Agenda and minutes

To note the attendance at this meeting of any Substitute Members, in accordance with paragraph 4.12 of the Harrow Partnership Governance Handbook.

AGREED: To (1) note the attendance of Sarah Kersey of Harrow Association of Voluntary Service as substitute member for Julia Smith;

(2) note the apologies received.

(if any).

AGREED: To note that no declarations of interest were made.

That the minutes of the Board Meeting held on 16 February 2010, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

AGREED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 16 February 2010 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

Report of the Assistant Chief Executive, Harrow Council.

The Board received a report which detailed the Local Area Agreement (LAA) Reward Grant claim that had been submitted to Government Office for London, proposals for allocating the money and the governance arrangements for its use. The Chairman stated that the Council expected to receive almost £4.7 million over the next 2 years and it was important that the money was allocated carefully.

The Chairman explained that it had previously been agreed that any Reward Grant paid by Central Government would be split, with 50% given to the partners involved in the achievement of each stretched target and 50% pooled back into the Harrow Strategic Partnership for further partnership working. However, he stated that the business cases put forward by the Management Groups in the report lacked detail and more information should be provided before any money was allocated. He proposed a special meeting of the Harrow Partnership Board be arranged in April 2010 and the Management Groups be asked to submit full business cases for consideration. In addition, he proposed that the Harrow Chief Executive Group report back to the Harrow Partnership Board at the same meeting. The Chairman stated that once this information had been received at the special meeting, the Reward Grant funding could be allocated.

Some members of the Board raised concern at the delay that convening a special meeting would cause. The Chairman stated that it was important that due process was followed and, in cases where funding was required urgently, he would authorise the release of money provided there were grounds to do so.

AGREED: That

(1) a special meeting of the Harrow Partnership Board be arranged to take place in April 2010 to consider the allocation of grant funding;

(2) the Management Groups provide the Harrow Partnership Board with complete business cases for consideration at the special meeting;

(3) the Harrow Chief Executive Group report back to the Harrow Partnership Board with its proposals at the special meeting;

(4) the option to use a proportion of the Partnership element of the Reward Grant to meet costs of issues arising from the new LAA and the Sustainable Community Strategy that could not be supported from elsewhere, and for improved support to the Partnership itself, be approved;

(5) delegation to Harrow Chief Executives to determine, on the basis of the criteria set out in the report, the projects to be funded from the Partnership element of the Reward Grant supporting their 5 priorities, issues arising from the LAA and Sustainable Community Strategy and support for the Partnership itself, be approved;

(6) the reporting processes described in the report including the inclusion of Better Deal for Residents Programme information within Performance Reports to the Partnership Board, be approved.

Report of the Director of Public Health, Harrow Primary Care Trust.

The Board received a report which outlined the rationale for the proposed Health and Wellbeing Strategy. Carole Furlong, Consultant in Public Health at NHS Harrow, gave a presentation, during which she stated:

• The Health and Wellbeing Strategy had been developed to combat inequalities in health in Harrow and to generally improve the health of residents;

• The strategy acknowledged that the biggest threats to health, including heart disease, stoke and cancer, were projected to increase over the next 10 years due, in part, to underlying lifestyle issues. The purpose of the strategy was to take preventative action;

• Harrow already had a Sustainable Community Strategy in addition to Local Area Agreement and Comprehensive Area Assessment targets. These covered a wide spectrum of public health issues, including the need to reduce inequalities;

• Partners, including the voluntary sector, had been given the opportunity to have input into the themes for the strategy. The consultation process utilised interviews, questionnaires and workshops in order to identify priority topics;

• Following the consultation period, recommendations would be made to existing work streams and delivery groups. Topics not already being covered elsewhere would be picked up through the Adult Health and Wellbeing Partnership Board;

• Life expectancy and differences in life expectancy would continue to be the main measures of success for the strategy. The target was to decrease the inequality gap in Harrow by 10%;

• A measure of community wellbeing or happiness would be useful, although baseline data was still required and targets were yet to be confirmed.

In response to questions raised by the Board, Carole Furlong and Andrew Howe, Director of Public Health, NHS Harrow, explained that:

• The life expectancy data contained in the report was based on the expected life expectancy of a child born today;

• The health of those living in deprived areas was improving, although the health of individuals living in affluent areas was improving faster. As a result, the health inequality gap continued to grow;

• It was felt that the target to decrease the inequality gap in Harrow by 10% was ambitious;

• The final strategy would be brought back to the Board for approval in approximately 2 or 3 meetings time.

AGREED: That the report be noted.

Report of the Corporate Director, Place Shaping, Harrow Council.

The Chairman outlined the concept of the Credit Union, a cooperative financial institution owned and controlled by its members that provided banking facilities. Hillingdon currently operated a Credit Union supported by “M for Money” and, following authorisation from the Financial Services Authority (FSA), M for Money had been given permission to include Harrow in its common bond.

Initially the scheme would be supported by the Council and open to staff, although it was expected that the scheme would be expanded to include employees of the Primary Care Trust and other local public bodies. The scheme was due to be formally launched shortly and invitations had been sent to partner organisations.

A representative from Harrow in Business stated that his organisation would like to be involved in the development of the scheme and sent regular updates.

AGREED: That the presentation be noted.

Report of the Corporate Director, Adults and Housing, Harrow Council.

The Policy and Partnership Service Manager, Harrow Council, introduced the report and explained that the requirement to produce a Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) was outlined in the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007. The first JSNA had been produced in November 2008 in conjunction with third sector partners and the Department of Health had since recommended that the JSNA be refreshed. The report detailed the work that had been undertaken to refresh the JSNA and more detailed information was available on request.

AGREED: That the Harrow Partnership Board note the achievement of outcomes identified in the refreshed summary action plan.

Presentation by Jim Shutt, Home Group.

Jim Shutt, Regeneration Manager for Home Group, gave a presentation on the review of Rayners Lane Neighbourhood Plan. During the presentation he stated that:

• The plan had been developed in partnership with the community and stakeholders and a number of priority themes had been identified;

• Rayners Lane was the most deprived neighbourhood in Harrow. The population was relatively young and ethnically diverse, with 60% of residents from Black and Minority Ethnic communities. Unemployment levels were higher than elsewhere in the borough, with 30% of residents holding no qualifications, 20% dependent on income support and 50% of households with children eligible for free school meals;

• The review had considered progress that had been made against the plan to ensure that it remained fit for purpose and was shaped by a diverse range of residents;

• The review had concluded that the basic principles and priorities of the plan were still valid. However, the plan was not adequately linked into the strategic plans of key agencies;

• It was proposed that the Harrow Partnership Board take ownership of the plan and that the development and the delivery of the plan be linked into the strategic plans of key agencies in Harrow. In addition, it was proposed that projects be developed to address priority needs in the neighborhood, with the aim of promoting long-term changes to mainstream services.

The Chairman stated that the Harrow Partnership Board would monitor the implementation of the Plan and, wherever possible, facilitate progress.

AGREED: That the presentation be noted.

Presentation of the Corporate Director, Place Shaping, Harrow Council.

The Corporate Director for Place Shaping, Harrow Council, gave a presentation on the Place Shaping and Property Work Stream of the Transformation Programme. During the presentation he stated that:

• A key concern of Place Shaping was regeneration, a set of activities that reversed economic, social and physical decline. The purpose of Place Shaping was to create attractive, prosperous, vibrant, safe and strong communities and this sentiment was reflected in the Local Development Framework (LDF) Core Strategy. It was important that Harrow’s heritage was protected and enhanced whilst also allowing for appropriate development;

• The Council’s Property Strategy would determine Harrow’s Strategic Partnership’s property requirements and identify and implement a number of actions to contribute positively to the revenue budget review in 2010/11. Both Place Shaping and the Property Strategy were concerned with long-term development projects;

• The LDF was a suite of documents with the Core Strategy at its centre which provided civic leadership through long-term spatial vision. The Growth Strategy element of the LDF identified Central Harrow as an intensification area where coordinated development would be encouraged. Using new technology, 3D models could be used to determine the visual impact of new buildings and better inform public consultation on development plans;

• It was intended that the Harrow Strategic Partnership would move towards co-locating services in order to reduce the need for multiple sites. Doing so would ensure that public services in Harrow were seamless, provided good value for money and were shaped by the community’s views and needs. Co-location would also prevent the unnecessary duplication of services at multiple sites. Unused property could be sold or leased.

Following questions from members of the Board, the Corporate Director of Place Shaping stated that:

• Some developments in Harrow had been put on hold due to the recession and the resulting decline in demand for newly built properties. In addition, developers had also been unable to borrow the money required to fund construction. It was expected that some developers would request to vary planning permission in order to allow sites to be used for a different purpose than that originally intended;

• The Council would work with developers as the economy returned to normal in order to encourage the completion of partially finished developments.

Howard Bluston of the North West London Chamber of Commerce stated that he would like to see a future report on the progress of Place Shaping in Harrow and requested that this be provided to the Harrow Partnership Board. The Chairman agreed.

AGREED: That

(1) the report be noted;

(2) a progress report be provided to the Harrow Partnership Board in the future.

Report of the Assistant Chief Executive, Harrow Council.

The Chief Executive, Harrow Council, introduced the report which outlined the work undertaken by Harrow Chief Executives at their meetings on 25 January and 22 February 2010. He stated that progress was being made and that work was moving in the right direction.

AGREED: That the report be noted.