Agenda and minutes

Resident Experience Board - Tuesday, 22 November 2016 10.00 am

Venue: Council Chamber, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN. View directions

Contact: Dominic Mackie or Sharmina Ullah 

Media

Items
No. Item

81/16

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS

    • Share this item

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Apologies were received from John Orrick, Robert Evans, Alan Young and Karan Persand. The Chairman informed the Board that Ramon Gray was stepping down from the Resident Experience Board and an invitation was extended to  Denise Saliagopoulos to join the Board.

82/16

MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS pdf icon PDF 169 KB

    • Share this item

    To agree the minutes of the Board meetings on Thursday 22 September & Thursday 13 October 2016 as a true records of the meetings.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Minutes from the previous meeting, 22 September and 13 October were agreed as a true and accurate record.

83/16

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

    • Share this item

    All Members present are required to declare, at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible thereafter

    (i)            Any disclosable pecuniary interests and / or

    (ii)           Other interests arising under the Code of Conduct in respect of any item(s) of business being considered at this meeting

    NOTES:

    • Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest
    • As well as an interest of the Member, this includes any interest, of which the Member is aware, that relates to the Member’s spouse or civil partner (or any person with whom the Member is living as a spouse or civil partner)
    • Members with a significant personal interest may participate in the discussion and vote on that matter unless that interest could be reasonably regarded as prejudicial.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    No declarations of interest were received.

84/16

QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS

    • Share this item

    To receive any questions or petitions.

     

    Notes:

    1.    The deadline for Member’s questions is 12.00pm four working days before the meeting (Wednesday 16 November).

    2.    The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (Tuesday 15 November).

    3.    The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting, and no petitions have been received.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    No questions or petitions were received.

85/16

RESPONSES FROM THE CABINET TO ISSUES REFERRED BY THE SCRUTINY BOARD

    • Share this item

    There are no responses to report.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    There were no responses from Cabinet to report.

86/16

RECOMMENDATION TRACKER AND FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME pdf icon PDF 149 KB

87/16

DEVELOPING A FUTURE STRATEGY FOR THE LIBRARY SERVICE pdf icon PDF 215 KB

    • Share this item

    This report updates the Resident’s Experience Board on the Library Service’s progress against the three recommendations from the workshop on Thursday 17 March 2016, and on the work to date of the Library’s Task and Finish group in developing a single affordable strategy for the library service and a view of what the library service offer will be to residents in 2020.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

    Rose Wilson, Lead Manager Surrey Library Service

    Kelly Saini-Badwal, Senior Manager Customer Network

     

    Declarations of Interest:

     

    None

     

    Key points of discussion:

     

    1.    Due to unforeseen circumstances the members of the task group were not in attendance. The chairman informed the board that the task group were going to do a presentation and give the board an update of all the progress and work that has been carried out since the meeting in March when three recommendations were made. The task group since then had visited a number of libraries, getting a sense of the service and exploring opportunities in what the service endeavoured to develop as a future strategy. Furthermore the chairman explained the library service update was also on the agenda today as it was an opportunity for the board to give guidance and direction going forward.

    2.    The chairman suggested that the voluntary element of the service should be added to the task groups plan, as it was an important part of the service. Officers indicated that the voluntary aspect was on the agenda and would be discussed in more depth with the task group at the next meeting.

    3.    The chairman commended the work of the service and emphasised the library service played an important part for residents and thanked the officers for attending and working so well with the task group.

    Recommendations:

           The Board notes the progress the Library Service has made against the recommendations made at the March meeting.

           The Board notes the progress made by the Libraries Task Group.

     

     

88/16

CHANGES TO HOW SURREY FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE RESPONDS TO AUTOMATIC FIRE ALARMS pdf icon PDF 214 KB

    • Share this item

    The report explains the current procedure for attending Automatic Fire Alarms and explores changes that Surrey Fire and Rescue Service will propose to Cabinet.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

    Iain Houseman, Area Commander, Prevention and Protection

    Sally Wilson, Service Improvement Manager

     

    Declarations of Interest:

     

    None

     

    Key points of discussion:

     

    1. Officers introduced the report by informing the Board that the purpose of the paper was to explain the current procedure for attending incidents notified through Automatic Fire Alarms and explore changes that Surrey Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) were proposing. Officers highlighted that the Service was attending a high number of false alarms, and the proposals set out in the paper were around responding differently to cut out attending so many non-emergencies which effectively would make savings and increase safety for SFRS staff and crew.

     

    1. The Board were advised that the current position to responding to automatic fire alarms was based on policy set in 2008. This entailed, the Service always responding on blue lights to “Level One” premises which were domestic premises, hospitals, care homes and prisons. “Level Two” premises required a call challenge, however if there was no confirmation call the Service would respond and make an attendance, which would operate between 0700 and 1900. With “Level Three” attendance, the Service would not respond unless a call was received confirming any signs of fire, which if there was the Service would respond in an emergency way.

    2. A Member queried whether the service charged for frequent calls out to false automatic fire alarms. Officers clarified that the Service did not charge but under the Localism Act 2011, there were legislative mechanisms the Service had available to enforce conformity to health and safety standards.  As the burden of proof lay with the Service to prove fault with the property owners, it was very difficult to ensure a penalty charge could be successfully made. It was commented that resources required also would be higher than the charge received.

     

    1. One Member suggested a list should be created, noting premises that were reported to have frequent false automatic fire alarms, and for this list be made available to insurance providers. Officers responded that these steps would not be necessary and may breach other legislation, however the Service had legal powers to enforce commercial premises which had repeated call outs for false alarms to conform and rectify their alarm system.

     

    1. The Board also noted that the Service could penalise businesses for frequent false alarms by issuing notices to enforce the business owner to rectify the problem or in extreme cases to restrict that business from operating.

     

    1. In addition the Service held a statutory duty to provide guidance and information to commercial premises with regards to their automatic fire alarm. With regards to residential premises the officer highlighted that these would be fulfilled by the Initial Premises Survey (IPS) and Safe and Well Visit (S&W) programme. From the 1/12/16 all incidents would receive either an IPS or a S&W visit where residents would be visited to ensure they knew how to operate their alarms properly and also give valuable guidance towards their health and safety.

     

    1. There was a discussion around the requirement  ...  view the full minutes text for item 88/16

89/16

SAFE AND WELL VISITS pdf icon PDF 80 KB

    • Share this item

    To review Surrey Fire and Rescue Service’s Safe and Well Visit programme.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

    Iain Houseman, Area Commander, Prevention and Protection

    Sally Wilson, Service Improvement Manager

     

    Declarations of Interest:

     

    None

     

    Key points of discussion:

     

    1.    Officers explained the Safe and Well Visits programme was part of Surrey Fire and Rescue Service’s (SFRS) statutory duty to provide advice and education around prevention, and that this was a core aspect of what SFRS delivers. The Service was working on improving fire prevention awareness, in particular with the elderly demographic.

     

    2.    The Board were informed that the SFRS were working together with stakeholders and partnering agencies as part of the Fire as a Health Asset (FAHA) , Public Health England, the Chief Fire Officers Association (CFOA), The Local Government Association (LGA) and Age UK, in delivering a consistent approach across the country in line with the 2015 consensus statement.

     

    3.    Officers informed the Board that the Prevention team were aiming to target resources to the most vulnerable residents by accessing information and key intelligence. An operational team, including 450 members of staff, would go out to the public to deliver the Safe and Well Visits. It was noted that the SFRS use NHS data to identify vulnerable people in the County; the data helped identified over 7,000 residents that were most in need of a safe and well visit.

     

    4.    Officers touched upon what a Safe and Well visit entailed and gave national examples of falls assessments, fitness classes, falls education and multi agency assessment visits. The Board noted that the health aspect of these services reduced pressure off the NHS.

     

    5.    It was noted that the Exeter data enabled the SFRS to identify 7,500 vulnerable people through risk assessments to target and deliver Safe and Well visits. The Cabinet Associate for Community Safety Services commended this approach and emphasised what a great opportunity this was for the SFRS to target key work which was not previously accommodated.

     

    6.    It was highlighted that one of the key areas of concern for the Service was people in isolation. The Officer identified socially excluded individuals as among most vulnerable; this can be a result of a number of issues such as health, activities they’re involved in, or their social standing. The Service recognised this high risk profile and were keen to engage, making every contact count as part of the Fire as a Health Asset work. The Board were given a brief background on mosaic data, this enabled the Service to accumulate the information mentioned above and target high risk people.

     

    7.    The Officer indicated that the Service were using a broader spectrum to engage with residents and listed social media, face to face visits, writing material and radio as methods of engagement.

     

    8.    The Cabinet Associate for Community Safety Services informed the Board that the Safe and Well Visit report had been presented to the Health and Wellbeing Board (HWBB) and that they also understood how the SFRS were helping the wider community and helping them achieve their health targets.

     

    9.    The Chairman expressed the importance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 89/16

90/16

VERBAL UPDATE FROM THE PERFORMANCE & FINANCE SUB-GROUP

    • Share this item

    Update from the Performance & Finance Sub-Group on its recent work.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Key points of discussion:

    1.    The Performance and Finance Sub Group’s Chairman provided an update on its work to date, informing the Board the Sub Group had met previously on 5 September and 7 November, an overview of these meetings were circulated to members.

     

    2.    The Chairman indicated that the current MTFP and saving target was satisfactory and the challenge ahead would be the budget savings next year because of the new station at Forbridge.

     

    3.    The Chairman proposed that the board support the IRV pilot scheme and promote training for members on SEBs as a future action.

     

    4.    Members suggested that once the national budget was available in December/January, the Sub Group to review the scenarios, to identify if they are realistic and whether they accommodate the needs of the residents.

     

    5.    The Board requested the Service Improvement Manager from the SFRS to circulate the report on the KPI’s system to provide members with a good monitoring snapshot.

     

    Recommendations:

     

           The Sub-Group supports the recommendations made by the Internal Audit of the Members Allocation Fund in 2015, and for the further review of the Financial Framework to continue to ensure it reflects the current requirements.

           The Sub-Group supports the continuation of the Members Allocation Fund and recommends that Members collate evidence and recognition for their contribution to local projects in their area, and to provide the Council’s Communications department with such material for press releases.

           The Sub-Group supports the Community Buildings Grant and recommends that Members engage with District & Borough colleagues to promote the Grant locally.

           The Sub-Group supports and endorses the Community Improvement Fund.

           The Sub-Group supported the plans and approach taken to the Service’s savings targets outlined in the current MTFP.

           The Performance & Finance Sub-Group supports the Immediate Response Vehicle (IRV) pilot scheme and recommends that Cabinet gives approval for the pilot to commence.

           The Sub-Group acknowledges the work SFRS has undertaken to meet its financial targets and recommends Officers and Cabinet Members continue to work effectively deliver the planned savings outlined in the current MTFP.

     

91/16

DATE OF NEXT MEETING: THURSDAY 2 FEBRUARY 2017

    • Share this item

    The next meeting of the Board will be held at 10:00am on Thursday 2 February 2017.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The next meeting of the Board will be held on Thursday 2 February 2017.