to Cabinet, stating that there were two aspects to the Council’s approach to innovation – the update on its Innovation Journey, since the previous Cabinet report on 27 November 2012, and the Models of Delivery. He said that he wanted to receive ideas from all staff on ways that the Council could be more innovative.
The Cabinet Member for Change and Efficiency referred to the Peer team and their initial feedback as set out in paragraph 27 of the report.
The Deputy Leader also referred to Surrey County Council being named as local authority of the year at the recent Improvement and Efficiency Awards and also being shortlisted for an award at the recent Local Government Chronicle Awards.
Cabinet Members acknowledged the importance of both reports concerning the Council’s Approach to Innovation, however, it was agreed that the authority must not become complacent and must continue to ‘raise its game’.
RESOLVED:
1. That the good progress made so far to strengthen innovation capacity and capability be acknowledged and the findings from the peer challenge be welcomed.
2. The Chief Executive and Strategic Director for Change and Efficiency continue to work with colleagues to develop and implement the strategic framework for innovation, incorporating the recommendations from the peer challenge. 3. The learning and evaluation from innovation work be reported back to Cabinet and Council via the Chief Executive’s six monthly progress reports, the next of which will be published in summer 2013. Reasons for Decisions
To further refine and strengthen the Council’s approach to innovation so it can exploit new opportunities, navigate significant challenges and achieve improved outcomes and value for money for Surrey’s residents.
|
|
|
Strengthening the Council's Approach to Innovation: Models of Delivery
Surrey County Council places a relentless focus on delivering public value. The council has a successful track record of finding new and innovative ways of delivering services, in the interests of the residents of Surrey.
During the next few years many councils will respond to the challenges they face by reducing their capacity and capability. Surrey County Council is taking a different approach adopting a strategy of strengthening its ability to deliver services and investing in staff, so enabling it to continue to protect vulnerable residents and secure economic growth and a prosperous future for Surrey.
Recognising the scale of the challenge ahead and anticipating the needs of the future, this report focuses on how the council proposes to use the most effective delivery model to provide services for residents while ensuring public value. The report describes the different delivery models already being used by the council; examples of successes it has achieved so far; and makes recommendations to provide the foundations for the council to develop its approach to trading.
Please note there is a separate confidential annex relating to this report (item 24).
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee] Additional documents: Decision: 1. That the progress and achievements delivered to date through a range of existing delivery models be acknowledged. 2. That the primary objective the council seeks to achieve by developing its approach to trading is to deliver public value for Surrey residents and businesses be confirmed. 3. That the creation of a Surrey County Council Shareholder Board (‘the Board’) with responsibility for exercising ‘shareholder control’ over any limited (‘trading’) companies established by the council be approved and the Strategic Director for Change and Efficiency, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, Cabinet Member for Change and Efficiency and Chief Executive, be asked to establish the Board. 4. That authority be delegated to the Strategic Director for Change and Efficiency, in consultation with the Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Change and Efficiency, to establish a trading company that will deliver in the first instance ‘business services’ and in order to do so: a. to consider and approve a business case, which must satisfy the statutory requirements and the criteria set out in paragraph 28 and 29 of the submitted report; and b. to approve the Articles of Association including the naming of Directors of the company. 5. That the opportunities that a range of delivery models provides be acknowledged, future proposals (expressed as options appraisals and business cases) from services across the council over the three-year period 2013 – 2016 be welcomed and the Strategic Director for Change and Efficiency be asked to lead a programme of work that will review service delivery models including currently traded activity.
Reasons for Decisions
In the current financial and funding climate for local government it is essential that the council continues to focus on delivering public value to the residents of Surrey.
The council recognises that a range of delivery models are already and should continue to be used to provide services that best meet the needs of Surrey residents and businesses. Building on existing successes, the recommendations set out in this report will enable the council to continue to anticipate and respond to the challenges it faces and represent the next phase of its approach to ensure Surrey residents receive good quality public services.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee] Minutes: Surrey County Council places a relentless focus on delivering public value. The council has had a successful track record of finding new and innovative ways of delivering services, in the interests of the residents of Surrey.
The Leader of the Council commended this report to Cabinet Members and said that the County Council was looking to strengthen its capacity for delivery of services more effectively and that the creation of a trading company would enable the authority to do this. He also referred to a part 2 annex for this report (item 24).
The Cabinet acknowledged the progress and achievement delivered to date through a range of other options and referred specifically to Babcock4S and the £1.7m profit currently being reinvested in Education projects.
RESOLVED:
1. That the progress and achievements delivered to date through a range of existing delivery models be acknowledged. 2. That the primary objective the council seeks to achieve by developing its approach to trading is to deliver public value for Surrey residents and businesses be confirmed. 3. That the creation of a Surrey County Council Shareholder Board (‘the Board’) with responsibility for exercising ‘shareholder control’ over any limited (‘trading’) companies established by the council be approved and the Strategic Director for Change and Efficiency, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, Cabinet Member for Change and Efficiency and Chief Executive, be asked to establish the Board. 4. That authority be delegated to the Strategic Director for Change and Efficiency, in consultation with the Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Change and Efficiency, to establish a trading company that will deliver in the first instance ‘business services’ and in order to do so: a. to consider and approve a business case, which must satisfy the statutory requirements and the criteria set out in paragraph 28 and 29; and b. to approve the Articles of Association including the naming of Directors of the company. 5. That the opportunities that a range of delivery models provides be acknowledged and future proposals (expressed as options appraisals and business cases) from services across the council over the three-year period 2013 – 2016 be welcomed and the Strategic Director for Change and Efficiency be asked to lead a programme of work that will review service delivery models including currently traded activity.
Reasons for Decisions
In the current financial and funding climate for local government it is essential that the council continues to focus on delivering public value to the residents of Surrey.
The council recognises that a range of delivery models are already and should continue to be used to provide services that best meet the needs of Surrey residents and businesses. Building on existing successes, the recommendations set out in this report will enable the council to continue to anticipate and respond to the challenges it faces and represent the next phase of its approach to ensure Surrey residents receive good quality public services. |
|
|
From Reactive to Planned: A New Approach for Highway Maintenance
1. In early 2010 the Rethinking Surrey Highways programme was instigated (as part of the Council’s PVR programme), with the aim of improving customer satisfaction and reducing operating costs by: · Designing and implementing new contractual arrangements to replace the previous SHiP contracts · Redesigning the structure of the organisation, to improve service delivery and reduce establishment costs · Improving collaborative working with other organisations, including Borough and District Councils and SE7 Councils
2. Given the scale of transformation, the programme was structured in two phases with the first phase being those changes necessary to implement the new contracts from April 2011. This first phase has been delivered successfully, with operating costs reduced by a minimum of £8m per annum through efficiencies from the new highway contracts of £7m pa, and a reduction of establishment costs in excess of £1m pa. 3. The capital savings have been reinvested in the highway service, enabling: · An increase in the number of major road schemes · An increased allocation of funding to Local Committees · An overall increase in net customer satisfaction
4. Further changes identified during the Rethinking Surrey Highways programme, and planned to be implemented as Phase 2, were deferred to enable the new contracts to be mobilised. These changes included: · The development of longer term Capital programmes · Improved coordination of works on the highway · A shift from a reactive to a planned approach for defect repair
5. At their meeting on 5 February 2013, Cabinet approved the introduction of two initiatives that will deliver the first two improvements listed above: · Increased funding for planned road maintenance to enable the adoption of Operation Horizon to deliver fixed five year major maintenance programme to Surrey’s roads · The introduction of a Permit Scheme, which will introduce better control and coordination of all work on the highway 6. The report sets out proposals to deliver the final improvement – the shift from a reactive to a planned approach for safety defect repair. [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Transport Select Committee] Additional documents: Decision: 1. That the adoption of Surrey Priority Network(SPN) (2013) as Surrey’s road classification for maintenance be approved and the authority be delegated to the Cabinet Member for Transport and Environment to approve future local adjustments to the SPN, as set out in Annex 1 of the submitted report. 2. That the revised Highway Safety Inspection Policy, as set out in Annex 1 of the submitted report, be approved, subject to the development of robust processes and systems to ensure that risks are assessed and authority to agree those processes and systems be delegated to the Strategic Director of Environment and Infrastructure and the Strategic Director of Change and Efficiency, in consultation with the Leader and Cabinet Member for Transport and Environment. 3. That the Town Centre Management agreement with Woking Borough Council be approved, and the authority be delegated to the Assistant Director Highways to finalise the agreement with Woking Borough Council according to the terms set out in Annex 1 of the submitted report. Reasons for Decisions
These proposed changes will provide the following benefits: · Increase the frequency of highway inspections, ensuring defects are identified sooner. · Improve the planning of defect repairs, leading to an improved standard of repair and less repeat visits. · Improve the overall condition of the network by carrying out larger scale repairs. · As a consequence, improve the management of risk across the highway network. · Enable Woking Borough Council to invest in their town centre by complementing County Council services and providing a higher level of service than the County Council would be able to provide. [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Transport Select Committee] Minutes: The Chairman of the Environment and Transport Select Committee was invited to speak on this item. He said that this Cabinet report had been a culmination of a lot of effort and that his select committee had focussed on Highways issues during the last two years and had been a ‘critical friend’ to both the service and the contractors. He also said that May Gurney had been openly responsive to providing a better service to residents. He also made reference to Surrey’s winter policy, the permit scheme and Project Horizon. The Cabinet Member for Transport and Environment referred to his response (attached as Appendix 3 to these minutes) to the Environment and Transport Select Committee’s comments concerning the new approach to Highway Maintenance. He thanked the Chairman of this select committee for his positive comments and referred to the efforts made by the contractors, May Gurney and confirmed that, over the last twelve months, they had met their performance indicators almost every month. Finally, he drew Members attention to the recommendations and to Project Horizon and commended the report to Cabinet colleagues. The Leader of the Council said that he was pleased with the revised Highways Safety Inspection Policy because highways issues were the ‘number one’ concern of Surrey residents and he thanked Highways officers for their efforts. RESOLVED: 1. That the adoption of SPN (2013) as Surrey’s road classification for maintenance be approved and the authority be delegated to the Cabinet Member for Transport and Environment to approve future local adjustments to the SPN, as set out in Annex 1 to the submitted report. 2. That the revised Highway Safety Inspection Policy as set out in Annex 1 to the submitted report, be approved, subject to the development of robust processes and systems to ensure that risks are assessed and authority to agree those processes and systems be delegated to the Strategic Director of Environment and Infrastructure and the Strategic Director of Change and Efficiency, in consultation with the Leader and Cabinet Member for Transport and Environment. 3. That the Town Centre Management agreement with Woking Borough Council be approved, and the authority be delegated to the Assistant Director Highways to finalise the agreement with Woking Borough Council according to the terms set out in Annex 1 to the submitted report. Reasons for Decisions These proposed changes will provide the following benefits: · Increase the frequency of highway inspections, ensuring defects are identified sooner. · Improve the planning of defect repairs, leading to an improved standard of repair and less repeat visits. · Improve the overall condition of the network by carrying out larger scale repairs. · As a consequence, improve the management of risk across the highway network. · Enable Woking Borough Council to invest in their town centre by complementing County Council services and providing a higher level of service than the County Council would be able to provide.
|
|
|
Children's Health, Wellbeing and Safeguarding Plan 2013 / 2014
The Health and Social Care Act 2012 requires all local areas to have a joint health and wellbeing strategy in place by April 2013. This strategy will bring together health and wellbeing priorities for both children and adults.
In order to meet our statutory responsibilities we have developed the Children’s Health and Wellbeing Plan to positively support children and young people’s health and wellbeing and to support the delivery of Surrey’s joint health and wellbeing strategy, which is currently in development.
The Children’s Health, Wellbeing and Safeguarding Plan is a one year plan. It sets out eight priority areas where we believe we can start to make the most difference in 2013/14 to ensuring that children and young people achieve the best health and wellbeing outcomes possible. It will act as a tool to engage partners in agreeing common challenges and longer-term priorities that will also inform future health and wellbeing strategies.
Although this is a County Council plan, we believe an integrated approach to social care and health provision is essential to improving the quality and equality of access to services. We are committed to working with our partners to provide coherent and effective services for children, young people and their families. In particular, to improve the likelihood of positive health and wellbeing outcomes through informed commissioning with key partners including public health, police and education.
Our main aim through this plan is to support our children and young people to achieve the best health and wellbeing outcomes possible.
The Children’s Health, Wellbeing and Safeguarding Plan is a one year plan. After this time it will be replaced by a visionary strategy for children linked to Surrey’s Joint Health and Wellbeing Strategy. This will be supported by a partnership 3 -5 year health, wellbeing and safeguarding plan.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Children and Families Select Committee] Additional documents: Decision: 1. That the approach to supporting Children, Young People and Families’ Health and Wellbeing, as set out in the plan submitted with the report, be approved.
2. That the publication of the Children’s Health, Wellbeing and Safeguarding plan be agreed. (Annex 1 of the submitted report)
3. That the Strategic Director for Children, Schools and Families, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Children and Families, can sign off any subsequent amendments to the Plan, provided there are no substantive changes.
Reasons for Decisions
To note the plan for positively supporting the health and wellbeing of children, young people and families in Surrey and to agree to delivery.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Children and Families Select Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Children and Families was pleased to present the Children’s Health, Wellbeing and Safeguarding Plan and said it was a one year plan. After this time it would be replaced by a visionary strategy for children linked to Surrey’s Joint Health and Wellbeing Strategy and this would be supported by a partnership 3 -5 year health, wellbeing and safeguarding plan.
The Plan set out eight priorities which would make the most difference in 2013/14 to ensure that children and young people achieved the best health and wellbeing outcomes possible.
Cabinet Members welcomed the report and said that they were committed to working with partners to provide coherent and effective services for children, young people and their families. In particular, to improve the likelihood of positive health and wellbeing outcomes through informed commissioning with key partners including public health, police and education.
The Leader of the Council drew attention to the comprehensive and detailed Equalities Impact Assessment (EIA) attached to the report.
RESOLVED:
1. That the approach to supporting children, young people and families’ health and wellbeing, as set out in the plan submitted with the report, be approved..
2. That the publication of the children’s health, wellbeing and safeguarding plan be agreed. (Annex 1 to the submitted report)
3. That the Strategic Director for Children, Schools and Families, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Children and Families, can sign off any subsequent amendments to the Plan provided there are no substantive changes.
Reasons for Decisions
To note the plan for positively supporting the health and wellbeing of children, young people and families in Surrey and to agree to delivery.
|
|
|
Surrey Family Support Programme
The Surrey Family Support Programme is the name we have given to the local implementation of the Government’s Troubled Families Programme.
This approach aims to improve outcomes for families who have multiple needs through a new model of multi-agency working.
This report provides an overview of the programme, including implementation by local teams based in borough and district councils.
This item includes consideration of the report and recommendations of the Supporting Families Task group.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Children and Families Select Committee] Additional documents: Decision: 1. That the strategy and implementation of the Surrey Family Support Programme, by local teams in Elmbridge, Guildford, Spelthorne, Reigate and Banstead, Waverley, and Woking Borough Councils be approved. 2. That a local discretionary criteria of families of concern be added to the Government’s criteria for families to join the programme.
Reasons for Decisions
In order to achieve the best outcomes for local families with multiple needs, the national programme has been adapted to better suit Surrey communities.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Children and Families Select Committee] Minutes: The Chairman of the Children and Families Select Committee was invited to present the report of her committee’s task group. She highlighted the key points from their report and the five recommendations made and in particular, drew attention to the task group’s recommendation (4): namely, that the Cabinet received an analysis of the costs of families included within the Surrey Family Support Programme and projected savings to the public pursue. She requested that this recommendation was pursued rigorously.
The Cabinet Member for Children and Families thanked the Supporting Families task group for its exceptional report and said that her response to it had been tabled (attached as Appendix 4 to the minutes). She acknowledged the Task Group’s thorough understanding of the issues.
She also provided Members with the background to the Government’s Troubled Families Programme and the objectives of the Surrey Family Support Programme and said that the Government has been supportive of the work underway in Surrey and was using Surrey as an exemplar. She referred to the diagrams attached to the report which clearly indicated the complexity of the support programme and the number of people working with the families.
Finally, she thanked the Head of Family Services and his staff for their outstanding work to date.
Other Cabinet Members made the following points:
· That the implementation was in two phases, with phase 1 including the six largest boroughs, starting in April 2013 and phase 2 coming on stream from October 2013. · Acknowledgement of the work undertaken to support these families. · That the Children and Families Select Committee continued to monitor this programme. · That any savings would be hard to quantify.
The Leader of the Council expressed his thanks to the task group for their report and also to officers involved in this area of work. He stressed the importance of this work which he hoped would break the cycle and give these children a real chance in life.
RESOLVED:
1. That the strategy and implementation of the Surrey Family Support Programme, by local teams in Elmbridge, Guildford, Spelthorne, Reigate and Banstead, Waverley, and Woking Borough Councils be approved. 2. That a local discretionary criteria of families of concern be added to the Government’s criteria for families to join the programme.
Reasons for Decisions
In order to achieve the best outcomes for local families with multiple needs, the national programme has been adapted to better suit Surrey communities. |
|
|
Emergency Response Cover Locations: Epsom and Ewell and Reigate and Banstead
This report details how Surrey Fire and Rescue Authority (SFRA) intend to improve the deployment of fire engines in order to maintain an effective emergency response in accordance with the Public Safety Plan. SFRA will operate a chain of single fire engine fire stations running through the boroughs of Epsom & Ewell and Reigate & Banstead. There will be two new fire stations in Salfords and Burgh Heath and will provide a more efficient use of resources across the county.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Communities Select Committee] Additional documents: Decision: That the proposals for the improved deployment of single fire engine fire stations running through the boroughs of Epsom & Ewell and Reigate & Banstead, including the delivery of two new fire stations in Salfords and the Burgh Heath area be approved.
Reasons for Decisions
1. To mitigate the impact of changes at Horley as a result of the West Sussex Fire and Rescue Authority’s decision to withdraw their fire engine. 2. To improve the fire engine response coverage in Surrey. This is measured through modelling analysis and performance data. 3. To improve the fire service provision across Surrey.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Communities Select Committee]
N.B. Comments from the Communities Select Committee together with the Cabinet response were tabled at the meeting. Appendix 5 and 6 respectively Minutes: This report detailed how Surrey Fire and Rescue Authority (SFRA) intend to respond to the removal of the West Sussex Fire and Rescue Service fire engine based at Horley Fire Station and improve the deployment of fire engines in order to maintain an effective emergency response in accordance with the Public Safety Plan. SFRA will operate a chain of single fire engine fire stations running through the boroughs of Epsom & Ewell and Reigate & Banstead. There would be two new fire stations in Salfords and Burgh Heath and a more efficient use of resources across the county.
Comments from the Communities Select Committee together with the Cabinet response were tabled at the meeting (attached to the minutes as Appendix 5 and 6 respectively). Members also noted that the first sentence of paragraph 18 should read 350 and not 330 individual respondents.
Mrs Mason, local Member for Epsom and Ewell West, was invited to speak. She expressed concern about the reduction in provision in the Epsom and Ewell area from two to one pump and said that residents in this area did not consider that the proposals would deliver a better service. She requested that if the proposals were agreed by Cabinet, that the arrangements should be carefully monitored by both Cabinet and the relevant select committee.
The Cabinet Member for Community Safety introduced the report and highlighted the issues relating to the decision of the West Sussex Fire and Rescue Service to relocate their fire engine, based at Horley to Horsham. She did not consider that these proposals, considered today by Cabinet would diminish the fire service provision across the county. She acknowledged local concerns about the provision but said that the County Council needed to take a balanced view.
She also confirmed that there were agreements with London Boroughs to provide cover close to Surrey boundaries and she considered that the cover was resilient. She reiterated that Surrey County Council’s Fire and Rescue Service was a professional and high performing service and contributed to making Surrey a safer place.
She also said that the proposals included building two new fire stations and the location of the Burgh Heath site had not yet been identified.
Finally, she referred to the comprehensive EIA included with the papers and also to the consultation report, which detailed the processes and consultees including all local committees and commended the recommendations to Cabinet.
RESOLVED:
That the proposals for the improved deployment of single fire engine fire stations running through the boroughs of Epsom & Ewell and Reigate & Banstead, including the delivery of two new fire stations in Salfords and the Burgh Heath area be approved.
Reasons for Decisions
1. To mitigate the impact of changes at Horley as a result of the West Sussex Fire and Rescue Authority’s decision to withdraw their fire engine. 2. To improve the fire engine response coverage in Surrey. This is measured through modelling analysis and performance data. 3. To improve the fire service provision across Surrey.
|
|
|
Investment in Safe Cycling Infrastructure
In November 2012, the County Council submitted a bid to the Department for Transport’s newly established Cycle Safety Fund. The fund was established in response to concern about the rising numbers of cycling casualties in the UK, with the funding focused on junctions or stretches of the highway with a record of cyclists being killed or seriously injured.
The County Council bid for five schemes, prioritising two which offered best fit with the fund criteria: Walton Bridge Links and Leatherhead Town Centre. The DfT was due to make an announcement in February but this has been delayed. In order to ensure deliverability of the schemes within the DfT timescales for completion by the end of 2013, the County Council will need to progress quickly to implementation as soon as the bid outcome is received.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Transport Select Committee] Additional documents: Decision:
That the decision to accept the grant be delegated to the Strategic Director for Environment and Infrastructure, in consultation with the Leader and the Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport.
Reasons for Decisions
Tackling cyclist KSI rates is a corporate priority. The rate of cyclist KSIs in Surrey has more than doubled in the last four years. The schemes will directly benefit areas of high cyclist KSI rates, by making cycling a safer option for residents that live, work and shop in the town centres. It will deliver economic benefit by making it more possible for people to cycle, reducing travel costs and congestion. It will support the County Council’s ambition to secure a cycling legacy from the 2012 Olympics and will support development of Surrey’s visitor economy.
Consultation with residents in Walton-upon-Thames and Leatherhead, identified that 89% of people would welcome the introduction of safe, segregated cycle routes. Of the people surveyed, 44% of cycle owners and 82% of non-owners identified road safety issues as a deterrent to cycling.
The relevant Local Committees have formally approved the proposed schemes.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Transport Select Committee] Minutes: In November 2012, the County Council submitted a bid to the Department for Transport (DfT)’s newly established Cycle Safety Fund. The fund was established in response to concern about the rising numbers of cycling casualties in the UK, with the funding focused on junctions or stretches of the highway with a record of cyclists being killed or seriously injured.
The County Council bid for five schemes, prioritising two which offered best fit with the fund criteria: Walton Bridge Links and Leatherhead Town Centre. The DfT was due to make an announcement in February but this has been delayed. In order to ensure deliverability of the schemes within the DfT timescales for completion by the end of 2013, the County Council would need to progress quickly to implementation as soon as the bid outcome is received, which is hoped to be in April 2013. The Cabinet Member for Transport and Environment commended the recommendations to Members.
RESOLVED:
That the decision to accept the grant be delegated to the Strategic Director for Environment and Infrastructure, in consultation with the Leader and the Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport.
Reasons for Decisions
Tackling cyclist KSI rates is a corporate priority. The rate of cyclist KSIs in Surrey has more than doubled in the last four years. The schemes will directly benefit areas of high cyclist KSI rates, by making cycling a safer option for residents that live, work and shop in the town centres. It will deliver economic benefit by making it more possible for people to cycle, reducing travel costs and congestion. It will support the County Council’s ambition to secure a cycling legacy from the 2012 Olympics and will support development of Surrey’s visitor economy.
Consultation with residents in Walton-upon-Thames and Leatherhead, identified that 89% of people would welcome the introduction of safe, segregated cycle routes. Of the people surveyed, 44% of cycle owners and 82% of non-owners identified road safety issues as a deterrent to cycling.
The relevant Local Committees have formally approved the proposed schemes.
|
|
Woking Borough Council is in the process of, or will be, entering into Section 278/38 Agreements with Surrey County Council to enable the above works. It is County Council policy to charge developers fees to cover our reasonable costs in enabling the proper assessment, design audit, and the inspection of the works, as well as to cover the cost of the legal agreement itself. These fees are based upon 12% of the cost of the works plus legal expenses. It is also County policy to charge Commuted payments for increased maintenance liabilities resulting from an additional piece of infrastructure provided to enable a development, and to take a bond lest the developer fails to complete the works.
This report is to seek Cabinet approval to waive SCC’s normal fees including commuted sums for the Sheerwater scheme (including Bishop David Brown access). It also seeks to waive the need for a bond, and to seek authority to fund SCC’s internal costs from the New Homes Bonus.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Transport Select Committee] Additional documents: Decision:
1. That the agreement fee be waived and commuted payments or a bond for the Sheerwater Link Road/ Bishop David Brown scheme be not required.
2. That the internal costs arising from the above recommendation be funded from New Homes Bonus receipts.
Reasons for Decisions
Surrey County Council wants to assist Woking Borough Council in the delivery of this economically important project that will contribute a significant beneficial effect on the Borough, County, and wider South East Regional economies. This will not only have a substantially positive effect on the residents of Surrey (especially current and future residents of East Woking), but also it will benefit those who work in East Woking and travel through it.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Transport Select Committee] Minutes: Cabinet strongly supported the request to waive Surrey County Council’s normal fees including commuted sums for the Sheerwater scheme (including Bishop David Brown access) and to waive the need for a bond, and authorised the funding of the County Council’s internal costs from the New Homes Bonus.
RESOLVED:
1. That the agreement fee be waived and commuted payments or a bond for the Sheerwater Link Road/ Bishop David Brown scheme be not required. 2. That the internal costs arising from the above recommendation be funded from New Homes Bonus receipts. Reasons for Decisions
Surrey County Council wants to assist Woking Borough Council in the delivery of this economically important project that will contribute a significant beneficial effect on the Borough, County, and wider South East Regional economies. This will not only have a substantially positive effect on the residents of Surrey (especially current and future residents of East Woking), but also it will benefit those who work in East Woking and travel through it.
|
|
|
Leader / Deputy Leader / Cabinet Member Decisions taken since the last Cabinet meeting
To note any delegated decisions taken by the Leader, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Members since the last meeting of the Cabinet. Additional documents: Decision: That the decisions taken by the Leader, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Members since the last meeting, as set out in Appendix 7 be noted.
Reason for Decisions
To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken by Members under delegated authority. Minutes: RESOLVED:
That the decisions taken by the Leader, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Members since the last meeting as set out in Appendix 7 be noted.
Reasons for Decisions
To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken by Members under delegated authority. |
|
|
Westfield Primary School, Woking: Expansion by one form of entry from September 2013
To approve the provision of a permanent one form of entry increase at Westfield Primary School to two forms of entry to meet basic need requirements for primary places in the Woking area.
The number of primary school places in Woking is increasing. There are insufficient primary school places to meet this demand and increased primary provision is needed. Westfield Primary School is one of the schools best placed to expand to meet this demand. The demand is such that the expansion of Westfield Primary School is required for September 2013.
Financial information is set out in item 22.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee] Additional documents: Decision:
That the expansion and adaptation of Westfield Primary School, as detailed in the submitted report, be approved in principle, subject to the consideration and approval of the detailed financial information set out in agenda item 22.
Reasons for Decisions
The proposal delivers and supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Woking area.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Assets and Regeneration Programmes informed Members that the provision of a permanent one form of entry increase at Westfield Primary School to two forms of entry would help to meet the basic need requirements for primary places in the Woking area. He considered that the expansion of this school was a good example of Property Services and School Commissioning working together.
RESOLVED:
That the expansion and adaptation of Westfield Primary School, as detailed in the submitted report, be approved in principle, subject to the consideration and approval of the detailed financial information set out in agenda item 22.
Reasons for Decisions
The proposal delivers and supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Woking area.
|
|
|
Award of Two Year Contract for the Provision of Temporary Agency Staff
Surrey County Council (SCC) currently has a contract in place for the supply of temporary agency workers through Manpower which was awarded in March 2009. The annual spend on this Contract is £10.8 million (in the financial year 2011/12).
The current contract expires on 31 March 2013 and there is a need for temporary agency workers to continue to be provided or there will be a shortfall in services.
The provision for this service is currently being reviewed to consider all options for a long term strategic solution for the supply of temporary staff. A cross functional team has been formed to review the long term requirement and offer the best commercial approach.
This paper focuses on the proposed short term contract whilst the long term strategy is devised.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Additional documents: Decision: That the award of a two year new contract under a national framework which commenced April 2011 (contract notice 2010/s 209 3197760) be approved, so as to continue the provision, for the supply of temporary staff.
Reasons for Decisions
The current contract works well in delivering temporary agency staff to the Council. However after consultation with stakeholders there are aspects within the service provision that users would like to see improved.
A project team has been formed consisting of representatives from Human Resources, Procurement, Children’s and Adult Services to consider and create a strategy for the long term use of temporary staff.
This review will take into account market conditions and industry performance as well as recent changes in legislation regarding temporary agency workers. It will focus on the best options for delivering the Councils requirements and will potentially create innovative solutions to meet those needs.
The contract will provide the time required to complete and implement the outcomes of the review.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee] Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Change and Efficiency requested the agreement of the proposed short term two year contract as set out in the report, which would then enable the council to consider all options for a long term strategic solution for the supply of temporary staff.
RESOLVED:
That the award of a two year new contract under a national framework which commenced April 2011 (contract notice 2010/s 209 3197760) be approved, so as to continue the provision, for the supply of temporary staff.
Reasons for Decisions
The current contract works well in delivering temporary agency staff to the Council. However after consultation with stakeholders there are aspects within the service provision that users would like to see improved.
A project team has been formed consisting of representatives from Human Resources, Procurement, Children’s and Adult Services to consider and create a strategy for the long term use of temporary staff.
This review will take into account market conditions and industry performance as well as recent changes in legislation regarding temporary agency workers. It will focus on the best options for delivering the Councils requirements and will potentially create innovative solutions to meet those needs.
The contract will provide the time required to complete and implement the outcomes of the review.
|
|
|
Framework for the Provision of Managed Print Services
The Council’s current printer estate is out of date and costly due to the age of its existing devices, the associated rising maintenance burden and the need to purchase a diverse range of consumables.
The adoption of a modernised and rationalised printer estate will reduce costs and improve the working environment. It is proposed that this is achieved through the provision of a managed service solution delivering a range.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Additional documents: Decision: (1) That the award of a four year framework agreement, which will be made available for use by Surrey County Council, all local authorities and all public sector bodies in the South East be approved. (Financial details were set out in the Part 2 Annex, item 23 on the agenda)
(2) That the award for Surrey County Council’s specific print solution (as a mini competition from the framework) to the bidder identified in the Part 2 Annex (item 23) for a 5 year contract, be approved.
Reasons for Decisions
Surrey County Council (SCC) needs to modernise its approach to printing by offering a holistic and flexible print solution that fits organisational and operational needs.
The Council has a wide range of devices that print, photocopy, fax and scan which are of different makes and models. Currently there are 1800 networked printers and numerous photocopiers, plus standalone printers/photocopiers in various teams. These devices are spread across 143 buildings. This wide range is difficult to support/maintain and therefore expensive. The Council also needs to buy and stock a wide range of consumables for the devices makes and models. The current cost of printing and photocopying is approximately £1,275,000 per annum.
A move to Multi Functional Devices (MFDs) offers the ability to scan, fax, photocopy and print from a single machine, with resultant cost savings and rationalisation of equipment. Such devices also offer increased security, along with a reduction in print wastage and carbon.
SCC has entered a framework agreement (which will be open to all local authorities and all public sector bodies in the south east). This will give the Council a route to market for all its print needs. The framework will also facilitate a longer term collective approach to the delivery of printing across Surrey or a larger region such as the South East 7.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee] Minutes: This item was introduced by the Cabinet Member for Change and Efficiency who explained that the recommendation was in two parts: (i) a four year framework agreement for use by Surrey County Council, all local authorities and all public sector bodies in the South East, and (ii) a specific print solution for Surrey County Council. She drew attention to the financial information set out in the part 2 report (item 23) and commended it to Cabinet.
RESOLVED:
(1) That the award of a four year framework agreement, which will be made available for use by Surrey County Council, all local authorities and all public sector bodies in the South East be approved. (Financial details were set out in the Part 2 Annex, item 23 on the agenda)
(2) That the award for Surrey County Council’s specific print solution (as a mini competition from the framework) to the bidder identified in the Part 2 Annex (item 23) for a 5 year contract, be approved.
Reasons for Decisions
Surrey County Council (SCC) needs to modernise its approach to printing by offering a holistic and flexible print solution that fits organisational and operational needs.
The Council has a wide range of devices that print, photocopy, fax and scan which are of different makes and models. Currently there are 1800 networked printers and numerous photocopiers, plus standalone printers/photocopiers in various teams. These devices are spread across 143 buildings. This wide range is difficult to support/maintain and therefore expensive. The Council also needs to buy and stock a wide range of consumables for the devices makes and models. The current cost of printing and photocopying is approximately £1,275,000 per annum.
A move to Multi Functional Devices (MFDs) offers the ability to scan, fax, photocopy and print from a single machine, with resultant cost savings and rationalisation of equipment. Such devices also offer increased security, along with a reduction in print wastage and carbon.
SCC has entered a framework agreement (which will be open to all local authorities and all public sector bodies in the south east). This will give the Council a route to market for all its print needs. The framework will also facilitate a longer term collective approach to the delivery of printing across Surrey or a larger region such as the South East 7.
|
|
|
Waste Management: Proposal to Deliver EcoPark
To report on current status, describe next steps, and request approval to carry out the necessary activity to enable Cabinet to make a final decision regarding a contract amendment to deliver the Eco Park.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Transport Select Committee]
Additional documents: Decision: 1. That the actions proposed in this report be approved, and a further report be required by the end of July 2013, which provides the necessary information to enable the Cabinet to approve the actions to deliver the Eco Park. 2. That the positive discussions with DEFRA be noted and a realignment of grant with planned spend profile be supported. Reasons for Decisions
The recommendations are necessary to provide proper authority to:
1. Deliver the Eco Park which represents a corporate priority for the Council. 2. Avoid significant cost implications to the Council. 3. Provide assurance to contractual and funding partners to the Council. 4. Demonstrate ongoing commitment to value for money for the UK taxpayer.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Transport Select Committee] Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Transport and Environment reported on current status for the delivery of the Eco-park, described the next steps, and requested Cabinet approval to carry out the necessary activity to make the final decision regarding a contract amendment to deliver the Eco Park. Both the Leader and Deputy Leader referred to the letter from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Annex 1).
RESOLVED:
1. That the actions proposed in this report be approved, and a further report be required by the end of July 2013, which provides the necessary information to enable the Cabinet to approve the actions to deliver the Eco Park. 2. That the positive discussions with DEFRA be noted and a realignment of grant with planned spend profile be supported. Reasons for Decisions
The recommendations are necessary to provide proper authority to:
1. Deliver the Eco Park which represents a corporate priority for the Council. 2. Avoid significant cost implications to the Council. 3. Provide assurance to contractual and funding partners to the Council. 4. Demonstrate ongoing commitment to value for money for the UK taxpayer
|
|
|
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act. Additional documents: Minutes: RESOLVED:
That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
PART TWO - IN PRIVATE
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS OF BUSINESS WERE CONSIDERED IN PRIVATE BY THE CABINET. SET OUT BELOW IS A PUBLIC SUMMARY OF THE DECISIONS TAKEN.
|
|
|
Westfield Primary School, Woking: Expansion by one form of entry from September 2013
This report contains the financial information relating to item 17.
Exempt: Not for publication under paragraph 3
Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee or the Education Select Committee] Decision: 1. That the business case for the project to expand Westfield Primary School up to a maximum cost, as set out in the submitted report, be approved.
2. That the arrangements by which a variation of up to 10% of the total value be agreed by the Strategic Director for Change and Efficiency and the Cabinet Member for Assets and Regeneration Programmes, in consultation with the Leader.
3. That the award of the contract to carry out the works to provide the additional pupil places be approved.
Reasons for Decisions
The proposal delivers and supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Woking area.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee] Minutes:
RESOLVED:
1. That the business case for the project to expand Westfield Primary School up to a maximum cost, as set out in the submitted report, be approved.
2. That the arrangements by which a variation of up to 10% of the total value be agreed by the Strategic Director for Change and Efficiency and the Cabinet Member for Assets and Regeneration Programmes, in consultation with the Leader.
3. That the award of the contract to carry out the works to provide the additional pupil places be approved.
Reasons for Decisions
The proposal delivers and supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Woking area. |
|
|
Framework for the Provision of Managed Print Services
Part 2 Annex for item 19
Exempt: Not for publication under paragraph 3
Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)
[The decisions on the following items can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Decision: 1. That a framework agreement be awarded across three lots (capital goods, managed services and consumables) and available to authorities across the South East region, to commence on 5 April 2013.
Reasons for Decisions
Surrey County Council (SCC) needs to modernise its approach to printing by offering a holistic and flexible print solution that fits organisational and operational needs.
[The decisions on this item cam be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee] Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Change and Efficiency drew Members attention to the details of the tenders’ evaluation set out in the report.
RESOLVED:
1. That a framework agreement be awarded across three lots (capital goods, managed services and consumables) and available to authorities across the South East region, to commence on 5 April 2013.
2. On award of this framework a 5 year contract be subsequently awarded to the supplier named in the submitted report, for the provision of a managed service to meet Surrey County Council’s printing requirements, at an estimated value as set out in the submitted report, to commence on 15th April 2013.
Reasons for Decisions
Surrey County Council (SCC) needs to modernise its approach to printing by offering a holistic and flexible print solution that fits organisational and operational needs.
|
|
|
Strengthening the Council's Approach to Innovation: Models of Delivery
This is a part 2 Annex for item 9
Exempt: Not for publication under paragraph 3
Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Decision: Confidential Annex for item 9. Minutes: This was the confidential Annex for item 9. |
|
|
Award of Contracts for the Delivery of Paediatrics Services to Surrey Schools
The contracts for the delivery of paediatrics services that the Council currently hold with Virgincare Services Ltd (VCS) and Central Surrey Health (CSH) were set up to supplement NHS commissioned services.
They provide an enhanced paediatrics nursing service to special schools and therapy services to support pupils with SEN in some Special Schools, mainstream Schools and centres. An additional contract is in the process of being agreed to provide support for work on cases subject to a SEND Tribunal. These contracts have developed historically and lack the rigour of clear Key Performance Indicators to measure the provider’s performance and outcome based measures.
The Council’s contracts with both Virgincare Services Ltd and Central Surrey Health end on the 31st March 2013. This report proposes new short-term contracts with both providers for an additional 12 months.
Exempt: Not for publication under paragraph 3
Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Education Select Committee] Decision: That the award of new contracts to the existing providers be approved for one year on financial terms to be negotiated but not to exceed the annual value of the current contracts.
Reasons for Decisions
The County Council needs to deliver these services to meet children’s statemented needs. Officers in Children’s Services and Procurement have been working with colleagues in Health over the last 12 months to seek to develop a joint commissioning approach and strategy for new contracts to be awarded from April 2013. It has not been possible to agree this joint approach due to the organisational changes that the PCT and newly formed Clinical Commissioning Groups have been going through during this period.
The Council therefore proposes to award contracts with the current providers in order to ensure continuation of these services from April 2013 to March 2014.
[The decisions on the item can be called in by the Education Select Committee] Minutes: . The Cabinet Member for Change and Efficiency introduced the report and said that the proposals was for new short-term contracts with both of the current providers for an additional 12 months.
RESOLVED:
That the award of new contracts to the existing providers be approved for one year on financial terms to be negotiated but not to exceed the annual value of the current contracts.
Reasons for Decisions
The County Council needs to deliver these services to meet children’s statemented needs. Officers in Children’s Services and Procurement have been working with colleagues in Health over the last 12 months to seek to develop a joint commissioning approach and strategy for new contracts to be awarded from April 2013. It has not been possible to agree this joint approach due to the organisational changes that the PCT and newly formed Clinical Commissioning Groups have been going through during this period.
The Council therefore proposes to award contracts with the current providers in order to ensure continuation of these services from April 2013 to March 2014.
|
|
|
PUBLICITY FOR PART 2 ITEMS
To consider whether the item considered under Part 2 of the agenda should be made available to the Press and public. Additional documents: Minutes: RESOLVED:
That non-exempt information relating to items considered in part 2 of the meeting may be made available to the press and the public, if appropriate.
|