Agenda and minutes

To note the attendance at this meeting of any duly appointed Reserve Members.

Reserve Members may attend meetings:-

(i)                 to take the place of an ordinary Member for whom they are a reserve;

(ii)               where the ordinary Member will be absent for the whole of the meeting; and

(iii)             the meeting notes at the start of the meeting at the item ‘Reserves’ that the Reserve Member is or will be attending as a reserve;

(iv)              if a Reserve Member whose intention to attend has been noted arrives after the commencement of the meeting, then that Reserve Member can only act as a Member from the start of the next item of business on the agenda after his/her arrival.

RESOLVED:  To note the attendance at this meeting of the following duly appointed Reserve Members:-

To receive declarations of personal or prejudicial interests, arising from business to be transacted at this meeting, from:

(a)               all Members of the Committee, Sub Committee, Panel or Forum;

(b)               all other Members present in any part of the room or chamber.

RESOLVED:  To note that the following interest was declared:

Agenda Item 9 – Information Report – Extended Schools Review – Six Month Update

CouncillorDinesh Solanki declared a personal interest in that his daughter was a pupil at Belmont Middle School.  He would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 19 January 2010 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 19 January 2010, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

To receive questions (if any) from local residents/organisations under the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 8.

RESOLVED:  To note that no public questions were put, or petitions or deputations received at this meeting.

To receive any references from Council and/or other Committees or Panels.

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no references. 

Report of the Divisional Director Partnership Development and Performance.

The Sub-Committee received a report of the Divisional Director, Partnership, Development and Performance, which set out details of the Sub-Committee’s activity in 2009/10 which was intended for inclusion in the Scrutiny Annual Report.

Members were invited to evaluate the effectiveness of the Sub-Committee since its inception.  The following views were expressed by Members:

·                    a Member commented that whilst scrutiny had undertaken a number of good investigations, he was concerned that an important objective of scrutiny was to hold the executive to account.  He added that whilst Portfolio Holders had attended meetings and been asked some searching questions, he was not convinced that this purpose had been achieved or that the Executive had been persuaded to change a decision following comments made by scrutiny;

·                    the chairman referred to the Question and Answer sessions undertaken by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee with the Leader and Chief Executive as a successful example of scrutiny and that there had been added value compared to the previous four years; scrutiny members had resisted a ‘star chamber’ approach;

·                    a Member suggested that to maintain credibility of scrutiny, the Chairman should be an opposition Member; another member commented that good chairmanship was more important;

·                    a number of Members referred to good work that had been undertaken with regard to the scrutiny of outside bodies such as the health partners and the Chairman gave the example of the Accord MP review as an area of scrutiny activity that had influenced Portfolio Holders and the Executive.

RESOLVED:  That the Sub-Committee’s report on its activities be noted and included in the report to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 13 April 2010.

Report of the Director of Schools and Children’s Development.

The Sub-Committee considered a report of the Director of Schools and Children’s Development, which provided an update on the progress against the nine recommendations from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee report entitled Review of Extended Schools as Community Resources.

An officer introduced the report and highlighted the following:

·                    the report detailed the significant progress made on all nine recommendations.  The Overview and Scrutiny report had been welcomed by the service and had had an impact and influence over the direction of travel;

·                    Recommendation 2 arose from the successful appointment of Parent Ambassadors in the Canons cluster.  There were now 20 Parent Ambassadors working in 6 clusters;

·                    Recommendation 5 identified a number of areas of work for Governing Bodies of which elected Governors played a part.

In response to questions, Members were advised that:

·                    for the 2010/2011 plans the activities would be publicised across all clusters in a consistent way to ensure that every child received information about activities that they and their parents could access.  This was significant progress as the clusters had been set up separately;

·                    the Council’s Communication team would ensure that summer activities were listed in one publication, funded by all clusters, with a copy for each child.  The information would be made widely available so that members of the community not directly involved with schools were aware of the services and activities available;

·                    Recommendation 9 had resulted in the review of progress under consideration by the Sub-Committee.  The Community and Environment Group was consulting schools regarding an action plan to address how schools could make their buildings as open and accessible as possible;

·                    schools needed advice as to how to reduce costs, particularly in order to make their premises available to the community at a reasonable cost.

The Sub-Committee recognised the progress made and noted that since September 2009 seven schools had been inspected and four had been graded as outstanding.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Report of the Divisional Director of Human Resources and Development.

The Sub-Committee received a report of the Divisional Director of Human Resources and Development, presenting the draft Strategy for People 2010/12 which had been adopted by the Cabinet on 18 March 2010.  It was noted that the document superseded the Strategy for People 2006/09 and aligned the Council’s people management strategy to support achievement of the Council’s vision to be recognised as one of the best London Council’s by 2012.  Members were advised that it had not been possible to present a draft to the Sub-Committee prior to consideration by the Cabinet in order to meet requirements under the Use of Resources audit on workforce planning.  However, the range of issues that would be raised by the Better Deal for Residents programme would require the Strategy to be reviewed during 2010 to ensure it was fit for purpose.  At that point, the views of the Sub-Committee or Overview and Scrutiny would be sought to finalising any changed Strategy.

The Sub-Committee was advised that:

·                    the framework for the Strategy had been developed by the Improvement and Development Agency;

·                    the date for the staff survey had been brought forward in order to capture the outcomes in the Strategy.  Four main development areas had been identified: management of change, supporting people through performance management, improved communication within directorates, and improving the diversity of the workforce;

·                    a Workforce Strategy Group in each directorate, supported by Human Resources and Development, produced its own strategies and plans.  Common areas were highlighted and gaps in strategies identified;

·                     this review resulted in the key workforce objectives, agreed by the Corporate Strategy Board, in the Strategy together with actions to address them.

In response to questions, the Sub-Committee was advised that:

·                    it was difficult to be precise why one fifth of the workforce had been identified by the staff survey as being disengaged or disenchanted.  However, this percentage was low in comparison with a global study.  The staff survey indicated that 80% were engaged or enrolled against 60% in global statistics;

·                    employees in their first year of employment at Harrow and those nearing retirement were particularly positive.  Professional and technical staff tended to be less positive but this was consistent with surveys carried out in other organisations.  The Individual Performance Appraisal and Development process (IPAD) was being monitored regarding meaningful discussion being held between staff and managers on work objectives and meeting agreed development needs.  An action plan had been agreed with the Corporate Leadership Group and subsequently discussed at the Managers’ Forum;

·                    analysis of information between directorates, using a ‘traffic light’ system, had been undertaken to identify areas of concern.  This would be progressed by either Department Management Teams, or the Workforce Strategy Group within each Directorate;

·                    there had been an improvement in response rates and staff perception in successive surveys;

·                    there were 273 agency workers at the end of February 2010 out of 7,500 employees.  The Improvement Project included a reduction in agency and temporary staff, which was monitored on a monthly basis.  New legislation would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 160.

Which the Chairman has decided is urgent and cannot otherwise be dealt with.

The Chairman thanked the Members for their work over the last four years.