Public Document Pack
County Council
15 February 2011
Agenda
County Hall, New Road, Oxford, OX1 1ND www.oxfordshire.gov.uk Fax: 01865 783195 Media Enquiries 01865 815266
Declarations of Interest
This note briefly summarises the position on interests which you must d eclare at the meeting. Please refer to the Members’ Code of Conduct in Part 9.1 of the Constitution for a fuller description.
The duty to declare … You must always declare any “personal interest” in a matter under consideration, ie where the matter affects (either positively or negatively): (i) any of the financial and other interests which you are required to notify for inclusion in the statutory Register of Members’ Interests; or (ii) your own well-being or financial position or that of any member of your family or any person with whom you have a close association more than it would affect other people in the County.
Whose interests are included … “Member of your family” in (ii) above includes spouses and partners and other relatives’ spouses and partners, and extends to the employment and investment interests of relatives and friends and their involvement in other bodies of various descriptions. For a full list of what “relative” covers, please see the Code of Conduct.
When and what to declare … The best time to make any declaration is under the agenda item “Declarations of Interest”. Under the Code you must declare not later than at the start of the item concerned or (if different) as soon as the interest “becomes apparent”. In making a declaration you must state the nature of the interest.
Taking part if you have an interest … Having made a declaration you may still take part in the debate and vote on the matter unless your personal interest is also a “prejudicial” interest.
“Prejudicial” interests … A prejudicial interest is one which a member of the public knowing the relevant facts would think so significant as to be likely to affect your judgment of the public interest.
What to do if your interest is prejudicial … If you have a prejudicial interest in any matter under consideration, you may remain in the room but only for the purpose of making representations, answering questions or giving evidence relating to the matter under consideration, provided that the public are also allowed to attend the meeting for the same purpose, whether under a statutory right or otherwise.
Exceptions … There are a few circumstances where you may regard yourself as not having a prejudicial interest or may participate even though you may have one. These, together with other rules about participation in the case of a prejudicial interest, are set out in paragraphs 10 – 12 of the Code.
Seeking Advice … It is your responsibility to decide whether any of these provisions apply to you in particular circumstances, but you may wish to seek the advice of the Monitoring Officer before the meeting.
If you have any special requirements (such as a large print version of these papers or special access facilities) please contact the officer named on the front page, but please give as much notice as possible before the meeting.
To : Members of the County Council
Notice of a Meeting of the County Council
Tuesday, 15 February 2011 at 10.00 am
County Hall, Oxford OX1 1ND
Joanna Simons Chief Executive February 2011
Contact Officer: Deborah Miller Tel: (01865) 815384; E-Mail:[email protected]
In order to comply with the Data Protection Act 1998, notice is given that Item 3 will be recorded. The purpose of recording proceedings is to provide an aide-memoire to assist the clerk of the meeting in the drafting of minutes. Members are asked to sign the attendance book which will be available in the corridor outside the Council Chamber. A list of members present at the meeting will be compiled from this book.
The civic party will process into the Council Chamber at 9.58 am.
A buffet luncheon will be provided.
AGENDA
1. Minutes (Pages 1 - 40)
To approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 11 January 2011 ( CC1 ) to receive for information any matters arising therefrom.
2. Apologies for Absence
County Hall, New Road, Oxford, OX1 1ND www.oxfordshire.gov.uk Fax: 01865 783195 Media Enquiries 01865 815266 - 2 -
3. Declarations of Interest - see guidance note
Members are reminded that they must declare their interests orally at the meeting and specify (a) the nature of the interest and (b) which items on the agenda are the relevant items. This applies also to items where members have interests by virtue of their membership of a district council in Oxfordshire.
4. Official Communications
5. Appointments
To make any changes to the membership of the Cabinet, scrutiny and other committees on the nomination of political groups.
6. Petitions and Public Address
7. Medium Term Corporate Plan 2011/12 - 2015/16 (Pages 41 - 68)
The Council's Medium Term Corporate Plan 2011/2012-2015/16 will set out the challenges facing the County Council , the rationale for our objectives, and identifies the priority and activities on which we will focus. The Strategy and Partnerships Scrutiny Committee reviewed the draft Plan and submitted comments to the Cabinet, who approved the draft on 25 January 2011. The Corporate Plan is split into two parts – the first summarises the Council's broad strategic direction and the second sets our short and medium term delivery commitments. A summary of the key elements of the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) will also be included and the MTFP will form an annex to the plan. The Corporate Plan will be supported by a refreshed version of ‘This is Oxfordshire’, the evidence base of research, data and perception information produced by the Oxfordshire Data Observatory The Cabinet RECOMMENDS Council to approve the Corporate Plan 2011/12- 2015/16 subject to the inclusion of the delivery plan, a summary of the Medium Term Financial Plan and any changes in the text approved by the Chief Executive after consultation with the Leader of the Council.
8. Service & Resource Planning 2011/12 - 2015/16 (Pages 69 - 322)
Report by the Assistant Chief Executive & Chief Finance Officer ( CC8a ) and Report of the Cabinet by the Leader of the Council ( CC8b ) The recommendations set out below (and in the report) are made subject to the Commentary on the Budget Proposals by the Assistant Chief Executive and Chief Finance Officer, as the Council’s Section 151 Officer, to be circulated separately.
- 3 -
The Liberal Democrat and Green Groups propose to submit amendments to the budget proposals (CC8 Liberal Democrat) and (CC8 Green) respectively and these will be circulated separately.
The Cabinet RECOMMENDS Council:
(a) (in respect of revenue) RECOMMEND Council to approve: (1) a budget for 2011/12 as set out in Annex 4 and a medium term plan to 2015/16 as set out in Annex 1; (2) a budget requirement for 2011/12 of £408.616m; (3) the Council Tax and Precept calculations for 2011/12 set out in Annex 5 to the report and in particular: (i) a precept of £282.674m; and (ii) a Council Tax for Band D equivalent properties of £1,161.71; (4) the planned level of balances and reserves for 2011/12 to 2014/15 as set out in Annex 2; (5) the virement of £1m from demography for Older People to the Learning Disabilities Pooled Budget and a further virement transferring £1m from Older People to Physical Disabilities included in the Older People’s and Physical Disabilities Pooled Budget included in Annex 4; (6) the use of Dedicated Schools Grant for 2011/12 as set out in Annex 6b to the report and to note the calculation of the Guaranteed Unit of Funding set out in Annex 6a; (7) virement arrangements for 2011/12 as set out in Annex 7 to the report; (b) (in respect of treasury management) to RECOMMEND Council to approve: (1) the Treasury Management Strategy Statement as at Annex 8 including the Prudential Indicators; (2) that in relation to the 2011/12 strategy any further changes required be delegated to the Chief Finance Officer following consultation with the Leader of Council and the Cabinet Member for Finance & Property. (c) RECOMMEND Council to approve the Minimum Revenue Provision Methodology Statement as set out in paragraphs 11 to 15 of Annex 9. (d) (in respect of Capital) to approve: (1) the Capital Strategy at Annex 10 and Corporate Asset Management Plan and Transport Asset Management Plan at Annexes 11a and 11b; (2) the Capital Programme for 2010/11 to 2015/16 as set out in the capital programme at Annex 12; (3) the prudential indicators for capital set out in Annex 13.
- 4 -
Pre -Meeting Briefing
There will be a pre-meeting briefing at County Hall on Monday 14 February 2011 at 10.15 am for the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Group Leaders and Deputy Group Leaders
Agenda Item 1
OXFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
MINUTES of the meeting held on Tuesday, 11 January 2011 commencing at 10.00 am and finishing at 3.40 pm.
Present :
Councillor Hilary Hibbert-Biles – in the Chair
Councillors:
Alan Armitage John Goddard David Robertson Marilyn Badcock Janet Godden Rodney Rose Mike Badcock Patrick Greene John Sanders Roger Belson Jenny Hannaby Larry Sanders Maurice Billington David Harvey Don Seale Norman Bolster Steve Hayward Bill Service Ann Bonner Mrs J. Heathcoat Chip Sherwood Liz Brighouse OBE Ian Hudspeth C.H. Shouler Iain Brown Sarah Hutchinson Roz Smith Nick Carter Stewart Lilly Val Smith Louise Chapman Lorraine Lindsay-Gale Keith Strangwood Jim Couchman Sajjad Hussain Malik John Tanner Tony Crabbe Kieron Mallon Alan Thompson Roy Darke Charles Mathew Melinda Tilley Arash Fatemian Keith R. Mitchell CBE David Turner Anda Fitzgerald- Neil Owen Nicholas P. Turner O'Connor Zoé Patrick Carol Viney Jean Fooks Susanna Pressel Michael Waine Mrs C. Fulljames Anne Purse David Wilmshurst Anthony Gearing G.A. Reynolds Michael Gibbard
The Council considered the matters, reports and recommendations contained or referred to in the agenda for the meeting and decided as set out below. Except insofar as otherwise specified, the reasons for the decisions are contained in the agenda and reports, copies of which are attached to the signed Minutes.
1/11 MINUTES (Agenda Item 1)
RESOLVED: that the Minutes of the meeting of Council held on 2 November 2010 be approved and signed.
Page 1 CC1
2/11 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE (Agenda Item 2)
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Ahmed, Altaf-Khan, Atkins, Hallchurch, Handley, Harbour, Jelf, Jones, Lovatt, Nimmo-Smith, Sexon, Skolar, Stevens and Stratford.
3/11 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST - SEE GUIDANCE NOTE (Agenda Item 3)
The following declarations of interest were made:
All those listed as present at the meeting declared a Personal Interest in Agenda Item 9 (Report of the Independent Remuneration Panel on Members’ Allowances) as under the Council's code of conduct this affects the financial position of members.
Councillor Hayward declared a Personal & Prejudicial Interest due to the location of his property – Agenda Items 6 & 16 – Petitions & Public Address and Motion from Councillor John Tanner on Cogges Link By-pass, Witney.
Councillor John Sanders declared a Personal Interest as a member of a Management Committee of an Advice Centre – Agenda Item 15 – Motion from Councillor Charles Mathew.
4/11 OFFICIAL COMMUNICATIONS (Agenda Item 4)
The Chairman reported as follows:
(i) Council congratulated Martin Woodley, Team Leader Doorstep Crime Team, Trading Standards who had been awarded an MBE; (ii) Council congratulated Sara Thornton QPM, Chief Constable, Thames Valley Police who had been awarded the CBE; (iii) Council congratulated Dr Christopher Brown, Director Ashmolean Museum who had been awarded the CBE; (iv) Tony Harbour remained seriously ill but it was hoped that he would be able to return to work in the near future. Council sent warm wishes to Tony and his family for a speedy recovery. (v) John Parry, who had worked for Oxfordshire County Council for 15 years was leaving the Council. Council congratulated Mr Parry for his excellent service and wished him all the best for the future.
5/11 APPOINTMENTS (Agenda Item 5)
RESOLVED: to appoint:
(i) Councillor Stevens to the Adult Services Scrutiny Committee in place of Councillor Hutchinson; (ii) Councillor Tanner to the Standards Committee;
Page 2 CC1
(iii) Councillor Darke to the Pension Fund Committee in place of Councillor Tanner.
6/11 PETITIONS AND PUBLIC ADDRESS (Agenda Item 6)
Petition:
Ms Tamara James, addressed the Council on behalf of local residents of Summertown asking the County Council to re-think the proposed closure of Summertown Library.
The Chairman received the petition on behalf of the Council.
Addresses:
Ms Anne Routledge on behalf of the Summertown Library addressed Council speaking against the proposed cuts to the library service.
Mr David Condon, Resident of Witney, addressed the Council speaking against the proposed Cogges Link Bypass Scheme (Motion by Councillor John Tanner).
7/11 SUPPORT FOR POLITICAL GROUPS (Agenda Item 8)
The Council had before them a report by the County Solicitor which presented a recommendation of Cabinet that political assistants should no longer be employed by the Council in support of political groups as of 1 April 2011 (CC8).
The Group Leaders commended the Political Group Assistants for their excellent service to members.
Councillor Mitchell moved and Councillor Robertson seconded the adoption of the recommendations set out in the report CC8.
Councillor Brighouse moved and Councillor Patrick seconded the following amendment to the recommendations (set out in italics):
“Cabinet RECOMMENDS Council to agree that the posts of political assistant be deleted as from 1 April 2011 and that all of the work currently performed by the political assistants be absorbed by members of the respective groups with appropriate support from officers.”
Following debate, the amendment was lost by 40 votes to 19.
RESOLVED: (by 40 votes to 10) to agree that the posts of political assistant be deleted as from 1 April 2011 and that all of the work currently
Page 3 CC1
performed by the political assistants be absorbed by members of the respective groups.
8/11 REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT REMUNERATION PANEL ON MEMBERS' ALLOWANCES (Agenda Item 9)
The Council had before them a report by the County Solicitor which presented the recommendations of the Independent Remuneration Panel following a recent review of the Council’s Members’ Allowances Scheme.
Councillor Mitchell moved and Councillor Robertson seconded the recommendations set out in the report and on the face of the Agenda.
Councillor Brighouse moved and Councillor Darke seconded the following amendment shown in bold italics and strikethrough:
(a) the Basic Allowance payable to all councillors remain at be reduced to £4147 £8,295 ; (b) in addition to the Basic Allowance, a Special Responsibility Allowance (SRA) be paid as follows:- (1) Cabinet Members – remain at be reduced to £6221 £12,442; (2) Leader of the Council – remain at be reduced to £6221 £12,442 (in addition to the allowance as a Cabinet member); (3) Deputy Leader of the Council – remain at be reduced to £2073 £4,147 (in addition to the allowance as a Cabinet member); (4) Chairmen of Scrutiny Committees – reduce to £2500 £5,000 ; (5) Deputy Chairmen of Scrutiny Committees – no allowance; (6) Chairmen of Planning & Regulation Committee, Audit Committee, Pension Fund Committee and Democracy & Organisation Committee – remain at be reduced to £1351 £2,702; (7) Deputy Chairmen of Planning & Regulation Committee, Audit Committee, Pension Fund Committee and Democracy & Organisation Committee – no allowance; (8) Chairman of the Council – remain at be reduced to £4147 £8,295; (9) Vice-Chairman of the Council – remain at be reduced to £1037 £2,074; (10) Leader of the Opposition – remain at be reduced to £7258 £14,516; (11) Other Shadow Cabinet Members – remain at be reduced to £1216 £2,432; (12) Oxfordshire Corporate Director on South East Fire & Rescue Control Centre Ltd – remain at be reduced to £1000 £2,000;
Following debate the amendment proposed was lost by 50 votes to 8, Councillor Roz Smith asking that her being abstention be recorded. The recommendations were then put to the vote and it was:
Page 4 CC1
RESOLVED: (by 50 votes to 2)
(a) the Basic Allowance payable to all councillors remain at £8,294.88; (b) in addition to the Basic Allowance, a Special Responsibility Allowance (SRA) be paid as follows:- (1) Cabinet Members – remain at £12,442.32 (2) Leader of the Council – remain at £12,442.32 (in addition to the allowance as a Cabinet member) (3) Deputy Leader of the Council – remain at £4,147.44 (in addition to the allowance as a Cabinet member) (4) Chairmen of Scrutiny Committees – reduce to £5,000 (5) Deputy Chairmen of Scrutiny Committees – no allowance (6) Chairmen of Planning & Regulation Committee, Audit Committee, Pension Fund Committee and Democracy & Organisation Committee – remain at £2,701.92 (7) Deputy Chairmen of Planning & Regulation Committee, Audit Committee, Pension Fund Committee and Democracy & Organisation Committee – no allowance (8) Chairman of the Council – remain at £8,294.88 (9) Vice-Chairman of the Council – remain at £2,073.72 (10) Leader of the Opposition – remain at £14,516.04 (11) Other Shadow Cabinet Members – remain at £2,432.16 (12) Oxfordshire Corporate Director on South East Fire & Rescue Control Centre Ltd – remain at £2,000 (c) the Council does not establish a general co-optees’ allowance; (d) the co-optee allowances to the Independent Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Standards Committee to be deleted; (e) the co-optees’ allowance to be payable to an independent co-opted member of the Standards Committee when the co-opted member serves on a panel hearing investigating an allegation of a breach of the Code of Conduct to be continued until the Standards regime has been repealed; (f) a co-optees’ allowance to be payable to an independent co-opted member of the Audit Committee when the co-opted member serves as Chairman of the Audit Working Group; (g) the Council’s Basic and Special Responsibility Allowances and the Co-optees’ Allowance to the Chairman of the Audit Working Group be amended annually by reference to the annual Local Government Pay Award for staff and that this should take effect from the date on which the award for staff similarly takes effect; (h) that Dependant’s Carer’s Allowances be paid on the basis that:- (1) the allowances can only be claimed when an "approved duty" is performed subject to the submission of receipts and to there being no other statutory allowance available; (2) the basis of the carers' allowances be the actual cost incurred up to the maximum hourly rates set out below:- Childcare - £6.00 per hour per child Care for dependent relatives - £17.00 per hour (i) the Council adopts, for members, the travel and subsistence scheme that is applicable to officers. Overnight accommodation to be booked
Page 5 CC1
by officers where possible; when alternative accommodation arrangements are to be used, this should be approved by the relevant officer and the South East Employers rate to be used (j) claims made under the Council’s travel and subsistence scheme be accompanied by receipts and/or any other relevant evidence of the costs incurred and that claims under the scheme be made, in writing, within two months of the relevant duty in respect of which the entitlement to the allowance arises (k) list of Approved Duties for the purposes of travel, subsistence and dependant care allowances continue and be updated taking account of Council changes (l) a review of ICT provision for county councillors (including the supply of broadband at a councillor’s home) be undertaken by 31st March 2011 with a view to considering whether this should be deemed to be covered by the current Basic Allowance or within the Allowances Scheme generally; and (m) the amounts for Basic Allowance, Special Responsibility Allowances and co-optees’ allowances be rounded to the nearest pound.
9/11 TREASURY MANAGEMENT MID TERM REVIEW 2011 (Agenda Item 10)
The Council had before them a report by the Assistant Chief Executive & Chief Finance Officer which outlined Treasury Management activity undertaken in the first half of the financial year in compliance with the CIPFA Code of Practice.
Councillor Couchman moved and Councillor Mitchell seconded the recommendations set out in the report and on the face of the Agenda.
RESOLVED: (nem con) to note the Council’s Mid Term Treasury Management Review 2010/11.
10/11 REPORT OF THE CABINET (Agenda Item 11)
The Council had before them the report of the Cabinet Meetings on 2 November, 16 November and 21 December (CC11).
In relation to the report on Oxfordshire Concessionary Fares Scheme referred to at Paragraph 8 (Question by Councillor Brighouse) Councillor Hudspeth undertook to investigate and supply Councillor Brighouse with a written answer on whether Concessionary fares were provided by ‘readibus’ in the South of the County.
In relation to the report on OCC Parking Standards for Residential and Commercial Development referred to at Paragraph 9 (Question from Councillor Purse) Councillor Hudspeth undertook to send an email to all councillors giving details of the consultation period, together with information on how to contribute.
Page 6 CC1
RESOLVED: to note the report.
11/11 QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL (Agenda Item 12)
28 questions with notice were asked. Details of the questions and answers and the supplementary questions and answers, where asked and given, are set out in the Annex to the Minutes.
12/11 MOTION FROM COUNCILLOR ZOE PATRICK (Agenda Item 13)
Councillor Patrick moved and Councillor Fooks seconded the following motion as amended by Councillor Keith Mitchell in bold italic and strikethrough:
“Council welcomes the Localism Bill as described in the Decentralisation and Localism Guidance issued on 13 December by Rt Hon Nick Clegg and Rt Hon Greg Clark. Council particularly welcomes the measures in the Bill that will: • Involve people more closely in the workings of their communities; • diversify the way services are provided; • roll back the interference of government in local and community matters; • reduce the amount of bureaucracy and form-filling that has bedevilled us for 40 years • abolish regional strategies • abolish the Standards Board regime • abolish the “predetermination” rule • commit government to a reform of the local government finance system Council urges the Cabinet to take initiative and leadership in ensuring that Oxfordshire residents benefit from the new legislation, in particular by identifying whether any of the following would prove particularly beneficial to Oxfordshire residents: • Facilitating local people to instigate local referendums; • Allowing Councillors to vote how best to present to Council an annual policy statement on salary packages of Senior Council Officers; • investigating how the very welcome powers of general competence can be used in Oxfordshire; • ensuring the monthly publication of items of spending over £500 provides meaningful information and minimises the need for “armchair auditors” to make costly inquiries about inconsequential spending; • set ting up Community Councils and allowing communities to set the agenda for Community Council Meetings .
Page 7 CC1
• how the county council can work with the district councils to maximize the benefits of the new planning regime and particularly the Community Infrastructure Levy for Oxfordshire residents and businesses ”
Following debate, the motion as amended was carried by 48 votes to 8, there being 2 abstentions.
RESOLVED: (by 48 votes to 8, there being 2 abstentions)
“Council welcomes the Localism Bill as described in the Decentralisation and Localism Guidance issued on 13 December by Rt Hon Nick Clegg and Rt Hon Greg Clark. Council particularly welcomes the measures in the Bill that will: • Involve people more closely in the workings of their communities; • diversify the way services are provided; • roll back the interference of government in local and community matters; • reduce the amount of bureaucracy and form-filling that has bedevilled us for 40 years • abolish regional strategies • abolish the Standards Board regime • abolish the “predetermination” rule • commit government to a reform of the local government finance system Council urges the Cabinet to take initiative and leadership in ensuring that Oxfordshire residents benefit from the new legislation, in particular by identifying whether any of the following would prove particularly beneficial to Oxfordshire residents: • Facilitating local people to instigate local referendums; • how best to present to Council an annual policy statement on salary packages of Senior Council Officers; • investigating how the very welcome powers of general competence can be used in Oxfordshire; • ensuring the monthly publication of items of spending over £500 provides meaningful information and minimises the need for “armchair auditors” to make costly inquiries about inconsequential spending; • how the county council can work with the district councils to maximize the benefits of the new planning regime and particularly the Community Infrastructure Levy for Oxfordshire residents and businesses ”
13/11 MOTION FROM COUNCILLOR LIZ BRIGHOUSE (Agenda Item 14)
Councillor Brighouse moved and Councillor Darke seconded the following motion:
Page 8 CC1
“Council notes it is estimated that over 150,000 people are regularly volunteering in the Oxfordshire. It also notes that most councillors are already very actively involved in their communities and many of them were community activists long before they were councillors. This Council is therefore deeply concerned that the coalition government expects that more and more people will be available to take over the jobs of our highly professional public servants and particularly our youth workers and librarians. This Council requests that the Cabinet write to the Secretary of State for Communities and ask him to rethink the extent to which there is ‘Big Society’ waiting to step into the breach left by this ideological attack on our public services.”
Following debate, the motion was lost by 39 votes to 8.
14/11 MOTION FROM COUNCILLOR CHARLES MATHEW (Agenda Item 15)
Councillor Mathew moved and Councillor Service seconded the following motion:
“In this time of financial uncertainty, with many people requiring more, rather than less help and advice, our voluntary services are becoming essential lifelines to those in need, but unfortunately, they too are struggling for funding.
This Council believes that funding could be raised to support these services through the private sector and, to this end, will write to the MP and to the relevant Government Department suggesting that a compulsory annual charge be made to all financial institutions to fund the voluntary debt advice services to ensue that citizens are able to obtain free financial advice when in need. Such funding would allow this sector to pursue its vital role without constant concern over its funding.”
RESOLVED: (nem con) accordingly.
15/11 MOTION FROM COUNCILLOR JOHN TANNER (Agenda Item 16)
Councillor Tanner moved and Councillor John Sanders seconded the following motion:
“Given the austere financial situation and the importance of getting value for money, this Council asks the Cabinet to reconsider its support for the Cogges Link By-pass. We ask the Cabinet to look again at the cheaper Shores Green alternative, which will not add to flooding risk and is likely to better reduce pollution and congestion in Witney. Council considers that parking restraint and greater priority for bus, cycles and walking are needed to prevent congestion and gridlock in Witney. Council is concerned that spending at least £18 million on the Cogges Link By-pass will divert funds from much needed smaller highways projects elsewhere in Oxfordshire.”
Page 9 CC1
Following debate, the motion was lost by 41 votes to 9.
16/11 MOTIONS FROM COUNCILLOR STEVENS AND ARMITAGE (Agenda Item 17)
The time being 3.40 pm the meeting closed and the motions from Councillors Stevens and Armitage were considered dropped in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 15.1.
in the Chair
Date of signing
Page 10 QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL ANNEX
Questions Answers 1. COUNCILLOR JENNY COUNCILLOR ARASH FA TEMIAN , CABINET MEMBER FOR ADULT SERVICES HANNABY The Government has talked about two separate sums of £1 billion for adult social care. £1 The Cabinet Member will know that an billion was supposed to be added to the personal social services element within the revenue extra £1 billion has been promised by support grant. the Government to local authorities for Social Care over the next two years. Separately the Government also talks about another £1 billion for adult social care which is This support is of significant importance being made available through the NHS. It has been possible to trace this money which is for many vulnerable and disabled additional resources which will help with the financial pressures faced by adult social care. people. Will he ring-fence these extra Details of these resources are set out in the NHS Operating Framework for 2011/12 which funds allocated by the government to was published on 15th December. I have supplied a copy of that document to Cllr Hannaby social care support, thus reducing the and I would be happy to share a copy with any other member who is interested. need to change the eligibility criteria? Page 11 Although this is real money it is not as simple as an extra £1 billion. Paragraph 5.24 of the Operating Framework says that "PCTs will receive allocations totalling £648 million to support social care. Indicative allocations, totalling £622 million, will also be set out for 2012/13. This is in addition to the funding of reablement services that is incorporated within recurrent PCT allocations of £150 million in 2011/12 rising to £300 million from 2012/13." (page 50)
Oxfordshire's share of the £648 million is £6.124m. This will come from three PCTs - the vast majority of it from Oxfordshire PCT but also small contributions from Buckinghamshire and Swindon PCTs. Paragraph 5.25 of the Operating Framework states that "PCTs will need to transfer this funding to local authorities to invest in social care services to benefit health, and to improve overall health gain. Transfers will need to be made via an agreement under Section 256 of the 2006 NHS Act."
Officers have started discussions with Oxfordshire PCT on the possible ways that these additional resources will be spent. Details will be brought forward for formal approval by elected members as part of the budget proposal.
If any additional funding can be identified I am happy to prioritise this for social care support. Questions Answers SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Can I thank the Cabinet Member for his The coalition government is no longer ring-fencing money it is allocating to councils to spend excellent reply. However I am not quite how they wish. As it says in the answer if there is money that can be identified, specific sure whether it is yes or no that he is money that can be identified then I am happy to prioritise that for adult social care, but that is going to ring-fence the extra money that as far as a commitment I am willing to make. is coming into the framework, which I thank you for a copy of which I have received today and I will make sure that I read every page.
2. COUNCILLOR DAVID TURNER COUNCILLOR RODNEY ROSE , CABINET MEMBER FOR TRANSPORT
When will the Administration allow Schemes within the council’s capital programme are prioritised, due to the problems left by the Page 12 agreed measures, such as speed limit last Government, and funding is allocated to the highest priority projects. Clearly with the changes, that have been agreed and on significantly reduced levels of capital funding we have had to review our spending and which considerable time and money unfortunately some projects previously agreed may not be able to go ahead at this point in have already been spent, to be time. implemented? However, I am pleased to say that, on 26 November, the funding for the Speed Review Implementation was taken out of moratorium. The background work is now taking place to put these changes in place, and will soon be seen on the ground.
3. COUNCILLOR JEAN FOOKS COUNCILLOR JIM COUCHMAN , CAB INET MEMBER FOR FINANCE & PROPERTY
Does the Cabinet Member now regret Whilst some of our buildings require more obvious security on account of the vulnerable off-handedly dismissing my concerns customers we support including emergency cash payments, (Knights Court, Cowley, about security in County Hall, and in Foxcombe Court, Abingdon, Samuelson House, Banbury - this County Council has always particular tail-gating, as raised at the taken the view that fortress security is not required at County Hall. It is a multi-purpose Cabinet Meeting in June 2010 and building which is open to members of the public for such events as Citizenship ceremonies, previously at the Members’ Reference Coroner's sittings and those associated with the democratic process. A number of surveys by Group? our insurers have recognised the nature of operations and do not insist on tighter measures. We have nevertheless tightened security here, e.g. closing off the entrance to old County Hall at the rear of the Common Hall Cafe.
Questions Answers Further measures have been installed as a result of the recent invasion by students. Most of the problems caused on that day were not, in fact, attributable to tail-gating at the main entrance. In the light of heightened security concerns more broadly for Oxfordshire, building users have been further reminded of the need for increased vigilance with receiving parcels etc and the need for proper display of identity badges and to challenge tail-gaters.
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
I did wonder whether Councillor I am sorry, I am not sure what she is trying to say. Are you saying that this was a matter for Couchman was in fact aware of the resurrecting with Members Reference Group or the question on tail-gating. The question on concerns raised earlier as I referred to tail-gating you got a straight forward answer in July and I have got that answer in my hands. in my question about the Councillor’s The information which I gave you in July was in fact as a result of speaking with the Senior Reference Group and the need for Hallkeeper and also the Facilities Manager. security into the Members Area on the 1st Floor which was rejected at that Councillor Couchman - Perhaps you could repeat your question. Page 13 point, and I wondered why it has now been introduced. Should it not perhaps have been introduced when it was originally suggested, as it might have saved a certain amount of embarrassment sometime ago?
The question is about the security on the 1 st Floor into the Members Area that was what was raised at the Councillors Reference Group and that was what the concerns was about security in addition to the tailgating issue and that has now been made secure, through the need to use cards to access the Members Area. I wondered why it wasn’t approved when we discussed it sometime ago and it was rejected at that point?
Questions Answers 4. COUNCILLOR ALTAF -KHAN COUNCILLOR MICHAEL WAINE , CABINET MEMBER FOR SCHOOLS IMPROVEMENT
Does the Cabinet Member agree that Whilst we have levels of exceptional performance by many young people in Oxfordshire, there the KS2 and GCSE results, as is no question that we have room for further improvement in the overall attainment of young previously with the KS1 results, in people across Oxfordshire within all age groups. Education colleagues in both schools and Oxfordshire, and particularly in Oxford, across the Local Authority are focussed entirely on this work as you will see from the following are disappointing? What radical detail. measures is he putting in place to ensure improvement and how is he We remain in line with the national averages for Key Stage 1 attainment, though slightly below going to ensure focus? the national average for attainment in writing, which remains the key area of prioritisation across the county. We recognise that this is still not where we would wish to be and that there are particular challenges for us with regard to the diverse population of children in Oxford City, where compared to the rest of the county, we have significantly higher number of children who have English as an additional language, higher levels of mobility, higher levels of pupils with Page 14 special educational needs and a significantly greater number of children able to claim free school meals.
Although the attainment of the pupils in Oxford City is lower than we would wish, in most cases these schools are making at least satisfactory or better progress by the end of Key Stage 1 in relation to the lower academic starting point for these young people. The gap in attainment is in fact narrowing and there are recorded improvements in the Early Years Foundation Stage point scores in 2010 as a direct result of the additional and successful training and improved moderation of teacher assessments which has also become more reliable. This should support much improved attainment for these pupils when they reach the end of Key Stage 1
At Key Stage 2 the pupils attaining Level 4 and above in both English and mathematics has risen to 75% this year, this is the largest increase in 4 years and higher than the national increase. Oxfordshire are ranked joint second against our statistical neighbours for progression by 2 Levels in English and also in mathematics between Key Stages 1 and 2.
Of the 28 primary schools in Oxford City, eight did not administer Key Stage 2 tests in 2010. In the remaining 20 schools, 9 schools improved on their 2009 overall results for Level 4 and above in English and mathematics; 3 achieved at the same level and 8 recorded scores lower than in 2009, though none of these decreases were significant. Overall the city schools have Questions Answers shown improvements in their Key Stage 2 scores over the past two years with some significant gains. There are also fewer schools below the previous national floor target in 2010.
Rose Hill Primary in particular has just recently been identified as the most improved school in England with regard to pupil attainment and progress.
At Key Stage 4 the county's students celebrated their best ever GCSE results and a welcomed trend of improvement reflected through an overall increase of 9% in the last five years for the percentage of students attaining five or more good passes at GCSE including English and mathematics. Though overall attainment in Oxford City remains the lowest in the county, overall students from five out of the six secondary schools in Oxford have made very positive progress from Key Stage 2 to Key Stage 4 when judged by their increase in attainment.
Oxfordshire has improved also in relation to our statistical neighbour ranking at Key Stage 4. We are the 4th most improved Local Authority when set against our statistical neighbours and Page 15 have had our best ranking at KS4 against statistical neighbours since 2007.
The government's recently released education White Paper, ‘The Importance of Teaching’ focuses on increased challenge and support for schools where achievement should be stronger, which is why we are working with schools on different approaches like the Improving Schools Programme at Key Stage 2 and the Class of 2011 initiative at Key Stage 4 and will continue to do so. We are also proactively supporting the government's intentions for alternative models for schools to address improvement where this would benefit young people, such as academies, interim boards, other interventions which are not always popular and not always supported by opposition members. We will carry on our work with schools and I've no doubt that the headteachers in all the city's schools will continue to focus on this too.
I therefore trust that you will agree that whilst we may aspire to further improved outcomes for all young people across Oxfordshire we are not entirely disappointed by the current progress and should value the significant steps already taken by those who support learning across the County.
Questions Answers 5. COUNCILLOR ZOE PATRICK COUNCILLOR KEITH MITCHELL, LEADER OF THE COUNCIL
In the light of making savings, has the No. Leader considered combining the role of Leader and Chief Executive as suggested by the Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP?
6. COUNCILLOR JANET GODDEN COUNCILLOR RODNEY ROSE , CABINET MEMBER FOR TRANSPORT
Could Priority B snow clearance routes The quick answer is NO. Our priority routes are to ensure that food, fuel and emergency be extended, or adjusted if necessary, vehicles are available within a short distance to the 650,000 residents of Oxfordshire. Should to include bus routes in suburban and you wish the routes extended, I would need to know from you which areas of Council other residential areas? This would do expenditure would take further cuts. Page 16 much to help people in essential jobs to get to work, and would keep some cars Oxfordshire County Council has provided an exemplary service to our communities after the off the road at a time when traffic heavy snow of this last week. We are already providing hand salting to shopping areas, health problems are particularly acute. centres, town centres and other public buildings. We have had the workforce out all day and night and under the direction of a duty manager we are attending to ‘hot spots’ not only on priority routes but at other locations as circumstances and resources permit. We have received many compliments from the community who have recognised the extra mile our staff have gone in the most arduous of conditions.
You are aware that firstly we salt and plough our priority routes to keep the national and county road infrastructure available but it would be impossible to maintain the full road network in this way not only due to cost but also resources. They are just not available. We have been encouraging self-help by individuals and communities and are aware of many events in the last week where this has worked well.
We attempt to support main bus routes and work closely with service providers to respond quickly when a route has an identified problem.
We manage all our resources using a duty officer process. They prioritise the resources available on a needs basis to ensure a fair service to all our residents and visitors. We have been really successful in this in recent days, as in previous years. Questions Answers We constantly review our processes and will take note of your comments but with limited funding and resources we will never achieve a 100% route clearance service in severe conditions like this last week. Our focus will always be on priority routes and hot spot attention via our duty officer. Please encourage self-help in your own community as it is often the answer to localised issues. You can report events to our duty officer via e mail [email protected] or phone 08453101111 or via Thames Valley Police.
7. COUNCILLOR ALAN COUNCILLOR MRS J. HEATHCOAT , CABINET MEMBER FOR SAFER & STRONGER ARMITAGE COMMUNITIES
The budget papers reveal that Viridor The funding referred to was provided by Viridor Credits: a not for profit company set up to have donated £80,000 towards the distribute some of the money that Viridor would have paid as Landfill Tax on rubbish it Oxfordshire County Museum (see page disposes of at its landfill sites. This was done through the Landfill Tax Credits Scheme (now 212 of the Cabinet papers). Does the known as the Landfill Communities Fund). Viridor Credits and Viridor are separate, Cabinet Member accept that it may not independent businesses. Page 17 have been a wise decision to accept this money, in view of Viridor's status as The donation to the Oxfordshire Museum was specifically to enable the preservation and company competing in the open market interpretation of the dinosaur footprints found in Ardley Quarry in 2003. At that time Viridor for a very significant contract for waste was managing the quarry as a landfill site. Work associated with extending the landfill site led disposal? to a number of tracks of dinosaur footprints being discovered. These were some 75 million years old, and provided some of the best evidence of these creatures in Britain.
Consideration was given by Viridor to establishing a public education facility at the Quarry, but it was decided that attracting large numbers of children (in particular) to a site with busy access by waste disposal vehicles and other traffic would not be ideal. The Oxfordshire Museum was approached to see whether it would be possible to preserve some of the footprints within the museum grounds - where excellent facilities already exist for children and other visitors. Councillor Neil Fawcett (then spokesperson for Cultural Services) was informed of this opportunity on 11 May 2004 (as well as other interested Councillors).
On 1 November 2004 the then Director for Learning and Culture, Keith Bartley, gave permission for the work to go ahead using the Viridor grant. Legal Services drew up the agreement with Viridor.
The grant from Viridor credits met the cost of lifting several footprints, their storage, Questions Answers transportation and installation in the garden at The Oxfordshire Museum in appropriate housing, together with the construction of a life size model of the dinosaur that made the prints. The grant also provided for the making of a DVD about the discovery and interpretation of the tracks and their preservation. Copies of this were distributed free of charge to all schools in Oxfordshire. In total the Viridor Credit's support for the project amounted to £325,000 including work commissioned directly by themselves.
The dinosaur garden opened on 8 May 2009 and has subsequently proved extremely popular and was awarded a prize by the Royal Horticultural Society. SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTI ON SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Was it actually wise for us effectively to Thank you for the supplementary, Chairman through you. I hear what you say and I will ask limit our own room for manoeuvre by that question, but I do feel that in my answer, I have actually covered that by saying the people accepting money from external bodies? who were funding these were a not for profit company and so that exempts that side of your Page 18 query I believe. I also believe that Viridor credits are independent businesses which again I believe covers your query and I would also say that at the time this decision was made was in 2004 by a Councillor I new very well from the Lib Dems – Neil Fawcett and I am sure that he would also have covered that side very well. I will cover that for you, outside of this meeting and come back to you.
8. COUNCILLOR ALAN COUNCILLOR MRS J. HEATHCOAT, CABINET MEMBER FOR SAFER & STRONGER ARMITAGE COMMUNITIES
Will the Cabinet Member provide a Over the last five years the only corporate sponsors at The Oxfordshire Museum, other than complete list of the corporate sponsors Viridor, have been Henmans (solicitors). This sponsorship was indirect, in that the funding of the Oxfordshire Museum? (£600 per year) was paid to Art in Woodstock, and used specifically to 'hire' the exhibition gallery at The Oxfordshire Museum for the duration of the Art in Woodstock visual art festival.
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER Yes Yes I thank Councillor Heathcoat for the answer to question 8. Would she arrange for that information to go onto the website because at the moment no corporate expenses are mentioned on Questions Answers the website, the information as to who they are the corporate sponsors is not?
9. COUNCILLOR LIZ BRIGHOUSE COUNCILLOR KEITH MITCHELL, LEADER OF THE COUNCIL
This Council has over the years I do not agree because my remarks were directed to those children and sixth formers who invested heavily in encouraging young chose to truant and to trespass at County Hall on 30 November 2010. It was directed to those people in Oxfordshire to have their say children and sixth formers who were rampaging around County Hall outside my office, in the and has sought their views in this lifts and corridors and on the roof of County Hall. It was clear to me from the comments of the chamber and through the Big Debate. It truants that they were politically motivated and supported by the Socialist Workers Party. is therefore disturbing that the Leader of the Council has chosen in a very public I met with their ring leaders on the following Thursday. I cannot pretend there was a meeting way to make derogatory and personal of minds but I was left with one question that was put to me about how young people were statements about young people and able to protest within the law. I sent a lengthy e-mail to my questioner with a number of teachers from Oxfordshire's Secondary suggestions and an offer of support. I was disappointed to receive no response although I Page 19 Schools. It is right that the Council has believe I spotted the faces of the ring leaders on the television at a subsequent “stop the cuts” supported and sought young people’s protest in Westminster. views in the past and it is right that if any individual behaves badly they are I remain concerned that young people in Oxfordshire and across the country are being misled taken to task for it. It is not right that the by left-wing propaganda and are being encouraged to join in activities that only too easily lead Leader of this Council should label all to trespass, violence and illegality. It seems to me that this country is in danger of emulating young people who have protested about continental countries in their unthinking opposition to sound economic policies if this means cuts, which undoubtedly will restrict their any diminution in public spending. I believe we are in danger of creating a generation that access to education, as ‘oiks’, an ‘ugly believes taking to the streets is the automatic response to any proposal which they do not like scruffy rabble’ and has said ‘God help and I will continue to say so. us if this is our future’. For the avoidance of doubt – and I am disappointed that Councillor Lady Brighouse has clearly Does the Leader agree that these never accessed my personal web site – both the Local and Political Blog pages bear the remarks were not helpful in maintaining legends “ The views expressed in this [Local] Blog are mine and do not necessarily a good relationship with our schools and represent County Council policy” and “ The views expressed in this [Political] Blog are their parent and student bodies and will mine and do not necessarily represent County Council policy or Conservative Party he now publicly state that these policy” respectively. As for my Twitter, I think it is very clear to anyone who accesses it that comments were not made in the name this is a personal expression of my activities, interests and views. I hope that being Leader of of or on behalf of this County Council? the Council does not prevent me from expressing personal views in the same way as every other elected member of the Council. Questions Answers SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Yes I do, I am quite saddened by this How many ways can one say No. reply, particular because Oxfordshire is very considerate and it’s inconsiderate and without verifiable substance. I looked at your blog and your Twitter I am asking Councillor Mitchell given that he is the Leader of this Council, given that even though it says in his Blog – which I have looked at – that he is doing it as a personal statement – he also tells us of various posts and positions he holds, so everyone will listen to what he Page 20 has to say. And that the media would not pick up if it were just simply a resident of Adderbury, the comments that he makes. I am sure he would consider making comments that do not cause offence in this Authority. Do you not agree?
10. COUNCILLOR JOHN TANNER COUNCILLOR IAN HUDSPETH , CABINET MEMBER FOR GROWTH & INFRASTRUCTURE Will the Cabinet member reverse the ban on pedestrians from entering the I am sure that Cllr Tanner is aware that between the entrance and the recycling bins there is Redbridge Recycling Centre in Oxford? no pavement or provision for pedestrians making it unsafe for them to on site. I agree that over Given that all users of the centre are the last 13 years of a Labour government there has been a ridiculous amount of Health & pedestrians at some stage as they Safety regulations imposed upon the general public, fortunately the new Coalition government dispose of their recycling and refuse, is taking a more common sense approach however I can not believe Cllr Tanner would wish to does he agree with me that this absurd put members of the public at risk. ban is health and safety gone mad? I must admit I cannot understand why somebody would wish to use a recycling centre on foot as they must live locally and can only carry a limited amount. Obviously it is very disappointing that Oxford City Council are not providing a suitable service for residents, I will write to the Questions Answers executive member to ask why their service is so poor that members of the public are forced to carry recycling goods to the centre.
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Madam Chairman, would the Cabinet As Councillor Tanner is aware there are proposals to redevelop Redbridge, so I think at the Member agree that the Redbridge moment to actually put pedestrian facilities in there would be wasting Council money but I Recycling Centre is in my division and come back to the point that I am making. At this stage I congratulate the City Council for their for many years it has been the most excellent recycling rate but I do wonder why people walk to a recycling centre when they natural thing in the world for people to should have a very good recycling service provided by the City Council and I will be writing to walk from those parts of that division to the Executive Member asking why the City Council aren’t providing that facility and people take their rubbish and recycling to have to walk all that way with a limited amount of carrying goods. Redbridge and would he despite his answer take the opportunity to ask officers to review whether in fact there is Page 21 any real danger giving as far as I understand it there have been no pedestrian accidents throughout the lifetime of this facility?
11. COUN CILLOR JOHN TANNER COUNCILLOR KEITH MITCHELL, LEADER OF THE COUNCIL
Does the Leader of the Council agree I do not recognise Eric Pickles’ figure of 1.87% reduction in “spending power”. with the Coalition Government that the cut to the County Council’s budget is It is clear to me that the County Council faces spending reductions of £58 million in 2011/12 only 1.87% for 2011/12 and that only and it is clearly not possible to make this level of cuts without reductions in front line services. ‘lazy’ councils will have to make cuts in However, it is important to understand that these cuts in public spending are necessary to services? Or does he agree with the eliminate the structural imbalance that has existed in the national budget in every year since people of Oxfordshire that the cuts 2001. To pretend that the cause was the banking crisis of 2008 and the recession that imposed by the Government on our followed is a nonsense. This country was spending more than it collected in taxes in every county are swingeing and will damage year since 2001 and was ill prepared to deal with the financial crisis of 2008 which increased everything from youth clubs, libraries government spending and the subsequent recession which reduced tax revenues. and road repairs to care for the elderly, children’s centres and recycling? We are about to pay the price for 10 years of Gordon Brown’s profligacy with the public finances. Questions Answers SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Thank you madam Chairman, will The damage is in a number of front line services and as a direct consequence of the Brown Councillor Mitchell accept my thanks for government which has overspent since 2001. I hope all the people of Oxfordshire understand his reply and would he now reply to the that and remember it. second part of it – which says does he agree with people of Oxfordshire that the cuts imposed by the Government on our County are swingeing and will damage everything from youth clubs, libraries and road repairs to care for the elderly, children’s centres and recycling? Would he be kind enough to answer that part as well. Page 22 12. COUNCILLOR JOHN TANNER COUNCILLOR RODNEY ROSE , C ABINET MEMBER FOR TRANSPORT
Does the Cabinet member agree that Iffley Road in Oxford is one of our highest priority roads for maintenance work and is the Iffley Road in Oxford is one of the programmed for work to start next year. The funding position that we have been left with from worst maintained main roads in the the last government has presented a real challenge for us in affording to carry out such works. county? What steps does he intend to However this scheme is a very high priority and despite a cost of around £2.5 million it will be take to repair, rebuild and redesign Iffley going ahead. Road for the benefit of local residents and commuters alike? When will these steps be taken?
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPP LEMENTARY ANSWER
Madam Chairman, would the Cabinet member accept my thanks for his intention to make significant repairs to the Iffley Road – I am most grateful.
Questions Answers 13. COUNCILLOR SUSANNA COUNCILLOR KEITH MITCHELL, LEADER OF THE COUNCIL PRESSEL I assume Cllr Mrs Pressel has retained her copy of the Conservative Manifesto from the 2010 Councillor Mitchell told Council at our General Election so will refer her to the relevant paragraphs: last meeting on 2 November that there is "a manifesto commitment" to make It might be worth reading the section on pages 45 & 46 of the Conservative manifesto in full radical changes to the NHS. Can he but I have taken out a couple of the most important paragraphs here. The manifesto clearly set either show us where in the manifesto out the government’s NHS reform agenda in general terms: this commitment is to be found or apologize for his attempt to mislead Q ‘We have a reform plan to make the changes the NHS needs. We will decentralise Council? power, so that patients have a real choice. We will make doctors and nurses accountable to patients, not to endless layers of bureaucracy and management. We can’t go on with an NHS that puts targets before patients’ (Conservative Party, General Election Manifesto 2010 , p. 45).
Page 23 The manifesto was also very specific on moving towards commissioning by GPs:
Q ‘We will strengthen the power of GPs as patients’ expert guides through the health system by: o giving them the power to hold patients’ budgets and commission care on their behalf; o linking their pay to the quality of their results; and, o putting them in charge of commissioning local health services’ (Conservative Party, General Election Manifesto 2010 , p. 46).
It is also worth pointing out that, as we are in coalition, we have also adopted some Liberal manifesto commitments (I am assuming Cllr Mrs Pressel has retained her copy of this?). This includes abolishing Strategic Health Authorities and phasing out Primary Care Trusts:
Q ‘We will... scrap Strategic Health Authorities’ (Liberal Democrat Party, General Election Manifesto 2010 , p. 41) Q ‘Local Health Boards... will take over the role of Primary Care Trust boards in commissioning care for local people, working in co-operation with local councils’ (Liberal Democrat Party, General Election Manifesto 2010 , p. 43).
Questions Answers SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Does Councillor Mitchell share my Well it always fascinates me that the largest part of the NHS are general practitioners. Since bewilderment at the way the manifesto the day it was invented by Bevan it has been run by business men and women who happen to contradicts the assurance from Andrew be medically qualified running private practices for profit and it has worked very well. So I Lionsley shortly before the election that actually tend to believe that GP’s running health services and commissioning based services and I quote “there will be no more top are very likely to make a better job of it in caring for their patients than the bureaucracies like down reorganisations of the NHS” and primary care trusts. So I don’t think I agree with Councillor Pressel. does he agree that it will be insane to go ahead with current proposals on the grounds that they cause confusion and delay will cost at least £3b, it is unrated by almost everyone and in February it will mean the end of the NHS as a not- Page 24 for-profit universal public service and if he doesn’t agree why not?
14. CO UNCILLOR SUSANNA COUNCILLOR MICHAEL WAINE , CABINET ME MBER FOR SCHOOLS IMPROVEMENT PRESSEL “Local Government control” is an interesting concept in 2011, over recent years Local Does the Cabinet Member agree with Authorities (LAs) have been held ultimately accountable for their schools, set alongside fully the ConDem government's view that self-managing and self-directing schools. Too often when schools are successful it is mostly schools need to be ‘freed from local seen to be as a result of their own efforts, and when they are not it is the fault of the LA. government control’? Clarity of the LA’s role and the responsibilities of schools is overdue! Our Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister in their introduction to “the Schools White Paper 2010” state:
“In this country we have seen the success over the past two decades of the City Technology Colleges (CTCs) and then the Academies programme. CTCs and former CTCs are now some of the best schools in the country and children on free school meals who attend them do twice as well as the national average. Academies improved at GCSE level twice as fast as other schools in 2008 and 2009. This week’s Ofsted Annual Report confirms their success – explaining that their freedoms allow them to innovate and ‘ensure that educationalists can concentrate on education’.
Questions Answers This White Paper, for the first time, offers these freedoms to all schools in a way that encourages them to work with each other to improve. Our best schools will be able to convert directly to Academy status but will have to work with less successful schools to help them improve. Other schools will be able to become Academies by joining federations or chains. Teachers, parents and charities will be able to open new schools where there is a clear demand for something not offered at the moment. All schools, whether they choose to become Academies or not, will see a massive reduction in the bureaucracy foisted on them in recent years.
As the best education systems have shown, this power shift to the front line needs to be accompanied by a streamlined and effective accountability system. So we propose to re-focus Ofsted inspections on their original purpose – teaching and learning – and strengthen the performance measures we use to hold schools accountable .”
The direction of travel will be one of schools as autonomous institutions collaborating with Page 25 each other in terms set by teachers not bureaucrats. Schools themselves will have the primary responsibility for improvement and achievement.
LAs will be expected to use publicly available data to hold schools to account for the attainment of students including their year on year improvements for all groups of students. They will have clear intervention powers, new roles in commissioning and a continuing role in supporting vulnerable children.
Tweaking things at the margins is not an option, reforms are absolutely essential if all children are to get the education they deserve. There has to be change.
We have always taken our role as strategic champion for children and young people seriously and WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO!
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Councillor Waine says that he is a I am doing none of those things, they are not in my portfolio and the Council have yet to make strategic champion for young people – a decision on all those matters. In terms of where I stand on this. I stand for the commutative how can he possible make that claim schools who have been self managing since 1989 and wish to take this mature step. when he is devastating our youth Questions Answers service, closing our libraries and this government is trebling university fees and removing the educational maintenance allowance. Is that not hypocrisy?
15. COUNCILLOR SUSANNA COUNCILLOR KEITH MITCHELL , LEADER OF THE COUNCIL PRESSEL Councillor Pressel has already posed an almost identical but rhetorical question in the local If the Tory administration is making media and I have replied to it in the same newspaper. I think I can do little better than to these cuts with deep regret, as you repeat what I said in that reply: claim, can we assume that when the global recession ends and the deficit is In response to Councillor Mrs Pressel's letter ( Oxford Mail 17 December) concerning public eliminated, the cuts will be reversed? spending cuts, she needs to understand that the real test of local politicians will happen much Page 26 sooner than she clearly expects. If we are to see libraries and youth clubs survive and return at a future time to local council funding, it will have been through the efforts of local councillors and others acting as social entrepreneurs in helping local communities retain the local services they value most and that councils can no longer afford by encouraging volunteering, local fund raising and innovative approaches to service delivery. In short this means the Big Society. I suspect the electorate will see through those councillors who spend their time creating smoke screens in a vain attempt to hide Labour's contribution to the financial mess in which we find ourselves. It is, after all, how all Labour governments end - broke and in tears.
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Yes I do have a supplementary – this is I don’t have the psychic ability to foresee when the current financial mess will be sorted and a typically verbose and patronising reply which government will be in charge then, nor do I expect to advice that Government and in a it is also illogical. Since the cuts could position to influence their policy as to whether the present financial regime is reversed and the be reversed even if the volunteers don’t cuts that have been made are reinstated or not. I am much more concerned with now than 5 manage to raise thousand of pounds a or 10 years time and if the communities rally round to support things they value like libraries or year to keep services open – please youth work and that the Big Society does work so that the foundation, the fabric of those could I have a reply to my original valued elements of public service are there if the money comes back all well and good, if it question, yes or no? Then could I have doesn’t the community will have at least what it values in those places where it is a supplementary question once I get a demonstrated like that. Now is the issue not in 5 years time Councillor Pressel. reply please. Questions Answers
Chairman – No
16. COUNCILLOR SUSANNA COUNCILLOR KEITH MITCHELL, LEADER OF THE COUNCIL PRESSEL Councillor Mrs Pressel was present at the last Cabinet meeting and, had she taken an interest Please could Councillor Mitchell tell us if in the contents of the meeting instead of grandstanding for the media, she would be aware Councillor Fatemian is still the "cycling that Councillor Fatemian is still the County Council Cycling Champion and provided a full champion"? If so, please can he tell us update on his recent activities in the role. what tangible achievements he can point to in the past 6 months to The present economic climate that is the legacy of 13 years of Labour Government has left encourage people to leave their cars at this country almost one trillion pounds in debt. For this reason, the prioritisation of funds within home and switch to their bikes? this area is directed at keeping the current road network in a condition that enables car and cycle users to travel effectively between destinations.
Page 27 It is important to remember that many cyclists use our road network right across the County. From the bubble that is County Hall, the view can sometimes focus too much on cycling provision within the City. As someone who regularly cycles all over the county, both in a rural and urban setting, the cycling champion is only too keen to see further effective provision for cyclists and, when the Coalition has managed to put the national economy back on track, we will return to funding more specialist areas like cycling.
That said, the upcoming Transport Plan, LTP3, is the most important document for transport and cycling within the County because it will set the agenda for the next twenty years. I am aware that the cycling champion has been working closely with officers to ensure a cycling perspective is included. In particular, I can point to the current tangible achievements in the draft of the plan which is out to consultation. In the Transport Objectives, ‘Develop and increase cycling and walking for local journeys, recreation and health’ has a high priority for Oxford, Larger Towns, Smaller Towns, and Rural Oxfordshire and I draw the councils’ attention to Chapter 21, entitled Cycling and Walking.
Councillor Fatemian also took part in a BBC Oxford TV and Radio series over the summer to discuss the cycling infrastructure within the county and to encourage more people to take up cycling.
Questions Answers SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Councillor Mitchell seems not to No. understand the meaning of the word tangible. Would he agree that there are in fact no concrete achievements to quote to, that is what tangible means, and if he wouldn’t agree with this why not?
17. COUNCILLOR SUSANNA COUNCILLOR KEITH MITCHELL, LEADER OF THE COUNCIL PRESSEL I do not have any specific information on this but am sure the trade press and the LGA will be Can the Leader tell us how the a source of information and comment. In any case, am not sure how one would define a Page 28 spending cuts in Oxon compare with “poor” area. Some councils have been huge recipients of the last government’s largesse for a other local authorities and can he long time in terms of revenue support grant, specific grants and other forms of funding. confirm whether or not it's the case that poorer areas are being hit harder than As I have said in an earlier answer, it is important to understand that these cuts in public richer ones? spending are necessary to eliminate the structural imbalance that has existed in the national budget in every year since 2001. To pretend that the cause was the banking crisis of 2008 and the recession that followed is nonsense. This country was spending more than it collected in taxes in every year since 2001 and was ill prepared to deal with the financial crisis of 2008 which increased government spending and the subsequent recession which reduced tax revenues.
We are about to pay the price for 10 years of Gordon Brown’s profligacy with the public finances. All parts of the country are going to have to pay that price but I am not aware that spending cuts have been targeted to areas of particular poverty. It does seem that plenty of councils generally seen as representing more affluent parts of the country are making draconian cuts. For example, the following are looking at ceasing to fund/closing significant numbers of libraries: Gloucestershire, Somerset, Dorset, Leeds, North Yorkshire and Buckinghamshire as well as Oxfordshire so I think the accusation is untrue.
Questions Answers SUPPLEMENTARY QUES TION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Yet another answer full of pomposity Chairman a number of Councils have undoubtedly been at a very high level of Government and irrelevance, and I am shocked that support for a very long time, and that strategy doesn’t seem to have done anything to improve he doesn’t know the facts. Will the economic position of those various communities or the people who live in them. So I am Councillor Mitchell accept that analysis entirely surprised, if that is correct, and if Council’s had been in receipt of huge amounts of by the House of Commons Library subsidy from Central Government are seeing a reduction but then so are we all. I am not in a shows that the most deprived 10% of position to comment on the relativities and I will wait until I have seen such evidence and able single tier authorities will see their to assess it before I give an answer to a question like that. spending power reduced by 8.4% next year compared with 2.2% and does he agree that this is scandalous and if he doesn’t then why doesn’t he?
18. COUNCILLOR RICHARD COUNCILLOR DAVID ROBERTSON , DEPUTY LEADER OF THE COUNCIL Page 29 STEVENS The recent reorganisation in the Chief Executive's Office has incurred redundancy costs of Will the Deputy Leader please confirm £123,018.78. This relates to the removal of three senior posts from 31 December 2010. As how much the redundancy payments Councillor Stevens will no doubt be aware we are currently looking to appoint a Head of are as a result of the reorganisation of Strategy and Communications and we hope to have someone in post when the Assistant the Chief Executive’s Office? Chief Executive (Strategy) leaves the Council in March 2011.
19. COUNCILLOR SUSANNA COUNCILLOR MRS J. HEATHCOAT , CABINET MEMBER FOR SAFER & STRONGER PRESSEL COMMUNITIES
If community groups take over a library, If a community group were to take on the running of a local library facility, I would not expect does Cllr Heathcoat expect them to be them to charge for the service, however, the decision to charge or not would be entirely a able to offer a free service and if not, matter for the local group. how much would she expect charges to be?
Questions Answers SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Yes, my supplementary question is – if Chairman, that question is one that the Communities need to reflect on. There is research the running costs which would be being done on our prices within the County Council and may be local groups can look at areas thousands of pounds a year are not within their own divisions where they could perhaps move a library to. For example if you found from charges, where does have a school you could perhaps move a library into it a school. A youth centre could perhaps Councillor Heathcoat think that they will be moved. So it is actually making multi use of a building so that financially the costs that you come from? are mentioning in your question wouldn’t actually occur.
20. COUNCILLOR SUSANNA COUNCILLOR LOUISE CHAPMAN, CABINET MEMBER FOR CHILDREN, YOUNG PRESSEL PEOPLE & FAMILIES
HM Revenue and Customs estimates National Indicator (116) for those under 20 years old living in families in receipt of out of work that 23% of children in Oxford were benefits, or in receipt of tax credits where their reported income is less than 60% median Page 30 living in poverty in 2008. This is higher income . than the national average, which is 21%. Can Councillor Mitchell explain The England average for 2008 was 20.8%, for Oxfordshire this percentage was 11.7%. Our why he allowed this to happen in a child poverty ranking is in the lowest 25% of all local authorities in England. relatively prosperous county like Oxfordshire? Nonetheless we have been committed to tackling those areas of the County that have higher levels of deprivation, Oxford and Banbury are two of those areas. Our corporate plan includes a cross cutting long term strategic objective of Breaking the Cycle of Deprivation. This cross cutting strategic objective is tied to each of our strategic objectives, achieving a World Class Economy, Healthy and Thriving Communities, protecting the environment and tackling climate change and securing better public services. We have worked and will continue to work with all of our partners, local businesses and our District Council colleagues to address the challenges and secure these objectives. I am delighted that we have secured for Oxfordshire a new Local Economic Partnership to work with businesses assisting more of our residents, particularly those who have found it difficult to get into a job, gain key skills and employment within the county.
Our Medium Term Financial Plan is key to securing these objectives and all Directorates have their part to play in addressing the cross cutting Breaking the Cycle of Deprivation objective through their business strategies. For example our Children, Young People and Families directorate’s draft business strategy has identified actions to support and “secure for the Questions Answers poorest and most vulnerable in society, the ability to improve their outcomes by effectively targeting resources to those most in need”, this work has been on-going and we have seen a wide range of initiatives and improvements:
• A rise in the take up of child care element of working tax credits by over 210, a rise that is above the national take-up, with corresponding rises in the achievement of children in their early years, since 2006 there has been a year on year rise in our early years foundation stage achievement with latest figures showing improvement above both statistical and national average • A drop in the numbers of young people not in education, training or employment. Over the last twelve months there have been significant improvements across the county for reducing 16-18 year olds Not in Employment Education or Training (NEET). Oxfordshire is now better than national average and above average for statistical neighbours between November 2009 and November 2010 Banbury reduced from 454 to 391 and City area from 330 to 324 against a rise nationally Page 31 • Our Family Intervention project; working with 60 families with multiple problems is already showing improvements emerging in terms of reducing offending, getting long term unemployed into work and children improved attendance at school • Neighbourhood Crime - improvements in neighbourhood policing and pre-court prevention work led by the youth offending team have contributed to all crime falling between 08-09 and 09-10 in Blackbird Leys by 5.5%, Barton by 10.5% and Rosehill by 27.7%. • Education-improvements in Early Years Foundation Stage Profile (EYFSP). Our work has contributed to an increase in children’s attainment, in the City, by 12% in 2010. In addition the gap between the median achievement of children and bottom 20% narrowed by 1.9%. Oxfordshire’s EYFSP attainment increased by 7.6% and the gap narrowed by 1.4%. • Oxford School and Oxford Academy are now above floor targets - no city school is below floor targets • During the last 12 months, Family Learning has delivered a wide range of courses throughout Oxford City, covering such things as literacy, numeracy, and financial capability, all of which are aimed at improving the economic and social wellbeing of vulnerable and at risk families, and families with few or no formal qualifications. 80% of these courses are offering national accreditation to the learners in either literacy, numeracy or ESOL (English for speakers of other languages). The National Curriculum for Adults is followed and work is done in partnership with Children’s Centres, schools and other relevant agencies to meet identified needs amongst vulnerable families. Questions Answers • Early Years services working with children's centres in Oxford City are providing more focussed support to disadvantaged families with very young children through the funding of disadvantaged 2 year olds, and programmes such as Every Child a Talker, PEEP early language and parenting programmes. • Feedback from recent Ofsted inspections of children's centres has highlighted the improvement in outcomes for children which will also lead to improvements in learning in later life plus improvements in outcomes for parents learning and employment which are levers out of poverty. For example, a recent Ofsted inspection of Cuddesdon Corner Children's Centre (July 2010) noted that: “ Courses available are valued by parents. They give them confidence, help them with parenting skills, supporting their children’s learning and prepare them for the world of work. Users are gaining recognised qualifications ….A proportion of users act as volunteers in the centre and many go on to further education or employment ”
Page 32 Oxfordshire was a pilot authority for the Primary “Extra Mile” Project which asked four of our schools to focus on a group of children in receipt of free school meals who were at risk of underperforming and to try a range of approaches to raise their attainment. All four schools reported high levels of success in raised academic attainment, attitudes to learning, self confidence and family engagement.
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Does Councillor Chapman agree with I think after 13 years of a labour government they need to take some responsibility me that it is scandalous that Oxfordshire themselves. I have to say to you in Oxfordshire, if Councillor Pressel bothers to read the has large areas of dire poverty and Business Strategy for our directorate she will see that we are prioritising those children who does she recognise that the national are in poverty. local cuts will increase child poverty and if not why not?
21. COUNCILLOR LARRY COUNCILLOR ARASH FATEMIAN, CABINET MEMBER FOR ADULT SERVICES SANDERS As Councillor Sanders is aware we have been working very hard with colleagues in the NHS How many delayed transfers of care to try to limit the number of delays. Details were set out in the report to Adult Services occurred in the most recent available Scrutiny Committee on 26th October 2010. Delays have risen this year due to increasing period? demands for social care. We have had to manage the available resources to prioritise the most urgent and needy cases. Although delays have risen this year, they are still below the Questions Answers level of delays in 2007/8.
The most recent figure is that for the week before Christmas which showed that 131 people were currently delayed. This was an improvement on the position reported to Scrutiny Committee in October. In addition, the winter months tend to show relatively high number of delays as pressures increase on the hospital system.
One week's figures are not the key measure because the numbers will fluctuate from one week to the next. The average number of delays up until the end of November (the latest figures we have) was 119 which place us as 146th out of the 151 local authorities. We are committed to improving our relative position. This is not just an issue about resources; it is also about looking at how older people can avoid having to be admitted into hospital beds and about changing the culture of all the professionals involved in the process. The report to the Adult Services Scrutiny Committee explained our approach. However, many of those changes will take time to have an impact on the figures. Page 33 As I have already explained, reducing delays is not simply about resources so it is not possible to answer the third part of Cllr Sanders' question.
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
My chief concern with the answer is that Thank you Chairman, I think there are a lot of things in place, I think the point is that I have I asked what the plans are for bringing said it isn’t a problem that is solved by throwing more and more money at it, as Councillor Oxfordshire into some kind of decent Sanders seems to be indicating. We need to come up with new ways of approaching it and position with regard to these delay different ways of thinking. One example of that is the whole systems pilot taking place in transfers. As 146th out of 151 it is not Abingdon, which has led to positive results for which Councillor Sanders was aware, there was really something we can be proud of. I an update of that at the last scrutiny committee meeting. I look forward to bringing detailed know a lot of work has gone into it but it plans on our proposals to reduce delay in transfers in care and in fact the effect they are is not yet proved to be successful, and I having to further scrutiny meetings about our services where they can receive the due care really think that we need to know for the and attention that they need and under detailed scrutiny rather than 5 minutes before Council sake of the people who are suffering Chairman. through this just what the plans are and what kind of timetable there is for getting into a better position?
Questions Answers 22. COUNCILLOR LARRY COUNCILLOR ARASH FATEMIAN, CABINET MEMBER FOR ADUL T SERVICES SANDERS See above. In a national table where would Oxfordshire be placed with regard to the proportion of delayed transfers?
23. COUNCILLOR LARRY COUNCILLOR ARASH FATEMIAN, CABINET MEMBER FOR ADULT SERVICES SANDERS See above. What are the plans for bringing Oxfordshire to the upper quartile of delayed transfers?
Page 34 (a) How much would it cost the County Council and how much Oxfordshire NHS to reach this point?
(b) How long would it take?
24. COUNCILLOR LARRY COUNCILLOR ARASH FATEMIAN, CABINET MEMBER FOR ADULT SERVICES SANDERS See above. Is it the intention of the County Council to improve its record of delays in transfers of care? What are its targets?
25. COUNCILLOR LARRY COUNCILLOR KEITH MITCHELL, LEADER OF THE COUNCIL SANDERS Given the gravity of the national economic and financial position and the priorities given by the There has been much discussion in coalition government to health, international aid, defence and schools spending, I suspect Local Government circles of asking the there is very little room for manoeuvre without undoing the good work done by the coalition in Government to reduce the degree of securing the UKs’ credit rating in international markets. The LGA has asked the coalition front-loading in its reduction of funding government to review the front loading of cuts for local government and I think our energies in Questions Answers for Local Authorities? What are Oxfordshire are better directed to briefing our six MPs on the implications for our services of Councillor Mitchell’s views on this the Provisional Local Government Settlement. We have been doing this and will continue to attempt? Would he recommend that the do so. Cabinet make such a request?
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Yes, thank you for your answer I think we probably differ on how to do that, I had a quiet drink with David Cameron last night Councillor Mitchell, I still wonder if you at Number 10 and he does have very clear idea of what the cuts mean for us. I had a slightly wouldn’t agree that it would be better if more interesting word with Eric Pickles about his maths in the same location. We did not the County Council through it’s elected exactly have a meeting of minds but he understands were that we are facing difficulties here, Leader was actually speaking up for the and I have been speaking with Greg Clark and with Bob Neal junior minister in CLG regularly. people of Oxfordshire? They know what we are facing and what Councils are generally face. I sometimes think a quiet word with friends in difficult circumstances is better than shouting from the rooftops.
Page 35 26. COUNCILLOR ROY DARKE COUNCILLOR KEITH MITCHELL, LEADER OF THE COUNC IL
Given that Eric Pickles announced Cllr Tanner has asked a similar question and I would refer Cllr Darke to my answer to him. It clearly in mid-December that Local would be helpful if Group members could coordinate their questions to avoid unnecessary Government was only getting a duplication. reduction in spending power of 1.89%, why is Oxfordshire County Council making massive cuts to libraries, youth service and dangerous and untried changes to adult social care up to near 20% overall reduction in budget next year when the Secretary of State has also said that Local Government only needs to make changes to back office functions and introduce shared services in order to cover this shortfall?
Questions Answers SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Madam Chairman I am having difficulty You and Councillor Tanner seem to be a tiny bit apart – he was 1.87% and you are 1.89% it is because Councillor Mitchell’s response a minor detail I did mention it specifically to Eric and I said I didn’t understand it. I got a grant says that I should look at his response is the answer. to Councillor Tanner but he doesn’t respond to Councillor Tanner because I Cllr Darke – that is power for the course I am sure. don’t understand the term total local spending power. In his quiet word with Eric Pickles last night and his talk about mathematics did that include the statement by the Secretary of State that total local spending power had actually only gone down by only 1.89% and did Page 36 you get any resolution to that discussion?
27. COU NCILLOR JOHN TANNER COUNCILLOR IAN HUDSPETH, CABINET MEMBER FOR GROWTH & INFRASTRUCTURE Has the County Council now signed the contract with Viridor for an incinerator at No the contract has not yet been signed. A redacted copy will be posted on the council Ardley? Will he publish the full details of website once completed. I would ask Cllr Tanner does he consider rubbish from Oxford City the contract? Does he agree that there other people’s rubbish. It must not be forgotten that due to the fact that the City does not have is a real risk of Oxfordshire, and the any disposal facilities within its boundaries then it is currently sending its rubbish to Ardley so Bicester area in particular, becoming a there will be no change to the existing arrangement. Therefore the answer to Cllr Tanner’s rubbish dump for other people’s question is no. rubbish?”
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Thank you madam chairman, will First of all, the planning decision says that we can take waste form consumerists on the Councillor Hudspeth accept my thanks boundaries and that is the planning decision, that is not for me to be able to alter in any way, for his willingness to publish the so I can’t say anything there. As regards when the contract is being signed – we have been in contract. Could he say when he thinks the process of signing the contract for several months, there is detailed negotiations that are the contract will be signed and is he of going on. We want to ensure that the negotiations are to our advantage to make sure we get Questions Answers the commitment that the Viridor the best detail possible for the residents of Oxfordshire. So we should be signing soon, but I incinerator will take not refuse rubbish don’t want to give any commitment to that because I made exactly the same statement back in from outside the County? September.
28. COUNCILLOR JOHN SANDERS COUNCILLOR RODNEY ROSE, CABINET MEMBER FOR TRANSPORT I would first like to praise all the team in the Highways & Transport Department who worked In the light of the traffic chaos caused throughout the weekend of 18 and 19 December and up until Christmas when they worked by the recent cold weather, will the beyond their normal hours to get the network salted. All our priority routes were cleared within Leader tell us what the Council has hours and were treated throughout the whole period for any ice. The majority of problems done to ensure that roads and footways occurred on the Highways Agency routes and we have been discussing with them how around the County are clear of snow improvements can be made. and ice? Will he also explain the contingency plans put in place to ensure Unfortunately the salt only works to minus 5 and in Oxfordshire the temperature fell to minus that our elderly and vulnerable 12 in places at times so the salt may be considered as not effective until the temperature rose. population have access to services It would be unrealistic for all 2,825 miles of road and 3,415 miles of pavement to be clear Page 37 during such difficult times? therefore we have to prioritize what areas are done on the basis of large volumes of traffic, vital access for rural communities, known problem sites, main bus routes providing access to hospitals and fire stations. This totals approx 1230 miles, representing 43% of the network.
Social & Community Services (SCS) - Out of Hours and Business Continuity
Given the vulnerability of some clients in these weather conditions it was even more important that the SCS Out of Hours Service and Emergency Duty Teams were fully supported and they ensured that all key services provided centrally co-ordinated status reports via the Major Incident Reporting System (MIRS) as well as regular teleconferences between all Council Services and daily with our partners in Health. The Duty Executive from the Directorate's Leadership Team made contact with these teams on a regular basis to ensure they had enough support as well as gauging for themselves whether resources on the ground were sufficient.
A regular report was circulated to a "Weather Group" of key service managers and the senior management team within Social and Community Services, informing them of the situation as well as ensuring that all key services were being provided or had mitigation plans in place.
Questions Answers Prior to the recent adverse weather SCS had been in contact with all internal services as well as external providers to ensure that they had adequate business continuity plans in place. Earlier in the year they had been part of the resilience plans submitted to the Strategic Health Authority by the PCT and had also run a number of desktop exercises to ensure that systems resilience mechanisms were in place and working.
Access and Transport
One of the key issues with the snow was getting access to all areas - and following the first fall of snow colleagues in Fire and Rescue acting on SCS behalf and in co-ordination with Emergency Planning rapidly set up a "Snow Cell" to co-ordinate the use of the internal 4 x 4 capability and any other community transport organisations that we had access to. This was shared both internally with Children Young People and Families as well as with all our Health partners. Our drivers from the Integrated Transport Unit worked throughout the holiday period Page 38 including Christmas Day to ensure that help was at hand.
Following the initial period a sustainable solution was found using the Integrated Transport Unit allowing them to carry on the co-ordination of all transport, making best use of their drivers as well as providing a minimum 4 x 4 cover during extended hours, supporting carers.
Due to SCS’ close ties with Health we were also able to pass on messages from these organisations to key council services providing road and access clearance regarding the main hospital sites as well as arranging transport for those who wished to go home from hospital and had limited choice because of the weather. SCS also publicised to all organisations and internally their Oxfordshire Travel Advice and Information Line (OXTAIL) which has access to many community organisations providing transport across the county.
During the whole of the period SCS internal day service provision was kept open during normal working days for people should they need it, providing outreach facilities to those who could not make it into the various centres as well as contacting customers to ensure that they were coping with the weather?
Questions Answers Prioritisation of Clients
As part of the recording of clients on the SCS Social Care system (SWIFT) we categorise clients into levels of need and an assessment of what other support they can call on e.g. neighbours, friends, family and other carers. Using this prioritisation system SCS then targeted resources to ensure that clients with the highest priorities were being seen by themselves or their external providers whilst contacting the carers of those in the lowest priority levels to make sure they could cope.
As SCS have an electronic time monitoring system which monitors every home visit they were able to run reports on a daily basis to check whether all clients in the top categories were actually being visited and receiving services.
Supporting all who were in need of support, not necessarily our clients
Page 39 Throughout the period SCS were keen to work closely with the Council's Communications team not only to ensure that the external website was up to date in terms of services available but also giving a number of interviews on BBC Oxford which both gave status reports of how services were coping with the weather as well as providing advice and support to communities, encouraging them to ensure through various means that the most vulnerable of their members were being looked after.
During the last few weeks SCS have been in contact with Parishes (they now have a comprehensive database of key Social Care contacts for Parish and Town Councils) ensuring that they could communicate key messages as to how people could cope best with cold weather as well as using these contacts as a point of supporting local communities and people who were isolated because of the weather.
SUPPLEM ENTARY QUESTION SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER
Thank you Chairman, I thank Councillor Thank you Chairman, through you I would like to inform this Council that I have every intention Rose for his helpful and detailed of increasing the amount of network with salt and number of grit bins and anything else in that answer. Given that we are likely to direction. My regret is that we need to help the Government to pay back the trillion pounds have more severe winters and given first. that the County is unable to afford to Questions Answers clear most roads and all footways, will he increase the number of salt and grit bins throughout the County so that Communities are more able to help themselves?
Page 40 Agenda Item 7
Division(s): N/A
COUNCIL – 15 FEBRUARY 2011
CORPORATE PLAN 2011/12 – 2015/16
Report by Assistant Chief Executive (Strategy)
Introduction
1. The Council's proposed Medium Term Corporate Plan 2011/2012-2015/16 is one of the plans and strategies that forms the policy framework and requires full Council approval. The Strategy and Partnerships Scrutiny Committee submitted comments to the Cabinet, who approved the draft on 25 January 2011.
Background
2. The Corporate Plan is split into two parts – the first summarises the Council's broad strategic direction and the second sets our short and medium term delivery commitments.
3. The emphasis in the plan is very much on the challenges we face responding to the financial pressures and transforming the organisation. It has been drafted with strong links to the directorate business strategies, and will be updated to reflect any amendments to our proposals (as a result of consultation for example).
4. Each priority in the Delivery Plan is supported by measures, against which we will report progress. In many cases the plan signposts to existing strategies/delivery plans to ensure there is a strong link from our top level objectives through to service delivery.
5. A summary of the key elements of the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) will also be included and the MTFP will form an annex to the plan.
6. The Corporate Plan will be supported by a refreshed version of ‘This is Oxfordshire’, the evidence base of research, data and perception information produced by the Oxfordshire Data Observatory.
RECOMMENDATION
7. The Cabinet RECOMMENDS Council to approve the Corporate Plan 2011/12-2015/16 subject to the inclusion of consequential and editorial changes in the text as agreed by the Chief Executive after consultation with the Leader of the Council.
Page 41 STEPHEN CAPALDI Assistant Chief Executive (Strategy)
Background Papers: Nil Contact Officer: Ben Threadgold, Senior Policy Officer, 01865 328219)
31 January 2011
Page 42
Oxfordshire County Council
Corporate Plan
2011/12 – 2015/16
Page 43 Foreword
From Leader / Chief Executive – to be added prior to publication
About Oxfordshire
Oxfordshire is home to around 640,000 people. The number of people living in Oxfordshire has increased rapidly in recent years and is forecast to continue, but it remains the least densely populated county in the South East region.
The county has tremendous assets which make Oxfordshire a place that people like to live and work in, including: good links to other parts of the country; a successful economy built around the universities and related high tech industries and businesses; a high quality built and natural environment; and a population that is healthier and more prosperous than virtually any other county in the UK.
However challenges remain: • More than 30% of the county’s workforce is currently employed in the public sector, making us particularly vulnerable to the impact of budget cuts; • Traffic congestion and pollution is growing; • Housing availability and affordability remain a problem despite the recent dip in house prices; • There are an increasing number of older people and people with disabilities leading to increased demand for public services, including social care and health care. • There are pockets of disadvantage and a cycle of deprivation in some areas of the county, which needs to be broken; • There are skills shortages and particular concerns about young people aged 16- 25 years who are not in education, employment or training. • Higher than average domestic energy and water use and emissions of carbon dioxide, and the need to reduce further the amount of household waste sent to landfill
More information about the strengths and challenges in the county is available in ‘This is Oxfordshire’, the key facts about Oxfordshire produced by the Oxfordshire Data Observatory:
www.oxfordshireobservatory.info/aboutoxfordshiredata
Page 44 Context
Oxfordshire County Council has identified that we need to make savings of £119 million over the next four years. This has come about for a number of reasons:
- a very significant reduction in the money we receive from the Government - Oxfordshire County Council receives 65 per cent of its annual budget direct from Government grants and these are being cut by up to 30 per cent to 2015; - increasing demand for our services, particularly from rapidly increasing numbers of older people who require our support, and ensuring that we are able to care safely for vulnerable children and adults; - inflation in our costs, particularly affecting energy, fuel and transport services.
Oxfordshire County Council has been planning for reduced financial circumstances since 2009. We saved £35m in 2010/11 through efficiency savings, a pay freeze and driving down the costs of contract with suppliers over a large range of services.
However we are faced with difficult decisions in finding the remainder of the savings needed. Given the scale of cuts and the previous savings already identified we will not be able to make cuts in back office functions and find further efficiencies to an extent that will protect front line services completely. However the situation would have been far worse for Oxfordshire County Council without the responsible forward planning we have done in recent times.
This Corporate Plan is in two parts:
Part 1 – summarises our broad strategic direction in response to the challenges we face and within the context set out above
Part 2 – sets out examples of our short and medium term delivery commitments.
Page 45 Strategic Objectives
The Council will work towards the following strategic objectives:
Efficient Public World Class Healthy and Environment Services Economy Thriving and Communities Climate Change
Breaking the Cycle of Deprivation
(cross-cutting theme)
Although our strategic objectives remain broadly the same as previous years, our role in helping to achieve them will change considerably over the next four years. This is explained further on pages XX to XX, and more detail about how specific services will be delivered can be found in service business strategies at www.oxfordshire.gov.uk
Figure 1: Oxfordshire’s Golden Thread
Golden thread
Oxfordshire 2030 Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) Sets out long-term partnership vision and strategy for Oxfordshire www.oxfordshirepartnership.org.uk/Oxfordshire2030
Oxfordshire 2030 Delivery Plan Action required to deliver the SCS www.oxfordshirepartnership.org.uk/wps/wcm/connect/OxfordshirePartnership/Oxfordshire+2 030/OP+-+O+2030+00+delivery+plan
Oxfordshire County Council Corporate Plan Sets out the council’s vision and priorities for the next 4 years reflecting council priorities, and the SCS
Medium Term Financial Plan Other statutory plans Sets out how the council will allocate Set the framework for delivery across the funding for the next 4 years council [ADD LINK ONCE AVAILABLE]
Directora te Business Strategies Annual plans converting corporate priorities and spending programmes into operational business strategies for individual services [ADD LINK ONCE AVAILABLE]
Individual performance objectives For every member of staff
Golden thread
Page 46 The Corporate Plan objectives fit into a wider picture as shown in figure XX. This ‘golden thread’ links all of our work from top level objectives through to service delivery and ensures that as a Council we take a coordinated approach to the challenges we face. Our strategic objectives are consistent with Oxfordshire 2030, the county’s long term plan which has been agreed with partners following extensive public and stakeholder engagement. Details of Oxfordshire 2030 can be found at: www.oxfordshirepartnership.org.uk
Principles
We are committed to:
• Low taxes – reducing year-on-year the annual increase in council tax to ease the burden on local people, including a freeze in 2011/12. • Real choice – ensuring residents receive the services they need, in ways that best suit the varying needs of different people and communities. This means more and more services will be delivered by providers other than Oxfordshire County Council and we will increasingly put power in the hands of individuals and communities to purchase the services they need or to run services themselves. • Value for money – we will have an absolute focus on ensuring services are efficient and delivering value for money for local people.
Values
We will continue to be guided by these six underpinning values:
• Customer focus – putting the needs of our customers at the heart of everything we do and improving opportunities for local people to have their say and get involved with council decision-making. • Honesty – being open and transparent about how we operate, prepared to admit where we need to do better and communicating the reasons if we are not able to meet the needs of local communities. • One team – working collectively as a county council and valuing and developing our staff to perform to the best of their abilities. • Involvement – providing opportunities for our communities, our stakeholders and our staff to help shape the services they receive and feeding back so that people know how local views influence decision-making. • Can-do – seeing problems and issues as opportunities and looking for solutions, rather than viewing difficulties as obstacles to what we want to achieve. • Efficient and effective – making the best use of our reduced financial resources by harnessing the skills and experience of our staff to help individuals and communities access or arrange the services they need, learning from our successes and constantly challenging ourselves to do better.
Page 47 Efficient Public Services
We have an excellent track record of delivering value for money and were ‘ahead of the game’ in preparing for the difficult times we now face. We delivered £35 million savings in 2010/11 and almost £100 million in year-on-year savings since 2007. We are also implementing an ambitious Business Strategy that is changing the way we operate as a Council.
Although the current financial situation presents many challenges, it is also an opportunity to radically rethink the way we do business and to look again at how we provide value for money for local people. Our focus is on transforming the Council and developing a new approach to how services are provided in Oxfordshire, working to protect the front line as far as possible.
Given the scale of the budget reduction we will have to stop providing some services that we believe are lower priorities for spending when times are tough. We will focus on fewer priorities and are radically redesigning some of our services, to ensure they are affordable and meet resident’s needs. In some areas this will include shifting from directly delivering services ourselves to commissioning others to provide services, based on the key outcomes we need to achieve for Oxfordshire.
We are committed to the development of the Big Society and will support others to build and maintain strong local communities in Oxfordshire, avoiding a ‘one-size fits all’ approach and seeking community ownership of locally important priorities. Where appropriate we will devolve decision making and service delivery to local levels, and ensure that our Councillors are supported to have a strong voice as community leaders.
The coalition government has announced radical changes to funding, policy and regulation for education, policing and health (including public health). Our joint working arrangements with the Oxfordshire National Health Service are already among the best in the country in terms of pooled budgets to achieve shared goals and we are involved in innovative partnerships such as the Oxfordshire City-Region Enterprise Partnership and Science Vale UK. However the Council needs to join up more effectively with other public sector organisations, and expand our relationships with the private and voluntary sectors, to deliver services more effectively.
Our Priorities for Action
• Delivering our savings target - delivering our challenging but achievable programme of scaling back some services and redesigning others to meet our savings target of £119 million by 2015/16. • Business Strategy – building on our previous efficiency programmes and recognising that delivering value for money is not just about savings, but also about how we use research and evidence of what provides best value for money and how that informs the way we do things. Our business strategy reflects this and includes actions to: o Change the way we work, including re-engineering staff working practices and processes;
Page 48 o Improve our use of technology to support new ways of working and customer interactions; o Rationalise our property and encourage the co-location of public sector services, and define our policies for disposing of assets to assist community groups in developing proposals for delivering local services themselves; o Streamline the organisational structure, including reducing the number of managers by 25%. o Give priority to key vital services and ensure they have the support needed to operate effectively o Exploit internal and external opportunities to find savings by moving more functions into our ‘shared service’ centre, and exploring ways to increase the benefits through joint service delivery and partnering arrangements • Community Ieadership – emphasising the role of local members as community leaders, including an innovative pilot scheme to develop their ability to act as social entrepreneurs and local champions. We will ensure that members and managers work together effectively, and work with local organisations and individuals to explore different ways to deliver services. • Customer focus – delivering excellent customer service by putting our customers at the heart of everything we do, expanding the range of services offered online and the ability of our customer service centre to handle internal and external enquiries efficiently and effectively. • Collaborative Working – identifying opportunities to work with others to deliver services more effectively and develop innovative approaches to common issues, and reviewing existing partnership arrangements to maximise the benefit we receive for the investment we make in them.
Page 49 World Class Economy
Oxfordshire has one of the strongest economies in the South East and continues to have one of the lowest rates of unemployment in the region. The county is the hub of Britain’s knowledge economy with the largest concentration of research and development activity in Western Europe, driven by Science Vale UK, two universities and their many spin-off research centres and start-up businesses. However, more than 30% of Oxfordshire’s workforce is currently employed in the public sector making us particularly vulnerable to the impact of budget cuts.
Figure 2: Employment by broad sector, 2008
Public admin., education, health
Banking, finance, insurance etc
Distribution, hotels, restaurants
Manufacturing
Transport and comms.
Construction
Energy and water
Agriculture and fishing
Other services
- 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 number of employees
Source: Annual Business Inquiry
The Oxfordshire City-Region Enterprise Partnership (our Local Enterprise Partnership) was one of the first to be approved by the Government. This business- led partnership will provide the strategic leadership needed to remove the barriers to sustainable economic growth. Its focus will be on encouraging innovation and wealth creation in the key employment sectors for the future.
The partnership will play an important role in improving the coordination of investment in economic development, transport and infrastructure, housing and skills in the county. In this way it will support the creation of additional sustainable private sector jobs and help reduce Oxfordshire’s dependency on the public sector for longer-term growth and prosperity.
The county's population is expected to continue to grow rapidly, and although the gap between earnings and house prices has fallen slightly since the start of the recession housing affordability remains a problem. Ensuring an adequate supply of affordable housing remains a key factor in encouraging economic growth, so although housing development has slowed in the short term our ambition remains to see planned major developments around Banbury, Bicester (including the North West Bicester eco-town), Didcot, Oxford and Wantage realised.
Page 50 Traffic congestion continues to be a problem in some parts of the county, and the withdrawal of Government funding for improvements to the A34, Oxford’s ring road and in central Oxford will make tackling this more difficult.
Although some areas in Oxfordshire are already benefiting from next-generation, superfast broadband, other parts of the county, particularly in rural areas, still do not have an acceptable level of standard broadband service. We will need to work closely with public and private sector organisations and with individual communities to develop the right solution for Oxfordshire.
Figure 3: Proportion of all residents claiming JSA, January 2007 to December 2010
3.5%
3.0%
2.5%
2.0% % of 16 to 24 year olds claiming JSA 1.5% 25-34
1.0% 35-44 % of age of group % claiming JSA
0.5% 45-54
55-60+ 0.0% July 2007 July July 2008 July July 2009 July July 2010 July April 2007 April April 2008 April April 2009 April April 2010 April January 2007 January October 2007 October 2008 January October 2008 October 2009 January October 2009 October 2010 January October 2010 October
Source: Department for Work and Pensions: via Nomis
There are skills shortages in the county and despite low levels of unemployment overall there are particular concerns about young people aged 16-25 years who are not in education, employment or training. The good levels of attainment in Oxfordshire schools at A-level have been maintained, together with our best ever GCSE results and largest rise in 2010. We continue to be above national average in these areas and also now compare more favourably against our statistical neighbours, but there remains room for continued improvement.
Our Priorities for Action
• Oxfordshire City-Region Enterprise Partnership – we will support the partnership and through it work with the private and academic sectors to create the conditions that enable Oxfordshire’s economic potential to be realised. • Skill levels – we hope to work with others to link adult skills provision to the needs of the local economy, reducing the number of people not in education,
Page 51 employment or training (NEET). We will also expand apprenticeship provision, particularly among public sector organisations and local businesses. • Educational Attainment – we will respond to shifts in national policy by working with schools in their lead role in improving educational attainment, and will continue to act as strategic champion for children, young people and their families, particularly vulnerable children. We will also review the way that funding is allocated to our schools in line with the national review of formula funding, to ensure it helps improve educational attainment overall, narrows the gap in attainment by our most vulnerable and disadvantaged young people, and ensures the long-term sustainability of schools. • Infrastructure – we will work across the public sector locally and with central government agencies to prepare an infrastructure plan, and through this will align investment priorities and decisions to achieve our shared ambitions for Oxfordshire and meet local needs. We will adopt a new approach to securing contributions to infrastructure from developers, and develop proposals that encourage innovative ways of using funds available to deliver necessary infrastructure in a timely way. • Tackling transport priorities – we will ensure that transport strategy supports the needs of the local economy and realises the opportunity to develop the potential of alternatives to car use where appropriate and suitable. We will reduce spending on public and community transport subsidies and non-essential areas of highways maintenance. However we will support communities through the Area Stewardship Maintenance Fund to enable them to help us address local priorities (such as replacement of non-priority road signs or grass verge cutting). • Broadband – we will work with network providers to develop and implement a strategy for the roll out of Next Generation Broadband across the county, to improve access and support business growth.
Page 52 Healthy and Thriving Communities
Most people in the county think Oxfordshire is a good place to live, and people generally feel safe in their local areas. Levels of crime and anti-social behaviour in Oxfordshire are low, although perception of crime does not always reflect this.
Overall levels of deprivation in Oxfordshire are low and have decreased, but areas in Oxford City and Banbury still fall within the 20% most deprived areas in the country. There is still a need to address inequalities in life expectancy, health, outcomes for young people, levels of unemployment, access to services and housing in these areas.
Oxfordshire is well-placed to respond to the Big Society agenda. The county has a strong voluntary sector with over 3,500 community and voluntary groups, an above average number of regular volunteers and an increasing number of communities preparing community-led plans. We want this to be extended across a diverse range of communities, with elected members playing a community leadership role in encouraging and facilitating this process.
Oxfordshire residents enjoy above average life expectancy, although there are variations across the county. The proportion of older people in the population is increasing, particularly in rural areas. This presents opportunities, as older people are more likely to be actively involved in their communities, carrying with them a wealth of knowledge and experience. However it will also increase demand for public services, including care (both in supported accommodation and in the wider community) and health care, and we will need to work across the public sector to meet this need effectively.
Figure 4: Oxfordshire population by age group, 2008 to 2033
800
700
600
500
400
300 number(thousands) 200
100
0 2008 2018 2033 Children Working Age Older people
Source: Office for National Statistics, 2008-based sub-national population projections.
We will continue to support and protect the vulnerable by effectively targeting resources to those most in need, including young people, older people and those with disabilities. We will, as far as possible, continue to invest in prevention as a cost effective approach leading to better outcomes for people of all ages, by preventing
Page 53 their needs escalating until they require more expensive and specialist service delivery.
We want to help people to maintain their independence, and encourage people to choose options in the community to meet their long term needs as opposed to a care home. We will prioritise investment in supporting the people who need it most and the people who care for them, and will work with colleagues in health to prepare for transfer of responsibility for public health to local authorities in 2013.
We continue to use intelligence about the way people access services and information to make sure the way they are provided reflects their needs and preferences where possible. Within the wider context of finding more efficient ways to deliver services, mapping patterns of usage has helped inform significant changes to our services for young people and our library services to focus on hubs in key areas of population in the county. We are keen to promote community-led models and alternative provision of services where viable, and will work with local organisations and groups to stimulate interest and support the development of these.
Figure 5: Deprivation in Oxfordshire compared with the rest of England
Our Priorities for Action
• Big Society – we will work with partners and voluntary organisations to encourage individuals and communities to take more responsibility, and will establish a Big Society Fund that will support local communities and organisations who wish to take on the running of local services. We will also focus on reducing barriers that prevent people doing more for themselves.
Page 54 • Closer to Communities – we will develop our locality-focused approach to service planning and delivery, piloted in six priority localities during 2010/11.This will include reviews in each of 14 localities (see fig 6) to understand the overall impact of budget changes on local communities, find effective ways to mitigate the impact of service losses, promote community self help and identify opportunities to reduce duplication of property and services in an area.
Figure 6: Oxfordshire’s Fourteen Localities
• Breaking the Cycle of Deprivation – we will continue to work in partnership to improve the quality of life in the most deprived areas of the county by promoting better engagement in education, employment and training; supporting the vulnerable and those with multiple and enduring problems; promoting healthy lifestyles and reducing health inequalities; reducing and mitigating the effects of child poverty. • Prevention – we will maintain our focus on preventing the need for more specialist services through early identification of problems and early intervention in adult and children’s services. This will reduce the number of people who need support, the amount of support they need or delay how soon they need it. We will also focus on giving people choice in the way they lead their lives and how they secure the services they need to support them. • Protection and safeguarding – we will continue to reduce the number of children, young people and adults that need to be taken into care or are in need of protection. We will ensure the multiagency approach to protecting and safeguarding our most vulnerable children and young people is maintained to its current high standard, and will work with our partners to raise public and professional awareness of the needs of vulnerable adults.
Page 55 • Demographic change – we will support the increasing number of older people and people with disabilities to live in their own home rather than a care home. We will increase the availability of extra care housing and assistive technology to reduce the need for support staff, and continue to provide information and support to carers. We will change the way day services for older people are provided, maintaining services in major towns but focusing on community initiatives and local decision-making about how best to support older people in their community. We will also introduce a mobile centre designed specifically to meet the needs of older people living in rural Oxfordshire.
Page 56 Environment and Climate Change
Oxfordshire has an attractive environment with beautiful and accessible countryside, including many areas of outstanding natural beauty and many places which are nationally or internationally important for biodiversity. The county also has outstanding architecture, including the Blenheim Palace world heritage site near Woodstock and over 1,000 listed buildings. The quality of Oxfordshire’s natural and built environment makes it an attractive place to live and work and is important to Oxfordshire both as an economic activity in its own right and as part of the wider tourism offer, supported by an extensive public rights of way network.
Figure 7: Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Carbon dioxide emissions from Oxfordshire remain higher than the South East and national average, but there have been overall reductions in recent years. We will continue working with partners to build on the behavioural change achieved so far in reducing, recycling and reusing household waste, thus further reducing the amount sent to landfill and minimising our financial liabilities.
We are embedding energy saving and carbon reduction into our business processes across the council, as reducing our energy consumption will also result in financial savings. We will continue to invest in energy efficiency measures in our buildings, including schools, and introduce measures to reduce our demand for energy. We will also continue to support the development of the eco-town to the north west of Bicester, focusing on extending the benefits and influencing changes in behaviour across the town.
Since the flooding across the county in July 2007 a range of mitigation measures have been put in place, but with around 12% of the county lying within the floodplain there will always be a significant number of properties at risk of flooding in Oxfordshire.
Page 57
Figure 8: Carbon dioxide emissions per person, 2005 to 2008
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0 2005 5.0 2006 per person per 2 2007 4.0 2008 3.0 tonnes CO tonnes 2.0
1.0
- Oxfordshire South East England
Source: Department for Energy and Climate Change
Our Priorities for Action
• Increase energy efficiency and reduce emissions – we will realise the financial benefits of reducing the council’s emissions, in the process reducing the impact of energy tax. We will turn off nearly half of our streetlights between 12.30am and 5.00am, but will not adversely impact on safety for the community or road users. We will explore the income generating potential of installing equipment to produce renewable energy on council sites and buildings, and will encourage others to follow our example in reducing energy use and emissions. • Waste management – we will work across the public sector to increase rates of recycling and reduce the amount of household waste sent to landfill. We will invest in new household waste recycling centres close to the major urban areas, and close those that have reached the end of their permissions. We will invest in new disposal facilities to convert waste to energy, and work with our partners to ensure our investment is complemented by other councils investing in improved kerbside collection schemes. • Protecting the environment – we will make sure Oxfordshire’s natural resources are used as effectively as possible and minimise the impact of economic growth on the environment. We will implement a climate change adaptation action plan to manage the impact of extreme weather events, and ensure planning applications for mineral extraction reflect the needs of the local economy. We will work with partner organisations, volunteers, community groups and local communities to protect and enhance the natural environment, and maintain the rights of way network as an important part of the rural economy.
Page 58 Measuring our progress
For each priority identified in this plan we have included some specific actions that we intend to take and measures of success for each target (see pages XX to XX). We will report progress against these to the Cabinet on a quarterly basis to monitor how well we are doing in delivering our priorities and take action to improve performance where needed.
Our quarterly performance management process and the management of the Council’s significant risks are now part of a single process, ensuring they are being handled appropriately and that action is being taken where necessary. This allows us to challenge our thinking so that our strategic and service priorities continue to be both ambitious and deliverable.
Finance
To be added following budget sign-off in February – to include detail of: • Spending plans • Where money comes from • Capital • Link to Medium Term Financial Plan
Page 59 Targets for Delivery Efficient Public Services
Priorities for What actions we will take Plans and st rategies for How we will measure our Action managing delivery success Deliver the Deliver service changes in order to meet Oxfordshire County Council Deliver the Business Strategy business budget targets for 2011/12 Business Strategy 2010-2015 including £119 million savings by strategy 2015 (and revised savings Build on our work so far to change our Directorate Business Strategies targets for interim years once organisational structures and the way we agreed) work
Undertake locality reviews to assess the Complete 14 locality reviews by impact of savings proposals and decisions March 2012 Page 60 on communities
Provide Ensure members and managers work Big Society Framework See Big Society actions under community together, as well as with local organisations Healthy and Thriving leadership and individuals, to explore different ways to Communities (page XX) deliver services that meet community needs
Develop our Accelerate implementation of the Customer Customer Service Centre Achieve £713,000 savings from customer Service Centre programme to realise Programme the Customer Service Centre focus savings and efficiencies. Programme by April 2015
Implement our strategy to deliver excellent Customer Service Strategy 2010- Deliver actions set out in our customer service by putting our customers 2013 Customer Service Strategy. at the heart of everything we do
Implement our strategy to use information Corporate ICT Strategy Deliver actions set out in our and communication technology to improve Corporate ICT Strategy customer service, business efficiency and
Priorities for What actions we will take Plans and st rategies for How we will measure our Action managing delivery success drive down service costs
Work closely Identify new medium term priorities Oxfordshire 2030 Agree new medium term with others to requiring partner collaboration partnership priorities and ensure implement 2011/12 targets Oxfordshire 2030 objectives are advanced
World Class Economy
Page 61 Priorities for What actions we will take Plans and strategies for How we will kn ow we have Action managing delivery been successful Develop the Support the development of the Local Directorate Business Strategy Oxfordshire Enterprise Partnership so that it provides City-Region strategic leadership on realising the Enterprise economic potential of Oxfordshire Partnership
Improve skill Invest in workforce development and widen [Local commissioning Statement Reduce the number of 16-18 levels participation in training and learning by 16- 2011-2012 year olds not in education, 25 year olds employment or training to 6% Oxfordshire Children and Young across the County by March People’s Plan 2010-2013 and 2012. Delivery Plan Expand number of apprenticeships offered Ensure 35 apprenticeship starts by the Council and encourage partners to Oxfordshire City-Region Local at OCC and 15 apprenticeship do the same Enterprise Partnership Bid starts in our supply chain by April 2012
Priorities for What actions we will take Plans and strategies for How we will kn ow we have Action managing delivery been successful Work with local businesses and education 16-19 Education Local providers to link adult skills provision to the Commissioning Statement 2011- needs of the local economy, including links 12 to skills training for veterans leaving the forces Directorate Business Strategy
Educational Work closely with schools to deliver the Oxfordshire Children and Young Achieve top quartile performance Attainment ‘Class of 2011’ project to further improve People’s Plan 2010-2013 and for Key Stage 2 (Level 4 English educational attainment against revised Delivery Plan and mathematics combined or national standards new floor standards) by 2014. Reported annually
Page 62 Achieve top quartile performance nationally for 5 GCSEs A*-C (including English and Maths) by 2014. Reported annually
Review the way schools are funded in Complete review of schools response to changes in government policy, funding by March 2012 and to improve educational attainment overall, implement for financial year narrow gaps in attainment by our most 2012/13 vulnerable and disadvantaged young people, and ensure the long-term sustainability of schools.
Infrastructure Identify the investment in existing and Directorate Business Strategy Prepare an Infrastructure Plan by development future infrastructure and services required April 2012 (subject to agreement to support sustainable economic growth, Corporate Asset Strategy by relevant partners), and reflect including Council-owned assets investment priorities within the Oxfordshire County Council County Council’s Capital Identify and exploit new funding Capital Programme Programme and the investment mechanisms for investment in infrastructure programmes of national agencies
Priorities for What actions we will take Plans and strategies for How we will kn ow we have Action managing delivery been successful and services, working in partnership with Deliver the Corporate Asset other public sector organisations Strategy targets (and implement the priority programmes from 2011/12 onwards
Tackle Ensure that our transport strategy supports Local Transport Plan 3 Implement priority programmes transportation the needs of the local economy as set out in the Local Transport priorities Plan 3 (to be approved by the Cabinet in March 2011)
Develop an Area Stewardship Maintenance Establish the Area Stewardship Fund to enable communities to help us Maintenance Fund and its address local priorities operating framework by July
Page 63 2011 Broadband Work with network providers to develop Target for increasing access to and implement a strategy for the roll out of high speed broadband by 2015 Next Generation Broadband across the to be confirmed during 2011/12. county to support business growth.
Healthy and Thriving Communities
Priorities for What actions we will take Plans and strategies for How we will know we have Action managing delivery been successful Supporting Develop our Big Society framework, jointly Big Society Framework Agree and implement strategic and with local public sector and voluntary framework by June 2011 developing organisations the Big Society in Establish and operate a Big Society Fund Establish Big Society Fund by Oxfordshire accessible to community groups wishing to April 2011 run Council services
Priorities for What actions we will take Plans and strategies for How we will know we have Action managing delivery been successful Closer to Engage with key local organisations in Closer to Communities Strategy Build on locality events already Communities developing a shared approach to local held, in conjunction with local issues and priorities in all 14 localities Members, in our 6 priority areas and develop proposals for remaining localities by June 2011.
Break the Improve outcomes for families with multiple Oxfordshire Children and Young Continue to deliver the Family cycle of problems in the most deprived wards in the People’s Plan 2010-2013 and Intervention Programme and deprivation City of Oxford and Banbury Delivery Plan report on outcomes by March 2012
Page 64 Focus on Focus on early intervention in adult and Ageing Successfully Strategy Agree and implement new prevention in children’s social care to reduce the number 2011/12 targets building on social care of people who need support, the amount of Directorate Business Strategy Transforming Adult Social Care support they need or delaying when they programme and Children and need it Oxfordshire Children and Young Young People’s Plan Year 2 People’s Plan 2010-2013 and objectives Delivery Plan Focus on giving people choice in the way Provide personal budgets for they lead their lives and how they secure everyone receiving long-term the services they need to support them care in their own home to arrange or purchase their own care and support by April 2013
Provide sufficient care arrangements to Significantly reduce the number transfer patients from hospital as soon as of people awaiting onward care they are well enough from a hospital setting to an average of 70 per week or fewer by March 2012
Develop our Ensure timely initial social care Oxfordshire Local Safeguarding Achieve top quartile performance
Priorities for What actions we will take Plans and strategies for How we will know we have Action managing delivery been successful safeguarding assessments of children and young people Children’s Board Business Plan in timeliness of our initial and assessments for children protection Oxfordshire Children and Young compared to statistical and services Persons Trust Business Plan national average each year.
Raise public and professional awareness of Children, Young Persons and Increase number of alerts raised adult safeguarding Schools Business strategy by agencies other than Adult Social Care by 10% by March Adult safeguarding plan 2012
Respond to Provide resources to respond to increased Ageing Successfully Strategy Implementation of agreed targets demographic demand for services, including the and actions by March 2012 change availability and uptake of Extra Care Directorate Business Strategy
Page 65 Housing and assistive technology in people’s homes HEARSAY report 2011/12
Focus on community initiatives and local Deliver local priorities for 2011/12 decision-making about how best to support as agreed through HEARSAY older people in their community user event in March 2011
Increase the proportion of informal carers in Increase the number of informal Oxfordshire who are in contact with the carers who are supported by the County Council and are receiving council with services or information, advice or support information to 18,600 carers (41% of the estimated carers) by April 2012
Prepare for transfer of responsibility for Staff and functions transferred by public health to local authorities in 2013 April 2013
Environment and Climate Change
Priorities for What actions we will take Plans and strategies for How we will know we have Action managing delivery been successful Increase Realise the financial benefits of reducing Directorate Business Strategy Energy saving target for the energy the council’s energy consumption Council agreed by March 2012 efficiency and reduce Convert 28,000 street lights to emissions Double the number of streetlights on part part-night lighting by March 2015 night lighting in areas that will not adversely (specific in year targets against impact on safety for the community or road the programme to be users determined)
Explore income generating potential of
Page 66 installing equipment to produce renewable energy on council sites and buildings Waste Work with others to increase rates of Oxfordshire Joint Municipal Complete Review of Joint Waste management recycling and reduce the amount of Waste Management Strategy Management Strategy and household waste sent to landfill development of new waste Directorate Business Strategy disposal targets by October 2011 (revised in year targets to Council Capital Programme be confirmed following the review)
Invest in a new facility to treat residual Have new waste disposal and waste and continue to invest in the network recycling facilities operational by of household waste recycling centres March 2015 Protect the Ensure Oxfordshire’s natural resources are Minerals and Waste Local Agree and begin implementing a Natural managed effectively Development Framework new Minerals and Waste Environment Framework by March 2012
Develop our resilience to extreme weather Climate Change Adaptation Begin the implementation of the events Action Plan climate change adaptation action plan by March 2012
Further information This Corporate Plan provides a high level summary of the strategic issues facing the council and the organisational responses planned for the medium term. It does not provide details of the ongoing service commitment across more than 100 activities for which the county council is responsible. For more information see the following documents and links that complement this Corporate Plan:
1. Information about Oxfordshire County Council
www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/aboutyourcouncil
2. Summary of Supporting Strategies
www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/improvingourperformance
3. Directorate Business Strategies
[Link to be added prior to publication]
4. Medium Term Financial Plan
www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/links/public/financialplans
4. ‘This is Oxfordshire’, key facts about Oxfordshire
www.oxfordshireobservatory.info/aboutoxfordshiredata
Page 67 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 68 Agenda Item 8 Divisions: N/A
COUNCIL – 15 FEBRUARY 2011
SERVICE AND RESOURCE PLANNING 2011/12 – 2015/16
Supplementary Report by Assistant Chief Executive & Chief Finance Officer
Introduction
1. The report and addenda to Cabinet on 25 January 2011 set out information known at that time on the revenue budget for 2011/12 along with the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) and Capital Programme for 2011/12 to 2015/16. The Final Local Government Settlement has now been notified and the budget for 2011/12 along with the MTFP and Capital Programme can be finalised.
Final Local Government Finance Settlement
2. The Final Local Government Finance Settlement for 2011/12 was announced on 31 January 2011. This confirmed final formula grant figures of £122.160m for 2011/12 and a provisional figure of £108.245m for 2012/13. This is £0.338m more than the figure provided in the Draft Local Government Finance Settlement for 2011/12 and £0.303m more in 2012/13.
3. Also announced as part of the final settlement was details of the Fire Revenue Grant, intended to cover funding for FireLink, New Dimension and control rooms. However, although this grant is comprised of various elements and is unringfenced, this will need to be used for expenditure transferring from national fire projects previously funded centrally by Communities & Local Government. Oxfordshire will receive £0.183m in 2011/12 and £0.254m in 2012/13.
4. The Fire Capital Grant was also confirmed for 2011/12. Oxfordshire will receive £1.086m which is un-ringfenced.
5. The report to Cabinet in January 2011 set out a number of specific grants for which their status in 2011/12 was still to be confirmed. Two of these grants were from the Home Office; Stronger Safer Communities and Young People Substance Misuse. Information provided as part of the final settlement has confirmed that these grants are being combined into a Community Safety Fund. Allocations to individual authorities have not been confirmed but national totals are available. The combined grants for 2010/11 were £77.2bn nationally; £56.8bn will be available in 2011/12 and £28.8bn in 2012/13. Based on Oxfordshire’s share of the national totals for 2010/11, we might expect to receive £0.563m in 2011/12 and £0.285m in 2012/13. This compares to £0.771m received in 2010/11 and planned expenditure in 2011/12 for these services of £0.618m.
Page 69 CC8a
Virement requiring Council approval
6. The Detailed Revenue Budget booklet at Annex 4 of the Leader of the Council’s report includes a virement transferring £1.0m of demography funding for Older People in 2011/12 to the Learning Disabilities Pooled Budget. A further virement transferring £1.0m from Older People to Physical Disabilities is included within the Older People's and Physical Disabilities Pooled Budget. These proposals are in recognition that the funding from the NHS to support social care and benefit health of £6.124m in 2011/12 is to be used for Older People and this enables Council funding to be freed up to support pressures within other areas of Adult Social Care.
Balances
7. The report to Cabinet in January set out that a review of the level of balances was being undertaken to ensure that the amount held is commensurate with risk for both 2011/12 and the medium term. This review has now been undertaken and shows that the identified risk for 2011/12 is £12.6m and rises by around £1.0m per year thereafter to £15.5m by 2014/15 as the amount of savings required to be delivered increases. This confirms that the level of balances in the current MTFP are appropriate but this will need to be reviewed annually in light of delivery of savings against the targets.
Conclusion
8. This report reflects a number of changes since the last report to Cabinet on 25 January 2011 and provides the final funding position for the Council. The Medium Term Financial Plan, which forms Annex 1 of the Leader of the Council’s report, reflects all of the changes described in this report.
SUE SCANE Assistant Chief Executive & Chief Finance Officer February 2011
Contact Officer: Lorna Baxter - Acting Head of Corporate Finance (Corporate Finance) Tel. 01865 323971
Page 70 COUNTY COUNCIL – 15 FEBRUARY 2011 CC8b
SERVICE AND RESOURCE PLANNING
2011/12 TO 2015/16
Report by the Leader of the Council
Introduction 1. The Cabinet Member for Finance & Property’s report to Cabinet on 25 January 2011 set out the strategy that this administration has taken to deliver a well planned and financially sound budget and Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) for the authority whose key aims are delivering high quality services to the residents of Oxfordshire within a challenging and necessary period of public sector spending constraint. 2. Even though this year has seen a reduction in the resources available to the Council that is unprecedented in my 22 years of public service, we are still delivering this budget within the framework set out in the Corporate Plan. We have been able to freeze the level of Council Tax owing to our long-term prudent planning and to the grant from the Government; we are still providing a real choice in many of the services we provide, although we have had to reduce that choice in some areas; and we have continued to provide those services with improving cost effectiveness year on year. 3. We have reviewed our medium term objectives and concluded that they remain broadly the drivers for growth in Oxfordshire through which we can provide leadership and ensure a prosperous future for our citizens. Understandably, in the current economic climate, we need to ensure that services are efficient and modernised. The Corporate Plan which is also on the agenda for this meeting sets out the detail of our vision and the delivery plan we propose for the coming year based on: (a) Growing our World Class Economy (b) Promoting Healthy & Thriving Communities (c) Combating Climate Change & Improving Our Environment (d) Delivering Efficient Public Services With the cross-cutting theme of Breaking the Cycle of Deprivation. 4. The Plan links to the Business Strategies for each of the directorates which have been updated and are available on the internet (www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/businessstrategies ). Later in this report, I have shown some of the linkages between the priority areas and the funding we have made available. 5. In previous years, we have been able to prioritise growth in investment; this year we have needed to prioritise the level of reduction, given the unsustainable position which the Coalition Government has inherited from its predecessor. I make no apology for seeking to protect those services which impact on the most vulnerable, nor answer the critics who want to demonstrate that we are being unfair with the reductions we are making but who are not prepared to say what they would cut instead.
Updated Information 6. The report to Cabinet in January set out the majority of our proposals but we were awaiting confirmation of the Local Government Settlement. The changes in funding available, taking account of the updated information, are set out in the Chief Finance Officer’s supplementary report to this meeting. This enables me to make slightly revised
Page 71 Page 1 of 9 COUNTY COUNCIL – 15 FEBRUARY 2011 CC8b
proposals, with the amendments built into Annexes 1 – 14 to this report. For clarity the changes are listed at the end of this report.
Low Taxes – the level of Council Tax 7. Since 2005, this Administration has been keeping the rate of increase in council tax as low as we could. Our Medium Term Plan reflected the Conservative Party manifesto which promised a freeze on Council Tax for two years, with the provision of a grant to support those authorities that restricted the effective increase to 2.5%. Having found the national finances to be in a much worse position than expected, the coalition Government has still been able to provide that grant for 2011/12 and we are delighted therefore to be able to freeze the council tax for the people of Oxfordshire. 8. We have reflected the previously planned increase of 2.5% for the following year, in the hope that the Government may yet find a way to maintain the freeze for two years. For the future, though, we expect inflation to have risen by 2013/14 and feel we will have to reflect that in the Council Tax level if we are to maintain services. 9. This means that the average Band D rate will remain at £1,161.71, or £22.34 per week for 2011/12. This is the same as the current year.
Prioritisation 10. The two areas we have protected from front line service reductions have been Children’s Social Care and the Fire & Rescue Service. Both of these are life saving services which help those at their most vulnerable. For other service areas, I have set out below, how we are prioritising, through the service and resource planning process, the challenges facing the County Council. This ensures that the County Council can continue to deliver excellent services to our customers within a greatly reduced financial envelope.
Other Service Changes 11. We have been through a most challenging process of examining our entire budget line- by-line, debating priorities and looking across directorates. We have considered the needs of our many communities including through an overarching equality impact assessment, which is set out at annex 14. As well as scrutinising the three large directorates, we have also scrutinised senior and middle management, the corporate core, shared services, property and elected members’ costs. We have consistently looked “outside the box” for innovation and different service delivery models that are able to meet need from a much reduced resource base. We have made it clear to officers that we expect a similar commitment to innovation and “out of the box” thinking in all service areas. We can afford no sacred cows or no-go areas. 12. Senior management posts will have been reduced by 40% by the end of the current financial year. The process continues through the management structure, considering levels of management and spans of control. Assessment of management will continue for some time to ensure we have an affordable and effective structure in the new financial regime. Elected members have contributed to savings by sharing the staff pay freeze and reduction in travel expenses; by deleting the political assistant posts for the three main parties and by a successful bid to the Boundary Commission to reduce the number of councillors by approximately 10 from the next elections in 2013.
Page 72 Page 2 of 9 COUNTY COUNCIL – 15 FEBRUARY 2011 CC8b
13. We have given very careful thought to relative priorities for those service areas we have not felt able to ring-fence. We found it unacceptable to exempt other areas from cuts and have worked on the basis that all services needed to start from a broadly similar level of cuts. 14. Public attention has inevitably focused on those services nearest to them in proximity if not always in usage. Libraries have dominated the media and the post bags of members. This is despite the fact that the library service has gross expenditure of only £8.7m compared to £973m for the council as a whole. The library service was asked to find the same level of savings as other services and has been able to show how those savings could be delivered by offering a radical new approach to a 21 st century service with more emphasis on electronic provision and community engagement. 15. Many communities are asking us to apply a proportionate funding cut to all libraries rather than ceasing to fund those accounting for the smallest number of book issues or with proximity to an alternative library on a public transport route. I also have concern that there are communities less able to respond to a community-based approach, that deserve equal attention in considering a way forward. These are difficult issues that we will have to address with great care after the consultation stage which will follow from the setting of the budget. 16. The youth service faces significant change from a generic service to one based on seven hubs but designed to provide significant outreach, targeted at young people and their families with the greatest need. This will require a significant culture change from staff currently working in different council areas. Many youth facilities already operate without county council funding or intervention and I hope communities will apply Big Society principles where they see a local need that we cannot afford to fund. Early plans anticipated closure of youth facilities with effect from 1 April 2011. Recognising that decisions will take longer to implement, we have set aside some of the additional funding, recently identified, to allow more time to deliver plans for the Early Intervention Service, including the impact on our property portfolio. 17. I hope the consultation process after the budget will help communities to develop Big Society solutions and new models, enabling them to retain the best attributes of their local library or youth centre that the county council can no longer afford to fund in whole or in part. I expect council officers to support serious community bids in relation to these and other council services. 18. We have established a Big Society fund to support these bids. This will be one-off funding designed to support change, not to perpetuate delivery models that are no longer affordable. 19. I have a considerable worry that the largest single area of cuts lies in social care, including older people, learning disabilities, physical disabilities and mental health. To read or listen to the local media would suggest there are no cuts being planned here. Sadly, a service that accounts for some £250m of spending per annum cannot be exempted from the scale of cuts we face. Both the Adult and Children’s directorates have taken the decision to exempt Support for Carers and Young Carers from any cuts and I am sure this will be broadly supported. However, the rest of social care faces real challenges in delivering serious levels of cuts. Given our close working with the NHS, this will require the most careful of monitoring. 20. Children, Education & Families has experienced considerable growth, much of it from specific grants targeted at specific and disparate activities, during the Blair/Brown years. With the dawning of financial realism, many of these grants have gone and have
Page 73 Page 3 of 9 COUNTY COUNCIL – 15 FEBRUARY 2011 CC8b
provided the directorate with an opportunity to review and restructure so as to concentrate on the highest priorities. 21. There is continuing investment of over £34m in schools through the capital programme, with priority being given to the provision of school places, and essential maintenance. 22. Environment & Economy is a critically important directorate if we are to support Oxfordshire’s private sector in growing to fill the gap left by a down-sized public sector. This does not mean it is being exempted from a fair share of cuts; it is not. We have resisted the “easy” solution of making huge revenue cuts in highway maintenance and we are conscious of the damage from recent severe weather that needs addressing. Our new highways contract is expected to contribute significantly to real savings while continuing to address road condition. There is continuing capital investment in the transport infrastructure of over £19m. Although reduced from previous years, we have been able to continue to fund key road maintenance schemes. 23. Securing Secretary of State support for the energy-from-waste facility provides welcome relief from the costs of continuing to dispose our waste to landfill. We are also investing from our capital programme in waste recycling centres, along with essential maintenance of our public buildings and provision of extra care housing. 24. We anticipate military repatriation returning to RAF Brize Norton soon and have set aside a modest sum to deal with the public engagement and transport implications of this. Similarly, we have planned for a small sum in 2012/13 to deal with the transport implications of the Olympic Torch coming through the county. I hope to bring proposals to council for important work with the military community in Oxfordshire to further the social and economic well being of service personnel and their dependents.
Linkage of Spending to Priorities 25. The Corporate Plan 2011/12 – 2015/16 sets out the council’s priorities. Here I show how these link to our budget proposals:
World Class Economy 26. Infrastructure – improvements are needed to the county’s arterial roads, schools and other public buildings. We have been working with our District colleagues and other partners to produce the local Investment Plan that links into their Local Development Frameworks and our Local Transport Plan 3. This gives us clear guidance as to where we should prioritise our investment, seek to secure external resources and target these to deliver the required housing growth and other infrastructure over the coming years. 27. Tackling transport priorities – congestion impacts adversely on Oxfordshire businesses as well as its residents. It is a priority to make it easier to get around the county, by bus, car, rail, walking or other forms of transport. We will also support communities to decide what local schemes are important to them through the Area Stewardship Maintenance Fund and the next iteration of the Local Transport Plan 28. Educational achievement – performance in Oxfordshire schools reflects the national average and is continuing to increase each year. However we think our schools should do a lot better and our aim is to work with them to be in the top 25% of areas nationally. There is still a mountain to climb. 29. Skill levels – need to continue to improve, both for the benefit of individuals and Oxfordshire’s businesses which need high quality, skilled employees. We will work with Page 74 Page 4 of 9 COUNTY COUNCIL – 15 FEBRUARY 2011 CC8b
others, particularly through the Oxfordshire City Region Enterprise Partnership, to link adult skills to the needs of the economy. The recession has impacted adversely on our efforts to make sure all 18-25 year olds are in education, employment or training. With our partners we will work even harder to ensure that every young person gets the help they need to gain and maintain employment.
Healthy & Thriving Communities 30. Breaking the Cycle of Deprivation – work to promote healthy lifestyles, to support the vulnerable and tackle the cycle of deprivation is designed to address health inequalities, including focussed work in Banbury and parts of Oxford as well as smaller pockets in less visible locations. 31. Big Society Approach – encouraging communities to develop new service delivery models through our Big Society fund where the county council can no longer afford to fund a local service. 32. Prevention – our aim is to help people to maintain their independence and to have more control over their lives. We will continue to invest in preventative services and increase the availability of Extra Care Housing and assistive technology as an alternative to residential, reducing the pressure on the NHS and residential care services. 33. Protection and safeguarding – we will continue to reduce the number of children, young people and adults that need to be taken into care or are in need of protection. We will continue to work with partners to protect and safeguard our most vulnerable children and young people, to raise public and professional awareness of the needs of vulnerable adults. 34. Demographic change – significant growth in older people (particularly the over 85s) and people with learning disabilities will put pressure on public services in the medium term. The Council is providing additional resources to meet these challenges and it will also be important to encourage more community self help.
Environment and Climate Change 35. Increase Energy Efficiency and Reduce Emissions – we are working to realise the financial benefits of reducing the council’s use of energy. We are rationalising our property portfolio and making more efficient use of those buildings that remain, turning off nearly half of our street lights between 12.30am and 5.00am; and working closely with schools on energy saving measures. 36. Waste management – we have worked closely with District partners to ensure that all the food waste collected within the county is processed within the boundary. We have delivered an in-vessel composting facility and another is being built. An anaerobic digestion plant has also been built which produces enough electricity to power 4,000 homes from food waste. The proposed restructure of the household waste sites will encourage more residents to recycle at home using the excellent services provided by the Districts. The proposed energy from waste facility will not only process the household waste arising in the county but produce enough electricity to power 22,000 homes.
Page 75 Page 5 of 9 COUNTY COUNCIL – 15 FEBRUARY 2011 CC8b
Efficient Public Services 37. Delivering savings targets and changing the way we work – much work has already been done, with more to come. We have reduced our top tiers of management by 40%, are undertaking further work on the next tiers and are reducing back office costs to ease the impact of cuts on frontline services. We are changing the way we work, including re- engineering staff working practices and processes. We will rationalise our property portfolio to reduce the ongoing costs and achieve capital receipts where possible. This also links to delivering more joined up services with our partners, looking at co-location or new ways of delivering services. This includes taking a stronger commercial approach and looking at strategic partnering options with the private sector. Finally, we have revised the conditions of service, including reducing redundancy payments and freezing increments for most staff to help meet our savings targets. 38. Keeping council tax low – the priorities for action set out above will enable the Council to reduce spending and continue to keep Council Tax increases low, following the Council tax freeze in the coming year. 39. Customer focus – we will further enhance and develop on-line services and Customer Contact Services so that more enquiries can be dealt with at the first point of contact.
Our Staff 40. I would again like to pay tribute to our loyal and hard working staff who have been continuing to deliver excellent services to the public while coming to grips with the changes which we have to make to live within our means. Following on from last year’s pay freeze, we are now asking them to freeze not only their pay but also their increments. The majority recognise the pressures which local government and the public generally are facing and accept that this is no different from the position in the private sector.
Conclusion 41. This Revenue and Capital Budget and the Medium Term Financial Plan for 2011/12 to 2015/16 delivers Low Taxes, Real Choice and Value for Money for Oxfordshire County Council. It achieves this in a prudent and sustainable form, against a continuing background of economic recession, a large structural imbalance in the national finances and anticipated severe cuts in public spending. 42. I am able to recommend a robust proposal which freezes the level of Council Tax but balances expenditure with the funding we expect to receive over the plan period. 43. This budget is a testimony to the strong service and financial planning framework we have established and to the clear vision we have for high quality, customer-focused services that meet the needs of all of the citizens of Oxfordshire. It demonstrates a clear inter-relationship with the Corporate Plan, with continuing investment in as many of our key priorities as we can afford to make Oxfordshire a better place for all of our citizens.
Page 76 Page 6 of 9 COUNTY COUNCIL – 15 FEBRUARY 2011 CC8b
44. Accompanying this report are the following documents:
Annex 1: Medium Term Financial Plan 2011/12 – 2015/16
Annex 2: Planned Balances & Reserves 2011/12 – 2014/15
Annex 3: Identified Pressures & Proposed Savings 2011/12 – 2014/15
Annex 4: Detailed Revenue Budget 2011/12
Annex 5: Council Tax and Precepts 2011/12
Annex 6a: Calculation of Guaranteed Unit of Funding 2011/12
Annex 6b: Dedicated Schools Grant Provisional Allocation 2011/12
Annex 7: Virement Rules 2011/12
Annex 8: Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Annual Investment Strategy for 2011/12
Annex 9: Minimum Revenue Provision Policy Statement for 2011/12
Annex 10: Capital Strategy 2011/12 – 2015/16
Annex 11a: Corporate Asset Management Plan 2011/12 – 2014/15
Annex 11b: Transport Asset Management Plan 2011/12 – 2014/15
Annex 12: Capital Programme 2010/11 – 2015/16
Annex 13: Prudential Indicators for Capital
Annex 14: Overarching Equalities Impact Assessment
Page 77 Page 7 of 9 COUNTY COUNCIL – 15 FEBRUARY 2011 CC8b
45. RECOMMENDATIONS (a) (in respect of revenue) RECOMMEND Council to approve: (1) a budget for 2011/12 as set out in Annex 4 and a medium term plan to 2015/16 as set out in Annex 1; (2) a budget requirement for 2011/12 of £408.616m; (3) the Council Tax and Precept calculations for 2011/12 set out in Annex 5 to the report and in particular: (i) a precept of £282.674m; and (ii) a Council Tax for Band D equivalent properties of £1,161.71; (4) the planned level of balances and reserves for 2011/12 to 2014/15 as set out in Annex 2; (5) the virement of £1m from demography for Older People to the Learning Disabilities Pooled Budget and a further virement transferring £1m from Older People to Physical Disabilities included in the Older People’s and Physical Disabilities Pooled Budget included in Annex 4; (6) the use of Dedicated Schools Grant for 2011/12 as set out in Annex 6b to the report and to note the calculation of the Guaranteed Unit of Funding set out in Annex 6a; (7) virement arrangements for 2011/12 as set out in Annex 7 to the report; (b) (in respect of treasury management) to RECOMMEND Council to approve: (1) the Treasury Management Strategy Statement as at Annex 8 including the Prudential Indicators; (2) that in relation to the 2011/12 strategy any further changes required be delegated to the Chief Finance Officer following consultation with the Leader of Council and the Cabinet Member for Finance & Property. (c) RECOMMEND Council to approve the Minimum Revenue Provision Methodology Statement as set out in paragraphs 11 to 15 of Annex 9. (d) (in respect of Capital) to approve: (1) the Capital Strategy at Annex 10 and Corporate Asset Management Plan and Transport Asset Management Plan at Annexes 11a and 11b; (2) the Capital Programme for 2010/11 to 2015/16 as set out in the capital programme at Annex 12; (3) the prudential indicators for capital set out in Annex 13.
Keith R Mitchell CBE FCA FCCA Leader of the County Council 4 February 2011
Page 78 Page 8 of 9 COUNTY COUNCIL – 15 FEBRUARY 2011 CC8b
Changes to the Budget and Medium Term Plan following finalisation of funding:
2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 £m £m £m £m £m Additional Funding: Collection Fund (per Addenda to -0.795 January Cabinet report) Previously unannounced grants * -0.562 -0.284 -0.284 -0.284 -0.284 Changes to funding from settlement -0.338 -0.303 -0.303 -0.303 -0.303 Fire Revenue Grant -0.183 -0.254 -0.254 -0.254 -0.254 TOTAL ADDITIONAL -1.878 -0.841 -0.841 -0.841 -0.841 FUNDING Reduced Savings & Additional Expenditure: Recognition of delay in Early 1.500 Intervention savings Recognition of delay in Property 0.100 savings Partnership working 0.100 Olympics – highways costs 0.070 Use of Efficiency Reserve -0.075 Additional Fire Expenditure 0.183 0.254 0.254 0.254 0.254 Support for repatriations 0.070 0.070 0.070 0.070 0.070 Funding available to respond to 0.447 0.517 0.517 0.517 consultations TOTAL ADDITIONAL 1.878 0.841 0.841 0.841 0.841 EXPENDITURE * Due to rounding differs by £0.001m compared to CFO Supplementary Report
Page 79 Page 9 of 9 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 80 CC8 Annex 1
Medium Term Financial Plan 2011/12 - 2015/16 Summar y INDICATIVE POSITION 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 Base Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Budget Allocation Budget Base Allocation Budget Base Allocation Budget Base Allocation Budget Base Allocation Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget
£000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
Directorate Budgets Children, Education & Families 98,350 -6,117 92,234 92,234 -7,289 84,945 84,945 -1,350 83,595 83,595 -987 82,608 82,608 82,608 Social & Community Services 178,246 -6,505 171,742 171,742 -6,150 165,592 165,592 -535 165,057 165,057 -1,196 163,861 163,861 163,861 Community Safety 27,592 61 27,653 27,653 -236 27,417 27,417 -113 27,304 27,304 -100 27,204 27,204 27,204 Environment & Economy 71,885 3,285 75,170 75,170 -1,281 73,889 73,889 -805 73,084 73,084 -1,307 71,777 71,777 71,777 Oxfordshire Customer Services 1,737 -1,452 285 285 -1,428 -1,143 -1,143 -513 -1,656 -1,656 -301 -1,957 -1,957 -1,957 Chief Executive's Office 10,161 -2,411 7,751 7,751 -140 7,611 7,611 -99 7,512 7,512 10 7,522 7,522 7,522 Inflation and Other Adjustments (1) 6,099 6,099 6,099 11,601 17,700 17,700 11,584 29,284 29,284 10,250 39,534 Directorate Budgets 387,973 -13,138 374,835 374,835 -10,425 364,410 364,410 8,186 372,596 372,596 7,703 380,299 380,299 10,250 390,549
Area Based Gran t -43,329 42,609 -721 -721 111 -610 -610 -610 -610 -610 -610 -610 Net Directorate Budget 344,643 29,471 374,114 374,114 -10,314 363,800 363,800 8,186 371,986 371,986 7,703 379,689 379,689 10,250 389,939
Page 81 Strategic Measures Capital Financing Principal 17,930 362 18,292 18,292 -300 17,992 17,992 -793 17,198 17,198 -396 16,803 16,803 16,803 Interest 20,023 -1,165 18,858 18,858 -747 18,112 18,112 -746 17,365 17,365 -508 16,857 16,857 16,857 Prudential Borrowing Costs 1,350 -100 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 Interest on Balances -1,341 -486 -1,826 -1,826 -1,727 -3,553 -3,553 -691 -4,244 -4,244 -402 -4,646 -4,646 -4,646 Pensions - Past Service Deficit Funding 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 Total Strategic Measures 37,962 112 38,074 38,074 -2,774 35,300 35,300 -2,231 33,069 33,069 -1,305 31,764 31,764 31,764
Contributions to/from reserves General Balances 3,344 -1,725 1,619 1,619 1,181 2,800 2,800 200 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Budget Reserve - 2009/10 Budget 176 -1,922 -1,746 -1,746 726 -1,020 -1,020 -2,321 -3,341 -3,341 3,341 Efficiency Savings Reserve 3,444 2,573 6,018 6,018 1,924 7,942 7,942 -1,170 6,772 6,772 -6,772 - - - Capital Reserve 300 -300 Insurance Reserve -2,400 -2,400 -2,400 2,400 Total Contributions to/from reserves 7,264 -3,774 3,491 3,491 6,231 9,722 9,722 -3,291 6,431 6,431 -3,431 3,000 3,000 3,000
Council Tax Freeze Grant -7,063 -7,063 -7,063 -7,063 -7,063 -7,063 -7,063 -7,063 -7,063 7,063 Indicative Balance 1,925 1,925 1,925 -2,871 -946
Budget Requiremen t 389,870 18,746 408,616 408,616 -6,857 401,759 401,759 2,664 404,423 404,423 4,892 409,315 409,315 14,442 423,757
(1) Adjustment for inflation and other items that have not yet been allocated by Directorate. CC8 Annex 1
Medium Term Financial Plan 2011/12 - 2015/16 Financing INDICATIVE POSITION 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 Base Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Budget Allocation Budget Base Allocation Budget Base Allocation Budget Base Allocation Budget Base Allocation Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget
£000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Budget Requirement 389,870 18,746 408,616 408,616 -6,857 401,759 401,759 2,664 404,423 404,423 4,892 409,315 409,315 14,442 423,757
Financing Total Formula Grant Revenue Support Grant 28,844 Business Rates 93,316 122,160 108,245 98,491 89,566 89,566 Council Tax Surpluses 3,782 1,600 800 800 800 Council Tax (precept) 282,674 291,914 305,133 318,949 333,391
Page 82 Total Financing 408,616 401,759 404,423 409,315 423,757 Council Tax Calculation Council Tax Base 243,326 245,151 246,989 248,842 250,708 Council Tax (Band D equivalent) £1,161.71 £1,190.76 £1,235.41 £1,281.74 £1,329.80
Increase in Council Tax (precept) 0.5% 3.3% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% Increase in Band D Council Tax 0.00% 2.50% 3.75% 3.75% 3.75% Increase in Budget Requiremen t 4.8% -1.7% 0.7% 1.2% 3.5% CC8 Annex 2 Estimated Reserves and Balances 2011/12 to 2014/15
The table below provides an analysis of estimated earmarked reserves and general balances for 2011/12 to 2014/15.
2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £000 £000 £000 £000 Earmarked Reserves
Estimated School Reserves at start of year 13,844 11,844 9844 7844 Estimated Reserves at start of year 53,578 36,994 26,849 18,961 Estimated Total Reserves at start of year 67,422 48,838 36,693 26,805
Estimated Use of (-) / Additions to (+) School Reserves in Year -2,000 -2,000 -2,000 -2,000
Estimated Use of (-) / Additions to (+) Reserves in Year -16,584 -10,145 -7,888 -675
Estimated School Reserves at end of year 11,844 9,844 7,844 5,844 Estimated Reserves at end of year 36,994 26,849 18,961 18,286 Estimated Total Reserves at end of year 48,838 36,693 26,805 24,130 Page 83
General Balances
Estimated Balances at start of year 13,056 12,675 13,475 14,475
Planned Contributions to Balances to meet required level of balances in MTFP 2,119 2,800 3,000 3,000 Planned Contributions from Balances to meet required level of balances in MTFP -500 0 0 0 Budgeted Change in Balances 1,619 2,800 3,000 3,000
Total Balances at Start of Year 14,675 15,475 16,475 17,475
Estimated Use of Balances in Year -2,000 -2,000 -2,000 -2,000 Estimated Repayment of Previous Use of Balances 0 0 0 0 Net Use of Balances -2,000 -2,000 -2,000 -2,000
Estimated Balances at end of year 12,675 13,475 14,475 15,475 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 84 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Changes to Pressures and Savings compared to 25 January Cabinet Report (see shaded proposals in the Directorate Annex 3s)
New Pressures Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Children Education and Families CEF4 Removal of pressure as contributions to Youth Offending Service are not ceasing -259 -259 -259 -259 CEF27 One off cost of implementing new directorate Structure and Business Strategy 400
Environment & Economy EE70 2012 Olympics - Transport Management 70
Oxfordshire Customer Services CS19 Administration connected to the repatriation of military personnel to Brize Norton 70 70 70 70
Chief Executive's Office 12CES17Page 85 Funding to respond to consultations 447 517 517 CC36 Partnership Funding 100
TOTAL 311 328 328 328
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Children Education and Families CEF25 City Schools Reorganisation - savings realised following repayment of costs in 2010/11 (see Financial Monitoring N -181 Report to Cabinet on 16 February 2010) CEF7 Cessation of spend on Huntercombe - Youth Offending Service N -40 -40 -40 -40 CEF9 New Early Intervention Service - delay in implementation N 1,500 CEF22 Adjust saving to reflect implementation of Quality & Compliance structure N 200
Environment & Economy EE43 Reduce property saving to reflect delays in closing buildings N 100 Contributions to (+) /from (-) Efficiency Reserve N -431 430
TOTAL 1,148 390 -40 -40
Pressures and Savings relating to National Insurance and savings relating to Terms & Conditions have now been allocated to Directorates and have been removed from the Cross Directorate pressures and savin gs.
1 CC8 Annex 3 Summary of Pressures and Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required (c) Directorate 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Directorate 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Cross Directorate Cross Directorate 700 700 700 700 Children, Education and Families 1,447 1,557 1,064 1,274 Children, Education and Families -215 -215 -215 -215 Social & Community Services 7,348 12,838 16,321 21,362 Social & Community Services -4,160 -4,534 -3,073 -3,874 Community Safety 275 483 790 790 Community Safety -64 -64 -64 -64 Environment & Economy 7,431 13,150 18,069 20,030 Environment & Economy -4,749 -5,885 -8,232 -8,578 Oxfordshire Customer Services -3,360 -3,309 -3,372 -3,195 Oxfordshire Customer Services -150 -150 -150 -150 Chief Executive's Office -33 18 68 68 Chief Executive's Office -60 -60 -60 -60 Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 13,108 24,737 32,940 40,329 Total Pressures/Funding not required -8,698 -10,208 -11,094 -12,241 New Service Pressures (a) Savings Identified (b) Directorate 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Directorate 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Page 86 Cross Directorate 1,626 Cross Directorate -10,925 -19,788 -23,316 -25,533 Children, Education and Families 1,822 1,252 1,052 1,052 Children, Education and Families -11,070 -17,899 -18,556 -19,753 Social & Community Services 1,286 1,972 2,576 3,038 Social & Community Services -16,792 -28,744 -34,827 -40,725 Community Safety 50 50 50 50 Community Safety -653 -1,097 -1,517 -1,617 Environment & Economy 1,167 2,060 1,818 1,375 Environment & Economy -7,574 -14,498 -17,633 -20,112 Oxfordshire Customer Services 70 70 70 70 Oxfordshire Customer Services -2,004 -3,483 -3,933 -4,411 Chief Executive's Office 387 578 654 710 Chief Executive's Office -1,634 -2,016 -2,241 -2,287 Total New Service Pressures 4,782 5,982 6,220 7,921 Total Savings -50,652 -87,525 -102,023 -114,438 Total Net Savings Identified Directorate 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Cross Directorate -10,225 -19,088 -22,616 -23,207 Children, Education and Families -9,463 -16,862 -17,719 -18,916 Social & Community Services -19,666 -31,306 -35,324 -41,561 Community Safety -667 -1,111 -1,531 -1,631 Environment & Economy -11,156 -18,323 -24,047 -27,315 Oxfordshire Customer Services -2,084 -3,563 -4,013 -4,491 Chief Executive's Office -1,307 -1,498 -1,647 -1,637
Total Net Savings -54,568 -91,751 -106,897 -118,758 Year on year -54,568 -37,183 -15,146 -11,861
2 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Cross Directorate
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required (c) Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
National Insurance 700 700 700 700
Total Pressures/Fundin g per MTFP 0 0 0 0 Total Pressures/Fundin g not re quired 700 700 700 700
New Service Pressures (a) Savings Identified (b) Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Sum available to allocate 0 0 0 1,626 Cross Directorate -10,925 -19,788 -23,316 -25,533
Total New Service Pressures 0 0 0 1,626 Total Savin gs Identified -10,925 -19,788 -23,316 -25,533
Total Net Savings Identified (Excluding Redundancy Costs)
AnnualPage 87 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 New Service Pressures (a) 0 0 0 1,626 New Savings Identified (b) -10,925 -19,788 -23,316 -25,533 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP not required (c) 700 700 700 700
Total Net Savin gs -10,225 -19,088 -22,616 -23,207
3 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Cross Directorate
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
National Insurance 700 700 700 700
Total Pressures/Fundin g per MTFP 0 0 0 0 Total Pressures/Funding not required 700 700 700 700
New Pressures/Funding Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Sum Available to Allocate 1,626
Total New Pressures 0 0 0 1,626
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15
Page 88 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Inflation Inflation Savings agreed in existing Medium Term Financial Plan E -2,856 -5,256 -5,256 -5,256 Reduce pay inflation and inflation on expenditure budgets to nil in 2011/12 N -1,200 -1,200 -1,200 -1,200 Savings from freezing pay for two years N -1,121 -2,301 -2,301 -2,301 Future Years inflation savings (lower base) N -2,500 -3,750 Total Inflation -5,177 -8,757 -11,257 -12,507 Savings in Strategic Measures budget to reflect reduction in size of Capital Programme N -485 -3,217 -7,559 -7,453 One off Contribution from Insurance Fund N -2,400 One off Contribution from Balances N -500 Contribution from Pensions Reserve N -1,416 -4,500 -4,500 -4,500 Contribution from Efficiency Savings Reserve N -947 -3,314 -1,073
Total Savings -10,925 -19,788 -23,316 -25,533
4 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Children, Education & Families Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required (c) Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Cross Directorate 1,020 1,020 1,020 1,020 Cross Directorate -215 -215 -215 -215 Young People & Access to Education 10 20 30 40 Young People & Access to Education Children & Families 535 635 735 935 Children & Families Raising Achievement Service -356 -356 -356 -356 Raising Achievement Service Commissioning, Performance & Quality 238 238 -365 -365 Commissioning, Performance & Quality Assurance Assurance Schools Schools
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 1,447 1,557 1,064 1,274 Total Pressures/Funding not required -215 -215 -215 -215 New Service Pressures (a) Savings Identified (b) Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Page 89 Cross Directorate 300 200 Cross Directorate -673 -1,490 -962 -812 Young People & Access to Education 272 202 202 202 Young People & Access to Education -3,795 -8,295 -8,795 -9,295 Children & Families 500 500 500 500 Children & Families -500 -500 -500 -500 Raising Achievement Service Raising Achievement Service -1,580 -2,382 -2,650 -3,102 Commissioning, Performance & Quality 750 350 350 350 Commissioning, Performance & Quality -2,928 -3,138 -3,055 -3,255 Assurance Assurance Schools Schools -1,594 -2,094 -2,594 -2,789
Total New Service Pressures 1,822 1,252 1,052 1,052 Total Savings Identified -11,070 -17,899 -18,556 -19,753 Total Net Savings Identified (Excluding Redundancy Costs) 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 New Service Pressures (a) 1,822 1,252 1,052 1,052 New Savings Identified (b) -11,070 -17,899 -18,556 -19,753 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP not -215 -215 -215 -215 required (c) Total Net Savings -9,463 -16,862 -17,719 -18,916
5 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Children, Education & Families
Service Area : Cross Directorate
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired RefBS Re f Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CYPFP1 Previously agreed Medium 125 125 125 125 0 Term Financial Plan (MTFP). Directorate wide pressures for functions where there is insufficient budget 09CY5 Previous efficiency savings 530 530 530 530 target being removed National Insurance- increase in 365 365 365 365 National Insurance - changes in -215 -215 -215 -215 rate announced in March 2009 contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget budget Page 90 Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 1,020 1,020 1,020 1,020 Total Pressures/Funding not required -215 -215 -215 -215
New Pressures/Funding RefBS Re f Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CEF1 7.4 Training and staff development towards new ways of working 300 200
Total New Pressures 300 200 0 0
Savings Identified RefBS Re f Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CEF2 n/a Reduce Savings - Estimate for potential double counting in other savings N 500 600 750 CEF3 9.6 Termination of some external contracts (ending 31.03.11) N -137 -137 -137 -137
n/a Early Intervention Grant increase -1,317 -1,317 -1,317
n/a Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate -536 -536 -108 -108
Total Savings -673 -1,490 -962 -812
Further detail is available in the Children, Education & Families Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
6 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Children, Education & Families
Service Area : Young People & Access to Education Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired RefBS Re f Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 CYPFP1 Increased numbers of Learning 10 20 30 40 Difficulties & Disabilities (LDD) children and young people arriving in county especially with Autistic Spectrum Conditions preventing the achievement of recoupment/income targets and adding to local pressures
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 10 20 30 40 Total Pressures/Funding not required Page 91 New Pressures/Funding Ref BS Re f Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 CEF4 n/a External Contributions to Youth Offending Service ceasing CEF5 n/a Speech & Language and Paramedical Services 135 65 65 65 CEF6 n/a Post 16 Special Educational Needs 137 137 137 137
Total New Pressures 272 202 202 202
Savings Identified Ref BS Re f Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CEF7 n/a Cessation of spend on Huntercombe - Youth Offending Service N -95 -95 -95 -95 CEF8 9.4 & 9.5 Special Educational Needs - out of county placements N -1,000 -1,000 -1,000 CEF9 7.0 New Early Intervention Service replaces a number of previous services N -2,200 -4,200 -4,200 -4,200 CEF10 7.7 Early Years & Children's Centres N -1,500 -3,000 -3,500 -4,000
Total Savings -3,795 -8,295 -8,795 -9,295
Further detail is available in the Children, Education & Families Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
7 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Children, Education & Families
Service Area : Children & Families
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired RefBS Re f Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 09CY10 Removal of efficiency savings in 385 385 385 385 current Medium Term Financial Plan CYPFP2 Placements -50 -150 -250 -250 CYPFP4 Southwark Judgement. In May 200 400 600 800 2009, the Court of Appeal issued the Southwark Judgement which has significant implications for the way children’s services are Page 92 delivered to homeless 16 and 17 year olds. The Judgement extends Local Authorities' duty of care for this group
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 535 635 735 935 Total Pressures/Funding not required 0 0 0 0
New Pressures/Funding RefBS Re f Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 CEF12 n/a All Rights Exhausted (ARE) - continuation of support to asylum seeker children following Appeal Court case 500 500 500 500
Total New Pressures 500 500 500 500
Savings Identified RefBS Re f Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CEF13 8.0 Children's Social Care N -500 -500 -500 -500
Total Savings -500 -500 -500 -500
Further detail is available in the Children, Education & Families Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
8 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Children, Education & Families
Service Area : Raising Achievement Service
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired RefBS Re f Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
08CY11 Raise educational aspiration -356 -356 -356 -356 and achievement - removal of time limited funding for posts in 3 localities
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP -356 -356 -356 -356 Total Pressures/Funding not required 0 0 0 0
Savings Identified RefBS Re f Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CEF14Page 93 8.0 Cessation of National Strategies N -672 -672 -672 -672 CEF15 6.0 School Improvement N -318 -680 -798 -1,150 CEF16 6.2 Outdoor Education Centres - move to self financing model N -100 -200 -300 -400 CEF17 6.2 Equality and Diversity Achievement Service reduced N -240 -330 -380 -380 CEF18 6.2 Restructure 16-19 Teams N -250 -500 -500 -500
Total Savings -1,580 -2,382 -2,650 -3,102
Further detail is available in the Children, Education & Families Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
9 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Children, Education & Families
Service Area : Commissioning, Performance & Quality Assurance
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired RefBS Re f Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 09CY19 Removal of previous efficiency 77 77 77 77 savings target 09CY23 Building Schools for the Future 161 161 -442 -442 (BSF) - planning and preparation costs for accelerated implementation timetable from government. Not now required and removed as savings
Page 94 Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 238 238 -365 -365 Total Pressures/Funding not required 0 0 0 0
New Pressures/Funding RefBS Re f Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 CEF19 n/a Premature Retirement Compensation (Severance Panel) 350 350 350 350 CEF27 n/a Cost of implementing Directorate restructure and Business Strategy 400
Total New Pressures 750 350 350 350
Savings Identified RefBS Re f Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CEF20 n/a Building Schools for the Future - project funding no longer required N -996 -996 -393 -393 CEF21 6.2 Home to School Transport - procurement and route efficiencies N -1,556 -1,556 -2,056 -2,256 CEF22 5.2 Commissioning, Performance & Quality Assurance will become a cross directorate service with S&CS N -200 -400 -400 -400 CEF23 5.3 Family Information Service N -10 -20 -40 -40 CEF24 n/a Cessation of Contactpoint and Play Pathfinder Grants (full year effect) -166 -166 -166 -166
Total Savings -2,928 -3,138 -3,055 -3,255
Further detail is available in the Children, Education & Families Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
10 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Children, Education & Families
Service Area : Schools
Savings Identified RefBS Re f Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CEF25 n/a City Schools Reorganisation - savings realised as planned post full repayment of costs in 2010/11 N -594 -594 -594 -594 CEF26 6.2 Review existing local authority contribution to Schools Budget -1,000 -1,500 -2,000 -2,195
Total Savings -1,594 -2,094 -2,594 -2,789
Further detail is available in the Children, Education & Families Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies. Page 95
11 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services - Adult Social Care
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required (c) Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
All Client Groups -175 -79 -58 -58 All Client Groups -33 -34 -35 -35 Older People 2,865 4,513 6,007 8,149 Older People -2,914 -2,914 -2,914 -2,914 Physical Disabilities 67 127 127 127 Physical Disabilities -5 -5 -5 -5 Learning Disabilities 4,088 7,935 9,905 12,805 Learning Disabilities -1,098 -1,471 -9 -810 Mental Health 26 27 27 27 Mental Health -1 -1 -1 -1 Strategy & Transformation 56 56 56 56 Strategy & Transformation -42 -42 -42 -42
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 6,927 12,579 16,064 21,106 Total Pressures/Funding not required -4,093 -4,467 -3,006 -3,807
New Service Pressures (a) Savings Identified (b) Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Page 96 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
All Client Groups 34 98 152 170 All Client Groups -1,169 -1,475 -1,701 -1,835 Older People 895 1,158 1,289 1,394 Older People -7,822 -13,159 -15,992 -19,683 Physical Disabilities 102 206 370 534 Physical Disabilities -487 -763 -882 -980 Learning Disabilities 255 510 765 940 Learning Disabilities -2,426 -5,326 -6,811 -8,420 Mental Health Mental Health -221 -476 -692 -1,026 Strategy & Transformation Strategy & Transformation -3,859 -4,857 -5,567 -5,567
Total New Service Pressures 1,286 1,972 2,576 3,038 Total Savings Identified -15,984 -26,056 -31,645 -37,511
Total Net Savings Identified (Excluding Redundancy Costs) 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
New Service Pressures (a) 1,286 1,972 2,576 3,038 New Savings Identified (b) -15,984 -26,056 -31,645 -37,511 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP not -4,093 -4,467 -3,006 -3,807 required (c)
Total Net Savings -18,791 -28,551 -32,075 -38,280
12 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 CC8 Annex 3 Social & Community Services
Service Area : All Client Groups
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Occupational Therapy & Equipment 08SC17 Additional occupational therapy service 43 113 113 113 in response to increasing numbers of referrals due to demographic pressures to maintain reductions in waiting lists 08SC18 Additional equipment required due to 36 96 96 96 increase in older people each year 09SC9 Young people transferring to the service 10 20 30 30 requiring equipment and adaptations
09SC10 Increasing levels of dependency of 10 20 20 clients requires more expensive Page 97 specialist equipment 09SC12 Increased occupational therapy capacity -25 -25 -25 will reduce waiting list and response time. Variation to previous years plans
SCP9 Develop options for mobile working. -35 -35 -35 -35 Variation to previous years plans SCP11 Provision of equipment for an increasing -30 -30 -30 number of large people. Variation to previous years plans SCP12 Additional staffing capacity to achieve -20 -20 -20 -20 savings. Variation to previous years plans SCP13 One off investment in prevention. -250 -250 -250 -250 Variation to previous years plans
Miscellaneous 09SC17 Independent Safeguarding Authority - 1 2 3 3 S24 Independent Safeguarding Authority - -1 -2 -3 -3 Cost of implementing new registration Cost of implementing new registration requirements for all people working with requirements (no longer required as vulnerable adults change of government policy) National Insurance- increase in rate 40 40 40 40 National Insurance - changes in -32 -32 -32 -32 announced in March 2009 budget contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP -175 -79 -58 -58 Total Pressures/Funding not required -33 -34 -35 -35
13 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 CC8 Annex 3 Social & Community Services
Service Area : All Client Groups
Operational Pressures Operational Savings Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
S25 Unidentified Savings from All Client 299 299 299 299 S27 Potential savings by limiting contract -299 -299 -299 -299 Groups from 2009/10 budget inflation - work to keep costs of contracted services down by expecting providers to make efficiency savings in the costs of providing their services S26 Invest to then make savings in 125 125 125 125 S28 Savings from investment in Continence, -125 -125 -125 -125 Continence, Dementia Services and Dementia and Stroke Care Pathway Stroke Care Pathway
Total Operational Pressures 424 424 424 424 Total Operational Savings -424 -424 -424 -424 Page 98
New Pressures/Funding Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
S30 Cost of borrowing to fund the replacement ICT system for Adult Social Care to improve efficiency 34 98 152 170
Total New Pressures 34 98 152 170
14 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 CC8 Annex 3 Social & Community Services
Service Area : All Client Groups
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Occupational Therapy & Equipment 09SC14 The optional national retail model will be replaced in Oxfordshire by developing a local retail model of equipment provision E -100 -201 -301 -301 SC22 A review of the servicing and maintenance of stairlifts, steplifts and through floor lifts E -13 -26 -39 -52 SC23 A review of administrative support time for servicing and maintenance of stairlifts E -20 -20 -20 -20 SC24 Costs to support secondment of Occupational Therapists to housing (contributions from District Councils) E -18 -36 -36 SC26 By providing advice and information to people encourage people to arrange their own provision of small items of equipment E -140 -140 -140 -140 (under £25)
Adult Placement Service SC31 Restructure Adult Placement (Shared Lives) Service E -15 -30 -30 -30 Page 99 All Client Groups S31 The need for staff directly employed by the council is reduced as more people take up the option to arrange and purchase their E -648 -674 -699 -750 own care through a personal budget S32 Staff reductions due to streamlined processes resulting from the implementation of the new Adult Social Care ICT system N -34 -98 -152 -170 S33 Potential savings by limiting contract inflation - work to keep costs of contracted services down by expecting providers to make N -38 -87 -137 -189 efficiency savings in the costs of providing their services
S34 Restructure community development team N -120 -140 -140 -140
Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate -41 -41 -7 -7
Total Savings -1,169 -1,475 -1,701 -1,835
Further detail is available in the Social & Community Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
15 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Older People
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Older People SCP15 Removal of one-off pressure in 2010/11 -55 -55 -55 -55 resulting from an overspend on Older Peoples Pooled Budget in 2009/10 (Variation to previous year’s plans)
SCP16 Continuing Care - Reduction in -300 -600 -900 -1,100 additional activity as a result of
Page 100 improvement in the assessment and use of evidence to agree continuing health care eligibility under the national framework policy (Variation to previous year’s plans) S1 Personal Care at Home Act - The new 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 S2 Personal Care at Home Act - The new -2,800 -2,800 -2,800 -2,800 government has confirmed that it will not government has confirmed that it will not be commencing the Personal Care at be commencing the Personal Care at Home Act Home Act. This includes £1.4m originally provided in 2010/11 but not needed
Older People Pooled Budget
Residential & Nursing Beds 08SC21 Demographic pressure - more people 1,294 2,420 2,420 2,420 are living longer putting increasing pressure on budgets; this reflects the national situation. This will be allocated to domiciliary care to reflect strategy
Home Support 08SC28 Demographic pressure - more people 287 563 563 563 are living longer putting increasing pressure on budgets; this reflects the national situation. This will be allocated to domiciliary care to reflect strategy
16 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Older People
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Day Services 08SC31 Demographic pressure - more people 90 234 234 234 are living longer putting increasing pressure on budgets; this reflects the national situation
Integrated Care Services 08SC33 Demographic pressures for Care 101 304 304 304 Management. More people are living longer putting increasing pressure on budgets; this reflects the national
Page 101 situation
SCP17 Extra Care Housing (ECH) - additional 37 73 91 91 funding for night care workers (Subject to capital funding for projects)
SCP18 Cost of Prudential Borrowing - (capital) 18 39 50 50 for extra care housing schemes
09SC81 Adults Demography - more people are -152 -10 1,755 1,755 living longer putting increasing pressure on budgets; this reflects the national situation SCP19 Future Demography - Older People - 2,342 more people are living longer putting increasing pressure on budgets; this reflects the national situation National Insurance- increase in rate 145 145 145 145 National Insurance - changes in -114 -114 -114 -114 announced in March 2009 budget contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 2,865 4,513 6,007 8,149 Total Pressures/Funding not required -2,914 -2,914 -2,914 -2,914
17 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Older People
New Pressures/Funding Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
S3 Demography Increase - Older People - more people are living longer putting increasing pressure on budgets; this reflects the national 895 1,158 1,289 1,394 situation
Total New Pressures 895 1,158 1,289 1,394
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Page 102 Older People Pooled Budget Residential & Nursing Beds 08SC27 Previous years savings being removed as planned E 65 65 65 65 SC37 Ongoing changes to savings relating to the buy out of Servite contract having taken account of the cost of Prudential Borrowing E 1222
SC38 Net savings from the Care Homes for Older People project having taken account of the costs of prudential borrowing (HOPS E -136 -80 -82 -85 project phase 1 new build) S4 Review of Oxfordshire Care Partnership - working with the Oxfordshire Care Partnership to explore ways of meeting long term N -495 -1,236 -2,973 -3,857 care needs in a way which reduces the cost of providing services and leads to developments to achieve efficiencies
Home Support SC42 Reduce Home Support Placement Officer time by introducing more efficient ways of working E -15 -15 -15 -15 SC46 Reduce costs of Internal Home Support - as a consequence of the introduction of self directed support and the high unit costs E -1,000 -1,000 -1,000 -1,000 of internal home support combined with pressure for efficiencies it has been proposed that, subject to consultation, the service should be provided externally. This saving represents part of the proposed saving from ceasing the service. The remaining savings are identified within the Resource Allocation System proposed savings S39 £1m of expenditure on the Homes for Older People programme will be funded by other capital resources rather than prudential N -25 -90 -88 -86 borrowing resulting in a saving on the borrowing costs for the directorate
Day Services SC47 Rationalisation of day services contracts in line with Self Directed Support E -120 -120 -120 -120 SC48 Previous years savings fall out as planned E 50 50 50
Integrated Care Services 08SC34 Planned reducion in savings following restructuring in 2008/09 E 9999
18 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Older People Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Miscellaneous SC54 Extra Care Housing - Additional charging policy for clients in purpose built Extra Care Housing (ECH) schemes to reflect the E -52 -108 -108 -108 additional support available SC57 Savings from the establishment of a Prevention Service E -140 -140 -140 -140 S5 Review of Transport for Day Services in order to cease funding of fleet transport directly by Social & Community Services N ! -1,300 -1,300 -1,300
S6 Limit Contract Inflation - work to keep costs of contracted services down by expecting providers to make efficiency savings in N -1,117 -2,931 -4,800 -6,725 the costs of providing their services S7 Savings from the Resource Allocation System - the Resource Allocation System (RAS) allocates personal budgets to service N -1,917 -3,053 -3,529 -3,920 users. Efficiencies from the move to Self Directed Support and Personal Budgets will result in more efficient delivery of care Page 103 S8 Care Home Placement Reduction - potential savings from reducing the number of older people admitted to care homes and N ! -982 -1,314 -1,861 -2,351 providing alternative services for people in their own homes. This will provide better outcomes for people as well as achieving efficiencies for the council
S29 Additional NHS Funding -1,500 -1,500
Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate -398 -398 -102 -102
Total Savings -7,822 -13,159 -15,992 -19,683
Further detail is available in the Social & Community Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
19 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Physical Disabilities
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
08SC45 Demographic pressures - due to 62 122 122 122 improvements in healthcare there are more people with complex needs who are living longer putting increasing pressure on budgets; this reflects the national situation. In addition, the number of students with support needs arriving in Oxfordshire to study are increasing. This will be spent on external Page 104 home support National Insurance- increase in rate 5 5 5 5 National Insurance - changes in -5 -5 -5 -5 announced in March 2009 budget contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 67 127 127 127 Total Pressures/Funding not required -5 -5 -5 -5
New Pressures/Funding Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
S18 Demographic pressures - due to improvements in healthcare there are more people with complex needs who are living longer putting 102 206 370 534 increasing pressure on budgets; this reflects the national situation. In addition, the number of students with support needs arriving in Oxfordshire to study are increasing. This will be spent on external home support
Total New Pressures 102 206 370 534
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
S19 Savings from Resource Allocation System - the Resource Allocation System (RAS) allocates personal budgets to service users. N -487 -763 -882 -980 Efficiencies from the move to Self Directed Support and Personal Budgets will result in more efficient delivery of care
Total Savings -487 -763 -882 -980
Further detail is available in the Social & Community Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
20 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Learning Disabilities
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
08SC51 Demographic Pressures - numbers of 1,827 3,654 3,654 3,654 people with learning disabilities are increasing due to longer life expectancy and people with complex physical and health needs surviving into adulthood. Both these factors mean that not only are numbers rising, but the amount of care and support individuals need is increasing 09SC48 Demographic pressures - numbers of 1,005 2,010 3,015 3,015 S9 Reduction in demographic pressures for -535 -1,152 -34 -835 people with learning disabilities are Learning Disabilities - the predicted Page 105 increasing due to longer life expectancy increase in funding for demography from and people with complex physical and previous years is slightly less than health needs surviving into adulthood. anticipated Both these factors mean that not only are numbers rising, but the amount of care and support individuals need is increasing 09SC49 Prudential borrowing costs associated 35 33 31 31 with the supported accommodation project 09SC50 Supporting People - reducing Supporting 407 814 1,221 1,221 People contribution as agreed by the Supporting People Commissioning Body
09SC53 More frequent reviews that focus on -151 -151 -151 -151 making people more independent by ensuring that the support offered matches their needs 09SC64 Unit Manager and Procurement Officer -80 -80 -80 -80 to lead the framework tender (see 09SC66 below). Variation to previous years plans
21 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Learning Disabilities Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
OCC Contribution to Learning Disabilities pooled budget SCP27 Develop flexible respite, shared care and 50 100 100 100 training for family carers to enable families to continue to support family members SCP28 Home Farm Trust are in the process of 916 1,476 2,036 2,036 S10 Deregistration of Home Farm Trust -500 -256 88 88 de-registering their care homes. Under residential services - this cost was the procedures laid down nationally, the originally included in the medium term cost of their care transfers over a plan agreed by the County Council in Page 106 number of years from the authorities who February 2010. The cost have changed originally placed them with Home Farm slightly to reflect new information on when Trust to Oxfordshire, as they become the costs will come into effect formally residents of Oxfordshire
SCP30 Future Demography - numbers of people 2,900 with learning disabilities are increasing due to longer life expectancy and people with complex physical and health needs surviving into adulthood. Both these factors mean that not only are numbers rising, but the amount of care and support individuals need is increasing
National Insurance- increase in rate 79 79 79 79 National Insurance - changes in -63 -63 -63 -63 announced in March 2009 budget contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 4,088 7,935 9,905 12,805 Total Pressures/Funding not required -1,098 -1,471 -9 -810
22 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Learning Disabilities Operational Pressures Operational Savings Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
S11 On going impact of one off savings 500 500 500 500 identified in 2009/10 S12 Additional temporary staff to achieve 120 120 120 120 S13 Savings from Resource Allocation -620 -620 -620 -620 savings System - the Resource Allocation System (RAS) allocates personal budgets to service users. Efficiencies from the move to Self Directed Support and Personal Budgets will result in more efficient delivery of care. We therefore aim to reduce people’s personal budgets by approximately 12% over 4 years. Proposals are aimed at reducing reliance Page 107 on paid services and reducing unit costs of services through a wide range of activities so that people continue to be able to meet their eligible needs within the reducing budget
Total Operational Pressures 620 620 620 620 Total Operational Savings -620 -620 -620 -620
New Pressures/Funding Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
S14 Funding of Further Education - change in national policy ! 80 160 240 240 S15 Change to Independent Living Fund policy impacting on local authorities (Older People, Physical Disabilities and Learning Disabilities) ! 175 350 525 700
Total New Pressures 255 510 765 940
23 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Learning Disabilities Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
09SC66 Framework Tender - as contracts approach their expiry date they are being re-tendered to providers who hold framework E -503 -754 -754 -754 contracts. The framework is an agreement that establishes a lower baseline for costs than the previous contracts
SC62 Review of provision of day services - review the costs of the County Council's internal services for adults with learning E -25 -75 -75 -75 disabilities so that they offer value for money at least as good as external providers
OCC Contribution to Learning Disabilities pool SC67 Delay admission to supported living through enhanced respite and shared care E -50 -100 -100 -100 SC69 Increase use of technology and reduce need for paid staff E -25 -50 -50 -50
SC70Page 108 Reduce demand for day support through proactive employment strategy E -25 -25 -25 -25 SC71 Review Internal Learning Disabilities Service - review the costs of the County Council's internal services for adults with learning E -500 -1,000 -1,000 -1,000 disabilities so that they offer value for money at least as good as external providers S16 Savings from Resource Allocation System - the Resource Allocation System (RAS) allocates personal budgets to service users. N -680 -1980 -3280 -4580 Efficiencies from the move to Self Directed Support and Personal Budgets will result in more efficient delivery of care. We therefore aim to reduce people’s personal budgets by approximately 12% over 4 years. Proposals are aimed at reducing reliance on paid services and reducing unit costs of services through a wide range of activities so that people continue to be able to meet their eligible needs within the reducing budget S17 Limit Contract Inflation - work to keep costs of contracted services down by expecting providers to make efficiency savings in N -118 -386 -674 -983 the costs of providing their services
S39 Additional Learning Disabilities Reform Grant -386 -842 -842 -842
Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate -114 -114 -11 -11
Total Savings -2,426 -5,326 -6,811 -8,420
Further detail is available in the Social & Community Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
24 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 CC8 Annex 3 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Mental Health
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 09SC46 Temporary Project Manager (0.5fte for 3 -24 -24 -24 years)
OCC Contribution to Primary Care Trust pool (Service Level Agreements) SCP22 Autistic Spectrum Condition national 25 50 50 50 strategy development (50% contribution to service budget) National Insurance- increase in rate 1 1 1 1 National Insurance - changes in -1 -1 -1 -1 announced in March 2009 budget contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget
Page 109 Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 26 27 27 27 Total Pressures/Funding not required -1 -1 -1 -1
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 09SC46 Move to Supported Living (housing with support model) - savings to be achieved through moving to supported living where E -10 -20 -30 -30 service users can live more independently and access housing benefit SC60 Keeping People Well - the creation of a pathway in day services that both prevents people becoming so unwell that they need E -101 -101 -101 -101 to use adult social care services and promotes recovery so that people can self-manage their own care in the wider community SC61 Savings on direct payments E -8 -8 -8 -8 S20 Potential savings from Oxfordshire & Buckinghamshire Mental Health service workforce as a result of the introduction of self N -100 -200 -250 -300 directed support S21 As part of the mental health strategy we will offer self directed support to eligible people that supports greater independence N -24 -24 and self-management of care within a recovery pathway S22 Keeping People Well - further efficiencies from 2012/13 - the creation of a pathway in day services that both prevents people N -12 -12 -162 becoming so unwell that they need to use adult social care services and promotes recovery so that people can self-manage their own care in the wider community S23 Support to Independent Living - this will be managed by the creation of a housing pathway that supports people to move N -133 -266 -400 through from hospital to supported living to independent accommodation and makes the most efficient use of resources. The pathway pools adult social care, health and Supporting People investment in housing for people with mental health problems
Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate N -2 -2 -1 -1 Total Savings -221 -476 -692 -1,026
Further detail is available in the Social & Community Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies. 25 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Strategy & Transformation
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
08SC75 On-going costs for projects and support, -6 -6 -6 -6 above current budget provision. Variation to previous years plans
09SC76 Directorates investment in the Corporate 9 9 9 9 Procurement Team to ensure current activity level National Insurance- increase in rate 53 53 53 53 National Insurance - changes in -42 -42 -42 -42
Page 110 announced in March 2009 budget contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 56 56 56 56 Total Pressures/Funding not required -42 -42 -42 -42
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
08SC77 Recharge of costs when staff are assigned to projects E 5555 SC72 Reduction in senior management administrative support E -20 -20 -20 SC75 Efficiency in the way buildings are managed through Facilities Management E -63 -63 -63 -63 SC79 Savings from a review of business and systems support E -50 -110 -110 -110 SC80 Restructuring of contracts team E -25 -25 -50 -50 SC82 Review of the work of the strategy and performance team E -40 -90 -90 -90 S35 Savings from the amalgamation of two teams and a reduction in management N -350 -450 -450 -450 S36 Restructuring of Senior Management N -180 -180 -180 -180 S37 The Transforming Adult Social Care Programme ends in 2010/11 so expenditure will reduce -2,295 -2,295 -2,295 -2,295 S38 Supporting People - continued reduction in government grant as previously planned to be delivered through more efficient N -808 -1,576 -2,306 -2,306 contracts
Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate N -53 -53 -8 -8
Total Savings -3,859 -4,857 -5,567 -5,567
Further detail is available in the Social & Community Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
26 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services - Community Services
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required (c) Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Community Services 421 259 257 256 Community Services -67 -67 -67 -67
Total Pressures/Fundin g per MTFP 421 259 257 256 Total Pressures/Fundin g not re quired -67 -67 -67 -67
New Service Pressures (a) Savings Identified (b) Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Community Services Community Services -808 -2,688 -3,182 -3,214
Total New Service Pressures Total Savin gs Identified -808 -2,688 -3,182 -3,214
Total Net Savings Identified
AnnualPage 111 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
New Service Pressures (a) New Savings Identified (b) -808 -2,688 -3,182 -3,214 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP not required (c) -67 -67 -67 -67
Total Net Savin gs -875 -2,755 -3,249 -3,281
27 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Community Services
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Library Service 09SC2 Self service at Central Library savings 64 64 64 64 already built into the Medium Term Financial Plan will not be achievable as planned due to the delay in the Westgate project SCP2 Library Transformation Programme/Self 132 132 132 132 Service (existing target) SCP3 Library transformation programme: 30 29 28 27 Introduction of self service (Radio Frequency Identification) Potential cost of prudential Page 112 borrowing to manage the cash flow between necessary capital investment and the receipt of developer funding) SCP4 Cost of Prudential Borrowing - Combining 16 16 15 15 Oxfordshire Studies and Oxford Records Office on the Oxfordshire Records Office site
National Insurance- increase in rate 45 45 45 45 National Insurance - changes in contribution -35 -35 -35 -35 announced in March 2009 budget rate announced in June 2010 budget
Heritage & Arts Services 09SC5 One Off Funding - Additional short term 81 -80 -80 -80 resources for Cogges Manor Farm to implement the recommendations made to Cabinet on 25 November 2008 SCP6 Renegotiation of partnership with Victoria 10 10 10 10 County History Trust National Insurance- increase in rate 15 15 15 15 National Insurance - changes in contribution -11 -11 -11 -11 announced in March 2009 budget rate announced in June 2010 budget
Community & Cultural Development National Insurance- increase in rate 3 3 3 3 National Insurance - changes in contribution -2 -2 -2 -2 announced in March 2009 budget rate announced in June 2010 budget
Music Service National Insurance- increase in rate 25 25 25 25 National Insurance - changes in contribution -19 -19 -19 -19 announced in March 2009 budget rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 421 259 257 256 Total Pressures/Funding not required -67 -67 -67 -67
28 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Community Services
Operational Pressures Operational Savings Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Library Servic e 08SC5 Savings due to temporary closure of Central 21 21 21 21 09SC1 Income from the sale of withdrawn items & -40 -40 -40 -40 Library. Difference between pressure and reduced expenditure on audio book on saving cassette. Matching pressure ends March 2011 but budget will become permanent 08SC6 Self service at Central Library 63 63 63 63 Scale of outreach activities and staff cover -11 9 -55 -46 will be adjusted to ensure an overall balanced savings position 09SC2 Self service at Central Library which was 64 64 09SC2 Staff cover will be adjusted to ensure an -64 -64 -64 -64 found from elsewhere in service for years overall balanced savings position 2009/10 & 2010/11 09SC3 Community Librarian 20 SC8 Efficiencies achieved as a result of upgrade -38 -38 -38 -38 Page 113 of People's Network PCs Herita ge & Arts Service s O8SC11; Shortfall in savings in heritage services 49 49 49 40 SC9, SC10 and SC11
Total Operational Pressures 153 133 197 188 Total Operational Savings -153 -133 -197 -188
29 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Social & Community Services
Service Area : Community Services
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Library Service (see Community Services Business Strategy page 20) 09SC2 Self service at Central Library. Savings will be found from elsewhere within the service for years 2009/10 and 2010/11 until they can be E -64 -64 achieved through the Westgate project SC2 Fallout of one-off saving in 2010/11: Pending efficiencies from the introduction of Radio Frequency Identification self-service, defer payment E 65 65 65 65 into the Mobile Library vehicle replacement fund for one year in 2010/11 SC3 Fallout of one-off saving in 2010/11: Pending efficiencies from the introduction of Radio Frequency Identification self service, reduce E 11 11 11 11 expenditure by 16% on newspapers and periodicals for one year SC4 Fallout of one-off saving in 2010/11: Pending efficiencies from the review of Library Support Services, hold vacancies E 38 38 38 38 SC5 Fallout of one-off saving in 2010/11: 6% reduction in book expenditure falling to 4.9% in 2012/13 . Sustaining expenditure on book stock is E 17 13 63 63 a priority for the service and £63,000 is expected to be built back in by 2013/14
12COS8Page 114 Restructure libraries network, including mobile library network; reduce management and professional staff; savings from the introduction of N ! -406 -1,740 -1,980 -2,000 RFID self-service Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate N -63 -63 -4 -4 -338 -1,676 -1,871 -1,891 Heritage & Arts Service (see Community Services Business Strategy page 4) 08SC10 Withdraw funding from Cogges Museum, alternative arrangements for the future of the museum are currently being discussed E ! -78 -78 -78 -78 08SC12 Reduce support to Victoria County History E ! -112 -112 -112 -112 12COS1 Close Heritage & Arts Management Office N -51 -102 -102 -102 12COS2 Museum Service: restructure and increase opportunities for volunteering N -199 -299 -299 12COS3 History Service: restructure; reduce staffing and combine resources at St Luke's N -77 -163 -209 -221 12COS4 Partnerships with Arts Organisations - reduce support & focus on three key organisations N -10 -153 -153 -153 12COS5 The Mill Arts Centre - reduce support N -90 -90 Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate (subject to consultation) N -16 -16 -1 -1 -344 -823 -1,044 -1,056 Cultural & Community Development (see Community Services Business Strategy page 18) SC21 Reduced Cultural Development capacity E -15 -15 -15 -15 12COS6 Deletion of post of Cultural Development Officer (0.41 FTE) N -19 -19 -19 -19 Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate N -5 -5 -1 -1 -39 -39 -35 -35 Music Service (See Community Services Business Strategy page 21) SC14 Music Service Change Programme - including the raising of fees and charges, increasing administrative efficiency and restructuring the E -57 -120 -220 -220 service delivery Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate -30 -30 -12 -12 -87 -150 -232 -232
Total Savings -808 -2,688 -3,182 -3,214
Further detail is available in the Social & Community Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
30 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Community Safety
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required (c) Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Fire & Rescue Service 252 460 767 767 Fire & Rescue Service -55 -55 -55 -55 Emergency Planning 2 2 2 2 Emergency Planning -1 -1 -1 -1 Safer Communities 2 2 2 2 Safer Communities -1 -1 -1 -1 Gypsy & Traveller Sites 2 2 2 2 Gypsy & Traveller Sites -1 -1 -1 -1 Trading Standards 17 17 17 17 Trading Standards -6 -6 -6 -6
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 275 483 790 790 Total Pressures/Funding not required -64 -64 -64 -64
New Service Pressures (a) Savings Identified (b) Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
FirePage 115 & Rescue Service 50 50 50 50 Fire & Rescue Service -314 -486 -830 -830 Emergency Planning Emergency Planning -26 -31 -33 -33 Safer Communities Safer Communities -142 -142 -141 -141 Gypsy & Traveller Sites Gypsy & Traveller Sites -8 -8 -1 -1 Trading Standards Trading Standards -163 -430 -512 -612
Total New Service Pressures 50 50 50 50 Total Savings Identified -653 -1,097 -1,517 -1,617
Total Net Savings Identified 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
New Service Pressures (a) 50 50 50 50 Savings Identified (b) -653 -1,097 -1,517 -1,617 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP not required (c) -64 -64 -64 -64
Total Net Savings -667 -1,111 -1,531 -1,631
31 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 CC8 Annex 3 Community Safety
Service Area : Fire & Rescue
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CSP1 Increase the number of Watch Managers 208 416 416 416 See savings 12CS7.1 & 12CS8.3 to support the Retained Duty System fire stations and improve the overall operational resilience and availability across Oxfordshire. This pressure can be partially addressed by the reallocation of the £0.305m within the MTFP identified for the staffing upgrade associated with Bicester Fire Station
CSP1Page 116 Re-direct 09CS5 (Bicester) to CSP1 307 307 08CS8 Assessment Development Centres. 5 5 5 5 Reduction of Communities and Local -5 -5 -5 -5 Introduction of new legislation following Government direction and reduced the repeal of the Appoint and Promotion advancement opportunities due to Regulations concerning the reduced managerial posts allows removal advancement of personnel within the of this pressure Fire & Rescue Service 09CS8 Regional Control Centre. Increased 101 101 101 101 requirements (and therefore costs) for data management required in Fire & Rescue Service. No longer able to absorb this cost due to movement in the business case from predicted 30% saving. Based on workload equivalent of 2 FTE and data system / interfacing costs 09CS12 Increased recharge from County 2 2 2 2 Procurement
32 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 CC8 Annex 3 Community Safety
Service Area : Fire & Rescue
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 09CS2 Implications of flooding review as a result -22 -22 -22 -22 of Integrated Risk Management Plan (IRMP) - Provision of 2 further dry suits per appliance to allow crews to have a safe system of work and renewals and contribution to whole life costing of essential flood response equipment (in first 2 years to be found from contribution got FRS operational equipment reserves). Removal of one - off funding
09CS4 Implications of flooding review as a result -25 -25 -25 -25 of the Integrated Risk Management Plan - Page 117 second boat and swift water rescue capability to cover south of the county and create a resilient service. Removal of one - off funding.
CSP2 Maintenance / support and selective -150 -150 -150 -150 replacement of software and hardware systems in current Fire Control / mobilising centre. Removal of one - off funding. National Insurance- increase in rate 133 133 133 133 National Insurance - changes in -50 -50 -50 -50 announced in March 2009 budget contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 252 460 767 767 Total Pressures/Funding not required -55 -55 -55 -55
New Pressures/Funding Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
12CSP1 Training for fire fighters using Breathing Apparatus 50 50 50 50 12CSP3 Additional cost of the Retained Duty System following implementation of Part Time Workers (prevention of less favourable treatment) n/k n/k n/k n/k Regulations 2000 - it is not possible to provide an accurate estimate until the NJC issues revised conditions of service
Total New Pressures 50 50 50 50
33 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 CC8 Annex 3 Community Safety
Service Area : Fire & Rescue
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CSP1 Re-direct 09CS5 (Bicester) to CSP1 (Watch Managers) E -305 -305 CS4 The proposed Integrated Risk Management Plan (IRMP) in 2010/11 incorporates a project to examine the operational resilience E -36 -36 -36 -36 requirements in terms of appliances and equipment and to review the locations of all of our fire stations. This will ensure we can provide an effective emergency response service county wide. Part of this review will be to permanently remove the second fire engine from Faringdon which was temporarily removed several years ago
08CS10 Reduction in Communications budget. Following the completion of the Firelink project it is anticipated that it may be possible to E -10 -10 -10 -10 release these savings 08CS11 Review of support services arrangements E -16 -16 -16 -16 09CS8 Movement to regional approach for selected Control and mobilising support functions. Effect is to reduce opportunities for E -50 -101 -101 -101
Page 118 current staff redeployment and to require complete alignment with regional procedures which may require changes to the Oxfordshire Fire & Rescue Service Integrated Risk Management Plan CS13 Reduction in operational and specialist training. This will be a selective approach, protecting where possible risk critical course s E -45 -45 -45 -45 / qualifications. The outcome of the programmed Health and Safety Executive inspection in November could threaten deliverability of this saving due to the potential for current training arrangements to be found to be inadequate CS14 Extend the life of the new style (plastic body) fire appliances from 12 to 14 years. Selectively extend the life of other specialist E -30 -30 -30 -30 vehicles including the hydraulic platform, water tanker, incident command unit etc, depending on usage and condition
12CS3 Review of Service including current Integrated Risk Management Plan projects, the national strategic review of fire policy and N ! -61 -61 -61 synergies with Children, Education & Families and Social & Community Services. Includes removal of technical fire safety post
12CS3a Wholetime firefighter establishment review at Banbury and Slade Park Fire Stations N ! -70 -70 -70 -70 12CS3b Further outcome of Service review linked to movement into Social & Community Services Directorate - removal of one post N ! -41 -41
12CS3c Savings from more effective procurement (including regional and sub regional initiatives) N -20 -20 12CS5 Savings identified in the Fire & Rescue Service "Budget Justification Exercise" - reduced initial trainee volumes, increased N ! -30 -90 -90 -90 income and removal of Retained Recruitment Officer post. Reductions in Assessment Centre process and medical related expenditure
Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate -27 -27 -5 -5
Total Savings -314 -486 -830 -830
Further detail is available in the Community Safety Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
34 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Community Safety
Service Area : Emergency Planning Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
National Insurance- increase in rate 2 2 2 2 National Insurance - changes in -1 -1 -1 -1 announced in March 2009 budget contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Fundin g per MTFP 2 2 2 2 Total Pressures/Funding not required -1 -1 -1 -1
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
09CS1 Renegotiation of external contracts E -4 -8 -8 CS18 Reduce supplies & services budgets E -4 -4 -4 -4 CS19Page 119 Income from training courses E -1 -2 -2 -2 12CS11 Further reductions in supplies and services N ! -18 -18 -18 -18
Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate -3 -3 -1 -1
Total Savings -26 -31 -33 -33
Further detail is available in the Community Safety Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
35 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Community Safety
Service Area : Safer Communities
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
National Insurance- increase in rate 2 2 2 2 National Insurance - changes in -1 -1 -1 -1 announced in March 2009 budget contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Fundin g per MTFP 2 2 2 2 Total Pressures/Funding not required -1 -1 -1 -1
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Page 120 12CS14 Reduce funding to Safer Community partnerships and / or efficiencies achieved through absorbing function into the new cross- N ! -141 -141 -141 -141 directorate Communities Team
Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate -1 -1
Total Savings -142 -142 -141 -141
Further detail is available in the Community Safety Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
36 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Community Safety
Service Area : Gypsy & Traveller Services
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
National Insurance- increase in rate 2 2 2 2 National Insurance - changes in -1 -1 -1 -1 announced in March 2009 budget contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 2 2 2 2 Total Pressures/Funding not required -1 -1 -1 -1
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Page 121 Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate -8 -8 -1 -1
Total Savings -8 -8 -1 -1
Further detail is available in the Community Safety Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
37 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Community Safety
Service Area : Trading Standards Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
National Insurance- increase in rate 17 17 17 17 National Insurance - changes in -6 -6 -6 -6 announced in March 2009 budget contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 17 17 17 17 Total Pressures/Funding not required -6 -6 -6 -6
Operational Pressures Operational Savin gs Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Page 122 12CSP5 Provide sustainable funding for 43 43 43 43 12CS15 Delete head of service post - additional -40 -40 -40 -40 Intelligence analyst post saving for full post less restructuring costs 12CSP6 Increase support services capacity to off- 30 30 30 12CS16 Reduced hours for 1 Principal Trading -3 -9 -9 -9 set managerial reductions Standards Officer 12CS17 Delete Community Liaison Officer post ! -24 -24 -24 12CSP7 Expected reduction of animal health 49 60 70 81 12CS22 Reduce the size of the animal heath ! -49 -60 -70 -81 grant (DEFRA) service
Total Operational Pressures 92 133 143 154 Total Operational Savings -92 -133 -143 -154
38 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Community Safety
Service Area : Trading Standards Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CS26 Increase the level of grant funding (net of specialist grants and funding officer post, 1fte). Raising performance of Trading E -20 -20 -20 -20 Standards in securing grant funding to a level consistent with other local authorities) CS27 Additional increase in grant funding. Raising performance in securing grant funding to a level consistent with highest performing E -50 -50 -50 authorities. Higher risk strategy that, if unsuccessful, will necessitate further service reductions CS28 Replace Trading Standards operational post with an apprenticeship E -2 -2 -2 -2 CS30 Reprovision of Oxfordshire County Council Consumer Advice Service through redirecting Oxfordshire residents to national call E -102 -102 -102 centre. Reduction of 3 posts CS31 Delete honoraria payments for emergency call out rota and flexible working etc E -10 -10 -10 CS34 Provision of petrol station 'vapour recovery' licensing service on behalf of district councils. Avoids duplication of inspection E -4 -4 -4 -4 between OCC and Districts. High risk strategy relies upon agreement of all 5 District Councils to achieve the full saving CS35 Delete Trading Standards Enforcement Officer post E -30 -30 -30 -30 Page 123 CS36 Delete head of service post E -50 -50 -50 -50 12CS18 Delete Business Community Liaison Officer post N ! -24 -27 -27 -27 12CS19 Further savings to be achieved either through adopting an alternate model for provision of a Trading Standards Service (subject N ! -100 -200 to options appraisal and approval) or through further reductions to be identified 12CS20 Management restructure, deleting group manager layer in the service structure N ! -112 -112 -112 12CS21 Bring forward deletion of some honorarium payments (CS31) N ! -4 0 0 0 12CS16 Reduced hours for 1 Principal Trading Standards Officer (used as Operational Saving from 2012/13) N -6000
Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate -23 -23 -5 -5
Total Savings -163 -430 -512 -612
Further detail is available in the Community Safety Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
39 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Environment & Economy
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required (c) Service 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Highways & Transport 1,676 3,990 5,144 5,505 Highways & Transport -94 -94 -94 -94 Growth & Infrastructure 5,243 8,605 11,978 13,578 Growth & Infrastructure -4,155 -5,291 -7,638 -7,984 Property Asset Management 512 555 947 947 Property Asset Management -500 -500 -500 -500
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 7,431 13,150 18,069 20,030 Total Pressures/Funding not required -4,749 -5,885 -8,232 -8,578
New Service Pressures (a) Savings Identified (b) Service 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
HighwaysPage 124 & Transport 80 150 80 80 Highways & Transport -5,572 -9,700 -11,721 -12,875 Growth & Infrastructure 517 912 1,668 1,225 Growth & Infrastructure -821 -2,007 -3,642 -5,152 Property Asset Management 570 998 70 70 Property Asset Management -1,181 -2,791 -2,270 -2,085
Total New Service Pressures 1,167 2,060 1,818 1,375 Total Savings Identified -7,574 -14,498 -17,633 -20,112
Total Net Savings Identified Annual 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
New Service Pressures (a) 1,167 2,060 1,818 1,375 New Savings Identified (b) -7,574 -14,498 -17,633 -20,112 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP not -4,749 -5,885 -8,232 -8,578 required (c)
Total Net Savings -11,156 -18,323 -24,047 -27,315
40 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Environment & Economy Service Area : Highways & Transport
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
09EE1 Public Transport Contract Inflation 352 704 1,055 1,055 09EE3 Removal of one - off funding for cost of -50 -50 -50 -50 Analysis of South East Plan infrastructure requirements EEP1 On - Street Parking Account - 300 550 550 adjustments to bring into balance EEP2 Parking Account to generate surplus to 625 350 125 150 redistribute 08EE4 Oxfordshire Highways Contract Inflation 528 1,055 1,583 1,583
EE13 Flood and extreme weather pressure 190 400 650 986
EE15Page 125 Removal of one off funding for Highways -250 -250 -250 -250 contract mobilisation EEP6 Removal of one - off additional cost of -750 -750 -750 -750 repairing highway defects as a result of bad weather in January 2010 10/11 Estimated shortfall in funding (as at 900 2,100 2,100 2,100 MTFP February 2010) following transfer of concessionary fares to the council National Insurance- increase in rate 131 131 131 131 National Insurance - changes in -94 -94 -94 -94 announced in March 2009 budget contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 1,676 3,990 5,144 5,505 Total Pressures/Funding not required -94 -94 -94 -94
New Pressures/Funding Ref Description Policy Redun- 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change dancy £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
EE68 Tree Maintenance 80 80 80 80 EE70 2012 Olympics - Transport Management 70
Total New Service Pressures 80 150 80 80
41 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Environment & Economy Service Area : Highways & Transport
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Parking Account EE12 Cancel previously agreed drawdown of the On Street Parking reserve E 800 (adjustment to planned use of reserve as per 2010/11 MTFP) EE11 Increase charge for residents' & other permits E ! -25 -50 -75 -100 Updated contribution to (+)/from (-) On & Off Street Parking Account following: N ! -34 -1,041 -963 -2,036 a) re-introduction of street parking charges (£0.600m per annum) b) re-introduction of charges at park and ride car parks (£1.000m per annum from 2012/13) 741 -1 ,091 -1 ,038 -2 ,136 Transformation and Restructuring Page 126 EE6 Reduce Policy & Strategy activity E -131 -131 -131 24 EE1 Integrated Organisation Structure E -25 -425 -800 -800 EE2 Reduce staffing N -150 -123 -250 EE3 Remove additional external funding (relating to road adoptions) E 100 EE4 Increase use of commuted sums, then reduce in 2012/13 E -4 -58 200 200 EE15 Reduce Section 42 payments E -20 -40 -50 -60 EE8 Reduce the use of consultants N -150 -100 -150 -150 -330 -904 -1 ,054 -936 Street Lighting EE14 Increase part night lighting by 28,000 units (2 phases of £14,000 units) and decommission areas of lighting E -50 -150 -250 -350 -50 -150 -250 -350
Public Transport 09EE1/E Improve Public Transport Contract Efficiency E -440 -792 -1,143 -967 E5 EE9 Reduce levels of Bus Subsidy and the number of routes supported N -300 -300 -550 -800 EE16 Reduce investment in Public transport development projects/activities N ! -100 -100 -100 -100 EE17 Reduce support to Oxfordshire Rural Community Council (ORCC) to leave advice line only N ! -60 -60 -60 -60 -900 -1 ,252 -1 ,853 -1 ,927
42 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Environment & Economy Service Area : Highways & Transport
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Road Safety EE7 Increased support for Thames Valley Road Safety Partnership from 2012/13 as assumed in 2010/11 MTFP (saving of £0.100m E 100 100 100 in 2010/11 and 2011/12 falls out) EE18 Reduce Road Safety education activity N ! -100 -100 -100 -100 EE19 Reduce Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) enforcement activity N ! -90 -90 -90 -90 EE20 Full year effect of ceasing of grant to the Safer Roads Partnership N -1,145 -1,145 -1,145 -1,145 EE21 Full year effect of reduction in grant for School Travel Advisors N -92 -92 -92 -92 -1,427 -1,327 -1,327 -1,327 Transport - Procurement Efficiencies 09EE15 Oxfordshire Highways efficiency & contract savings E -828 -2,198 -3,269 -3,269 /EE13 -828 -2,198 -3,269 -3,269 Page 127
Transport - Maintenance standard quality reduction 08EE4 Reduction in road maintenance E -546 -546 -546 -546 EE22 Remove the 7 day response time N ! -250 -250 -250 -250 EE23 Reduce highways maintenance N ! -1,550 -1,550 -1,550 -1,550 EE24 Reduce flooding/drainage activity N ! -100 -100 -400 -400 EE25 Reduce repairs and maintenance of Street Lights N ! -150 -150 -150 -150 -2,596 -2,596 -2,896 -2,896
Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate -182 -182 -34 -34
Total Savin gs -5,572 -9,700 -11,721 -12,875
Further detail is available in the Environment & Economy Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
43 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Environment & Economy
Service Area : Growth & Infrastructure
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11to 2014/15 Pressures/funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Waste Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme 1,730 2,585 797 941 LATS purchase/fines - reduced pressure -2,101 -1,687 (LATS) purchase/fines as per previous to reflect increase diversion from landfill tonnage & market assumptions disposal and price reduction from original assumptions in the MTFP. Now in line with current market assumptions
Waste Landfill Tax increases £8 per tonne 1,552 3,092 4,592 4,592 Landfill Tax escalator - reduction in -385 -757 -1,110 increase pressure reflecting increase diversion from landfill disposal. Assumes £80/tonne Page 128 in 2014/15 Waste LATS & Landfill Tax Adjustment 1,669 2,847 6,528 7,984 LATS & Landfill Tax Adjustment -1,669 -2,847 -6,528 -7,984
Fallout of one-off funding EEP14, EEP7 -170 -170 -170 -170 & EEP8 09EE26 One off funding - pressures around the 211 -20 -20 delivery of a robust Minerals & Waste Framework EEP31 Budget inflation reduction not realised 233 233 233 233 National Insurance- increase in rate 18 18 18 18 announced in March 2009 budget
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 5,243 8,605 11,978 13,578 Total Pressures/Funding not required -4,155 -5,291 -7,638 -7,984
New Pressures/Funding Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
EE34 Restructure Waste Recycling Centres 76 354 250 373 EE35 Waste Treatment Procurement - delay in savings realisation 734 EE36 Investment in automated energy readers plus loss of LABGI funding assumed to be available in 2014/15 20 20 20 70 EE39 Carbon Reduction pressures due to change in government policy 127 195 248 293 EE41 Carbon Reduction Tax (street lighting and non - school properties) 294 343 416 489
Total New Pressures 517 912 1,668 1,225
44 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Environment & Economy
Service Area : Growth & Infrastructure
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Integrated Organisation Structure EE46 Directorate Integration Efficiencies E -312 -312 -312 EE45 Integrated Organisational efficiencies (Management cost) E -167 -167 -167 EE47 Early realisation of Integrated Organisational efficiencies (Management cost) in 2011/12 and amendment for future years N -100 67 67 67 recognising limitation of saving (direct link to EE45 above) 08EE27 Savings still to be identified E -19 -19 09EE55 Contributions from Heads of Service to meet Business Support share of savings target E -19 -38 -38 -119 -450 -450 -450
Transformation and Restructuring
EE48Page 129 Restructuring Countryside Service N -40 -75 -75 -75 EE49 Rationalisation of Waste Recycling Centres (capital investment required) N ! -110 -189 -291 -920 EE50 Restructuring of Waste Management Services N -43 -89 -165 -165 EE51 Restructuring of Planning, Planning Implementation and Economic Development teams N -76 -152 -228 -304 -269 -505 -759 -1,464
Service Prioritisation and Partnerships Review EE52 Countryside Service - reduction in service level N -69 -108 -122 -135 EE54 Grant Reduction - Countryside Service N -94 -94 -94 -94 EE55 Grant Reduction - Economic Development N -65 -65 -65 -65 EE56 Reduction in grants to external groups (economic development and rural) N -56 -93 -93 -93 EE57 Reduction in grants to external groups (waste management) N -40 -220 -270 -387 EE58 Reduction in monitoring of closed landfill sites N -25 -50 -50 -50 EE59 Waste Management - review financial incentives to Waste Collection Authorities N -600 -349 -630 -694 -1,424
45 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Environment & Economy
Service Area : Growth & Infrastructure
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Income Realisation 09EE19 Planning Application and monitoring income E -5 -12 -18 -18 08EE5 Increased Planning Fee Income E -17 -17 -17 -17 EE60 Reduce Planning Fee Income (due to reduction in applications) N 21 21 21 21 08EE8 Increase in third party income levels E -16 -16 -16 -16 EE61 Income Generation (renewable energy) N -5 -20 -35 -35 EE62 Income Generation (pre-application enquiries, discharge of conditions) N -10 -15 -20 -20 EE63 Income Generation (countryside) N -5 -80 -90
EE64Page 130 Income Generation (waste management) N -25 -25 -50 -70 -57 -89 -215 -245
Waste Management Procurement Efficiencies 09EE29 Procurement and Oxfordshire Waste Partnership (OWP) Financial arrangement savings E -243 -460 -684 -684 EE27 Closed landfill E -24 -24 -30 -30 EE29 Efficiencies through waste procurement E -978 -978 09EE32 Ongoing variations in the expected payments of Diversion credits to Districts reflecting expected activity E 30 9 -5 -5 -237 -475 -1,697 -1,697 Energy Reduction EE30 Schools' contribution (20% top slicing energy efficiency) E -33 -66 -99 -132 EEP28 Waste reduction through schools and non- school buildings E -12 -12 -12 -12 EE31 Directorate contribution (20% top slicing energy efficiency) E -15 -30 -45 -59 EE33 Carbon Management (reduced carbon allowances from 3% reduction) E -21 -41 -46 -44 -81 -149 -202 -247
EE28 Remove one -off funding for 2010/11 from the Waste Management Reserve E 384 384 384 384
Sub-total Growth & Infrastructure -609 -1,464 -3,183 -4,693
Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate N -93 -93 -9 -9
Total Savings -821 -2,007 -3,642 -5,152
Further detail is available in the Environment & Economy Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
46 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Environment & Economy
Service Area : Property Asset Management
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11to 2014/15 Pressures/funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
08EE18 Corporate Property database investment 1 1 1 1 and on-going support 08EE19 Remove one - off funding for updating of -20 -20 -20 -20 building floor plans 09EE41 Repairs & Maintenance inflation 75 101 121 121 09EE45 Fall out of loss of rent income on vacant -70 -70 -70 -70 staff housing 09EE47 The Charter -36 -36 -36 -36 09EE48 Rent increases net of properties leased 17 17 17 17 out 09EE51Page 131 Adjustment for Procurement 1 1 1 1 EEP16 Rent & Service Charges 34 51 103 103 EEP21 Pressure arising from changes from the 0 0 320 320 original Better Offices Programme business case. EEP19 Re-investment of delegated schools 500 500 500 500 EE44 Reviewing schools delegated Repairs & -500 -500 -500 -500 Repairs & Maintenance resulting from Maintenance budget (amount going to review schools) National Insurance- increase in rate 10 10 10 10 announced in March 2009 budget
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 512 555 947 947 Total Pressures/Funding not required -500 -500 -500 -500
Operational Pressures Operational Savin gs Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Unrealised income levels for 100 100 100 100 Managed through operational budget -100 -100 -100 -100 Staff Housing and management Smallholdings
Total Operational Pressures 100 100 100 100 Total Operational Savings -100 -100 -100 -100
47 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Environment & Economy
Service Area : Property Asset Management
New Pressures/Funding Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
EE65 Pump Priming investment to deliver reduction in the number of council properties ! 500 928 EE69 Repairs and Maintenance 70 70 70 70
Total New Pressures 570 998 70 70
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Repairs & Maintenance Page 132 09EE49 Reduction in Repairs & Maintenance fees to reflect reduced activity E -38 -66 -19 -19 EE40 Further adjustment to reduce Repairs & Maintenance by 40% overall leaving funding only for urgent reactive work E -732 -732 -5 175 -830 -2 -1,084 -904 Procurement Savings EE42 Procurement Savings E -550 -550 -550
Strategic Management of Property EE43 Reduction in operational costs through Strategic Management of Property E -120 -740 -885 -880 EE66 Further reduction in operational costs through Strategic Management of Property N ! -112 -220 -220 -120 -852 -1,105 -1,100 Transformation and Restructuring EE37 Transformation and Restructuring of Property Services E -230 -230 -230 -230 EE67 Transformation and Restructuring of Facilities Management - includes both staffing and other operational cost savings N -300 -300 -300
-230 -530 -530 -530 Other 08EE24 Utilise S106 funding E -61 -61 -61 -61
Total Savings -1,181 -2,791 -2,270 -2,085
Further detail is available in the Environment & Economy Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
48 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Oxfordshire Customer Services
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required (c) Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Cross Service 218 218 218 218 Cross Service -150 -150 -150 -150 Management & Administration Management & Administration Human Resources Human Resources Financial & Management Accounting Financial & Management Accounting ICT -2,731 -2,680 -2,743 -2,566 ICT Customer Services Centre -847 -847 -847 -847 Customer Services Centre Procurement Procurement
Total Pressures/Fundin g per MTFP -3,360 -3,309 -3,372 -3,195 Total Pressures/Fundin g not re quired -150 -150 -150 -150
New Service Pressures (a) Savings Identified (b) Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Page 133 Cross Service Cross Service -641 -642 -438 -438 Management & Administration Management & Administration -181 -211 -211 -211 Human Resources Human Resources -232 -420 -608 -796 Financial & Management Accounting Financial & Management Accounting -23 -48 -85 -184 ICT ICT -636 -1,560 -1,837 -1,911 Customer Services Centre 70 70 70 70 Customer Services Centre -261 -572 -724 -811 Procurement Procurement -30 -30 -30 -60
Total New Service Pressures 70 70 70 70 Total Savin gs Identified -2,004 -3,483 -3,933 -4,411
Total Net Savings Identified 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
New Service Pressures (a) 70 70 70 70 Savings Identified (b) -2,004 -3,483 -3,933 -4,411 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP not required (c) -150 -150 -150 -150
Total Net Savin gs -2,084 -3,563 -4,013 -4,491
49 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Oxfordshire Customer Services
Service Area : Cross Service
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
National Insurance- increase in rate 218 218 218 218 National Insurance - changes in contribution -150 -150 -150 -150 announced in March 2009 budget rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Fundin g per MTFP 218 218 218 218 Total Pressures/Funding not required -150 -150 -150 -150
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
07SS1Page 134 Business case savings E -304 -304 -304 -304 CS1 Additional business case savings N -122 -122 -122 -122 09SS1 Continuous improvement & business development E -1 -1 -1
Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate -215 -215 -11 -11
Total Savings -641 -642 -438 -438
Further detail is available in the Oxfordshire Customer Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
50 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Oxfordshire Customer Services
Service Area : Management & Administration
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CS2 Relocation expenses cease by the end of 2011/12 N -30 -60 -60 -60 CS3 Cease using Unipart for postal services N -40 -40 -40 -40 CS18 Delete Head of Shared Services Post N -111 -111 -111 -111
Total Savings -181 -211 -211 -211
Further detail is available in the Oxfordshire Customer Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies. Page 135
51 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Oxfordshire Customer Services
Service Area : Human Resources
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
SS6 Review of Human Resources function & processes E -40 -115 -115 -115 CS4 20% reduction in staffing establishment over 4 years N -17 -93 -244 -395 CS5 20% reduction of Learning & Development budget over 4 years N -37 -74 -111 -148 CS6 Remove budget funded by Childrens Social Care Workforce Area Based Grant N -138 -138 -138 -138
Total Savings -232 -420 -608 -796
Further detail is available in the Oxfordshire Customer Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies. Page 136
52 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Oxfordshire Customer Services
Service Area : Financial & Management Accounting
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
SS2 Review of financial accounting function E -70 -70 -70 -70 CS4 Re-schedule saving SS2 N 47 47 47 47 CS7 Review of financial accounting function N 0 -25 -25 -25 CS8 Reduction in establishment following implementation of the Business Strategy N 0 0 -27 -126 CS9 Reduce bank charges budget to reflect reduced activity N 0 0 -10 -10
Total Savings -23 -48 -85 -184
Further detail is available in the Oxfordshire Customer Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies. Page 137
53 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Oxfordshire Customer Services
Service Area : ICT
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
09CC15 IT Investment Fund - additional funding from 402 402 402 402 2011/12 CCP2 Changes to maintenance requirements -5 -11 50 146 CCP5 Increased demand on Oxfordshire 63 128 198 273 Community Network (OCN) CCP7 Internal security & compliance 0 0 -200 -200 CCP8 Telephony maintenance 6 11 17 23 09CC16 IT Investment Fund - removal of one - off -2,010 -2,010 -2,010 -2,010 funding
CCP3Page 138 Oxfordshire Community Network (OCN) - -387 -400 -400 -400 existing contract deficit 10/11 Oxfordshire Community Network (OCN) - -600 -600 -600 -600 removal of one - off funding 10/11 EU Directive on Online Payments - removal -200 -200 -200 -200 of one - off funding
Total Pressures/Fundin g per MTFP -2,731 -2,680 -2,743 -2,566 Total Pressures/Funding not required 0 0 0 0
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CC5 & Re-tender SAP support contract (current contract ends October 2012) E -1 -201 -404 -404 09CC5 CS10 SAP support contract - additional savings N -196 -546 -896 -896 CS11 Review of ICT staff structure N -74 -148 -222 -296 CS12 Ordnance Survey mapping charges N -100 -100 -100 -100 CS13 Reduced refresh of desktops & laptops, extension of replacement schedule, virtualisation of the desktop estate - Ongoing savings N -100 -100 - One off savings N -150 -450 0 0 CS14 Audit of software usage across the Council N -50 -50 -50 -50 CS15 Review of desktop support N -65 -65 -65 -65
Total Savings -636 -1,560 -1,837 -1,911
Further detail is available in the Oxfordshire Customer Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
54 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Oxfordshire Customer Services
Service Area : Customer Services
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
10/11 Customer Services project - removal of one - -847 -847 -847 -847 off funding
Total Pressures/Fundin g per MTFP -847 -847 -847 -847 Total Pressures/Funding not required 0 0 0 0
New Pressures Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CS19 Administration connected to the repatriation of military personnel to Brize Norton 70 70 70 70 Page 139 Total New Pressures 70 70 70 70
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CC12 Customer Services Centre - project savings targets E -180 -440 -575 -643 CS16 Additional project savings N -17 -34 -51 -70 CS17 Additional Access Team savings (transfer from SCS MTFP) N -64 -98 -98 -98
Total Savings -261 -572 -724 -811
Further detail is available in the Oxfordshire Customer Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
55 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Oxfordshire Customer Services
Service Area : Procurement
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CC18 Savings resulting from a review of Procurement Services E -30 -30 -30 -60
Total Savings -30 -30 -30 -60
Further detail is available in the Oxfordshire Customer Services Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies. Page 140
56 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Chief Executive's Office
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required (c) Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Cross Directorate 95 95 95 95 Cross Directorate -37 -37 -37 -37 Personal Office/Business Support Personal Office/Business Support Change Fund Change Fund Human Resources -201 -201 -201 -201 Human Resources Corporate Finance & Internal Audit 23 23 23 23 Corporate Finance & Internal Audit -23 -23 -23 -23 Law & Governance Services 50 101 151 151 Law & Governance Services Policy & Partnerships and Communications, Policy & Partnerships and Communications, Marketing & Public Affairs Marketing & Public Affairs
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP -33 18 68 68 Total Pressures/Funding not required -60 -60 -60 -60 New Service Pressures (a) Savings Identified (b) ServicePage 141 Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Service Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
Cross Directorate Cross Directorate -90 -90 -9 -9 Personal Office/Business Support 236 Personal Office/Business Support -165 -165 -165 -165 Change Fund Change Fund -100 -100 Human Resources Human Resources -52 -213 -281 -281 Corporate Finance & Internal Audit Corporate Finance & Internal Audit -266 -383 -437 -472 Law & Governance Services 51 131 137 193 Law & Governance Services -467 -531 -615 -626 Policy & Partnerships and Communications, 100 447 517 517 Policy & Partnerships and Communications, -594 -634 -634 -634 Marketing & Public Affairs Marketing & Public Affairs
Total New Service Pressures 387 578 654 710 Total Savings -1,634 -2,016 -2,241 -2,287 Total Net Savings Identified 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
New Service Pressures (a) 387 578 654 710 Savings Identified (b) -1,634 -2,016 -2,241 -2,287 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP not -60 -60 -60 -60 required (c) Total Net Savings -1,307 -1,498 -1,647 -1,637
57 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Chief Executive's Office
Cross Directorate
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
National Insurance- increase in rate 95 95 95 95 National Insurance - changes in -37 -37 -37 -37 announced in March 2009 budget contribution rate announced in June 2010 budget
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 95 95 95 95 Total Pressures/Funding not required -37 -37 -37 -37
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Page 142
Changes in Terms & Conditions - Freeze Increments & reduction in mileage rate -90 -90 -9 -9
Total Savings -90 -90 -9 -9
Further detail is available in the Chief Executives Office Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
58 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Chief Executive's Office
Personal Office/Business Support
New Pressures/Funding Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CC37 Big Society - additional funding to contribute to total fund of £0.600m (£0.364m vired from existing budgets) 236
Total New Pressures 236
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
CC19 Deletion of senior management post E -100 -100 -100 -100 Page 143 12CES1 Deletion of Business Manager post N -61 -61 -61 -61 12CES2 Provision of administrative support to the Lord Lieutenant of Oxfordshire N -4 -4 -4 -4
Total Savings -165 -165 -165 -165
Further detail is available in the Chief Executives Office Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
59 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Chief Executive's Office
Service Area : Change Fund
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
12CES1 6 Reduce annual contribution to the Change Fund N -100 -100
Total Savings -100 -100
Further detail is available in the Chief Executives Office Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies. Page 144
60 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Chief Executive's Office
Service Area : Human Resources (HR)
Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Fundin g in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not re quired Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
09CC21 One off Funding for Expansion of -201 -201 -201 -201 Apprenticeship scheme ends
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP -201 -201 -201 -201 Total Pressures/Funding not required
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
08CC10 Review of the provision of Human Resources services E -32 -113 -181 -181
& Page 145 CC11
12CES4 Reduce the organisational development budget N -80 -80 -80 12CES5 Cancel South East Employer subscription N -20 -20 -20 -20
Total Savings -52 -213 -281 -281
Further detail is available in the Chief Executives Office Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
61 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Chief Executive's Office
Service Area : Corporate Finance & Internal Audit
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
08CC13 Expected increase in external audit fee 23 23 23 23 Remove Audit Fee Pressure -23 -23 -23 -23
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 23 23 23 23 Total Pressures/Funding not required -23 -23 -23 -23
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Page 146
08CC14 Increase staffing vacancy factor E -10 -10 -10 -10 09CC22 Reduction in the number of ex Berkshire County Council pensioners E -42 -42 -42 09CC23 Savings in early retirement costs in 2010/11 budget - reduce over the medium-term E 133 & CC14 CC15 Restructure Corporate Finance E -49 -59 -59 -59 CC17 Review of audit services E -27 -27 -27 -27 12CES6 Reduction in audit fee N -180 -180 -180 -180 12CES7 Collaboration with Buckinghamshire County Council enabling retention of skilled resource but less audit days to reflect smaller N -36 -72 -107 organisation 12CES8 Reduction in posts to reflect smaller organisation N -30 -50 -50
Total Savings -266 -383 -437 -472
Further detail is available in the Chief Executives Office Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
62 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Chief Executive's Office
Service Area : Law & Governance Services
Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11to 2014/15 Pressures/Funding in current MTFP 2010/11 to 2014/15 not required Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
09CC31 Transfer of coroner's officers from 50 101 151 151 Thames Valley Police. OCC to fund 25% in 2011/12, 50% in 2012/13, 75% in 2013/14, 100% in 2014/15
Total Pressures/Funding per MTFP 50 101 151 151 Total Pressures/Funding not required
Operational Pressures Operational Savings Ref Description 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Page 147
12CEP4 Registration Service - 'Tell us Once' - 30 30 30 30 12CES1 Savings to be identified within the service -30 -30 -30 -30 this is a government initiative to pass 8 information about births, deaths etc to all agencies who need to know (estimated cost)
Total Operational Pressures 30 30 30 30 Total Operational Savings -30 -30 -30 -30
New Pressures/Funding Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
12CEP1 Transfer of coroners officers from Thames Valley Police - existing budgetary provision (09CC31) will be inadequate when the Council has 6 11 17 73 to fully fund the Coroner's officers in 2014/15 12CEP2 Coroner's Service - review of the pay & conditions of staff transferred from Thames Valley Police (estimated cost) 20 20 20 20 12CEP3 Coroner's Service - repatriation of military personnel to RAF Brize Norton from September 2011 25 100 100 100
Total New Pressures 51 131 137 193
63 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Chief Executive's Office
Service Area : Law & Governance Services
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
08CC17 Increased income generation for Section 106 developer funding work E -20 -20 -20 -20 09CC25 Further increase in Section 106 income E -17 -34 -34 08CC18 Income generation from legal work undertaken for other councils E -3 -3 -3 -3 08CC21 Reduce printing & postage costs by reducing the number of committee agendas printed and distributed E -6 -6 -6 -6 08CC22 Reduce furniture & equipment budget E -11 -11 -11 -11 08CC23 Reduce use of counsel E -3 -3 -3 -3 09CC26 Reduce use of counsel E -10 -20 -20 CC22 Early retirement costs cease E -30 -30 -30 Page 148 CC26 Review Coroner's Service E -12 -12 -12 -12 12CES9 Restructure Democratic Services N -266 -266 -266 -266 09CC33 Reduce members' services budgets (including IT & training) E -7 -14 -14 -14 & CC28 12CES1 Delete political assistant posts N ! -139 -139 -139 -139 0 12CES1 Reduce number of council members from 74 to 64 following the 2013 election N ! -57 -68 1
Total Savings -467 -531 -615 -626
Further detail is available in the Chief Executives Office Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
64 CC8 Annex 3 Savings Proposals 2011/12 - 2014/15 Chief Executive's Office
Service Area : Strategy & Communications (ex Policy, Partnerships and Communications, Marketing & Public Affairs)
New Pressures Ref Description Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000
12CES17 Funding available to respond to consultations 447 517 517 CC36 Partnership Funding 100
Total New Pressures 100 447 517 517
Savings Identified Ref Description New or Policy 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 existing Change £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Page 149 08CC30 Reduce Scrutiny Budget E -9 -9 -9 -9 CC32 Restructure Partnerships Unit E -15 -15 -15 -15 CC33 Share Partnershi p costs with ke y partner s E -21 -21 -21 -21 CC34 Review of contracted services with voluntary sector E ! -20 -20 -20 CC35 Review of town partnership support E -20 -20 -20 12CES12 Delete Head of Service post N -96 -96 -96 -96 12CES13 Review of Policy & Partnerships N -190 -190 -190 -190 12CES14 Cease publication of "Oxfordshire" magazine N ! -263 -263 -263 -263
Total Savings -594 -634 -634 -634
Further detail is available in the Chief Executives Office Business Strategy available on the Council website under About your Council/Plans Performance and Policies.
65 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 150
Annex 4
Detailed Revenue Budget
Page 151 2011/12
February 2011
Annex 4
NOTE:
The Detailed Revenue Budget has been prepared in the new directorate format consistent with the Business Strategy. Where a directorate no longer exists the services have been shown in the directorate they now belong to. Within Social and Community Services, Adult Social Care reflects changes made following the implementation of Self-Directed Support.
All Budget Book lines have new references in line with the Council’s Business Strategy. References to the 2010/11 Budget Book and notes have been added to explain the movement from 2010/11 to 2011/12.
Outstanding changes that will be incorporated into the Service & Resource Planning – Service Analysis
Page 152 2011/12 publication relate to the implementation of the Business Strategy in Children, Education & Families and Social & Community Services. Many of these changes will not alter the agreed budget book line but simply provide further analysis. If there are changes to agreed lines these will be requested as virements in the Financial Monitoring Reports.
CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Summary
Service Are a Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Change 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 from Agreed in Funding Funding Previous 2010/11 Changes and New Yea r Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 %
Children, Education & Expenditure 585,817 -32,707 493 1,671 3,234 -11,162 -2,348 544,998 -7.0% Families DSG income -333,376 -2,475 0 -50,952 0 0 0 -386,803 16.0% Grant income -138,822 35,395 0 51,658 0 0 -377 -52,146 -62.4% Income -14,569 -913 -32 -259 35 -123 2,046 -13,815 -5.2% 99,050 -700 461 2,118 3,269 -11,285 -679 92,234 -6.9%
Social & Communit y Expenditure 267,658 -11,843 3,036 25,562 10,171 -24,115 -59 270,410 1.0% Services Grant income -7,648 3,713 0 -15,472 0 0 -576 -19,983 161.3% Income -48,686 2,645 -376 -6,043 77 1,157 194 -51,032 4.8% 211,324 -5,485 2,660 4,047 10,248 -22,958 -441 199,395 -5.6%
EnvironmentPage 153 & Econom y Expenditure 152,349 7,297 1,148 7,458 5,378 -14,425 -1,860 157,345 3.3% Grant income -235 -3,883 0 209 0 0 0 -3,909 1563.4% Income -81,251 -655 -125 67 30 -152 4,105 -77,981 -4.0% 70,863 2,759 1,023 7,734 5,408 -14,577 2,245 75,455 6.5%
Chief Executive's Offic e Expenditure 20,270 1,670 16 0 384 -1,697 -1,241 19,402 -4.3% Grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% Income -10,692 -1,087 -15 0 0 -27 170 -11,651 9.0% 9,578 583 1 0 384 -1,724 -1,071 7,751 -19.1%
Less Council Tax Freeze Grant Expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% Grant income 0 0 0 -7,063 0 0 0 -7,063 0.0% Income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 -7,063 0 0 0 -7,063 0.0%
Less Area Based Gran t Expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% Income Grant income -45,656 2,327 0 42,609 0 0 0 -720 -98.4% Income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% -45,656 2,327 0 42,609 0 0 0 -720 -98.4%
1 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Summary
Service Are a Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Change 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 from Agreed in Funding Funding Previous 2010/11 Changes and New Yea r Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 %
Add Strategic Measures Expenditure 48,274 516 0 0 4,881 -8,137 0 45,534 0.0% Income -3,563 0 0 0 -2,796 2,389 0 -3,970 0.0% 44,711 516 0 0 2,085 -5,748 0 41,564 0.0%
TOTAL Expenditure 1,074,368 -35,067 4,693 34,691 24,048 -59,536 -5,508 1,037,689 -3.4% DSG income -333,376 -2,475 0 -50,952 0 0 0 -386,803 16.0% Grant income -192,361 37,552 0 71,941 0 0 -953 -83,821 -56.4% Income -158,761 -10 -548 -6,235 -2,654 3,244 8,944 -158,449 -0.2% 389,870 0 4,145 49,445 21,394 -56,292 2,483 408,616 4.8%
SeePage 154 Notes Below (2) (1) (3)
Notes 1. Savings in the Annex 3 include savings on Inflation which are not shown here, but do not include Operational Savings that are included. 2. Includes New Pressures of £4.8m 3. The 1533.6% Change from Previous Year for Grant Income in Environment & Economy relates to the transfer of Adult Learning to Oxfordshire Customer Services 4. DSG - Dedicated Schools Grant 5. Expenditure and Income include recharges which will be stripped out in the published Financial Plan to reflect real expenditure and income. For 2010/11 recharges totalled £101.235m. Actual gross expenditure was £975.133m
2 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Children, Education & Families
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CEF1 CYPF1 EDUCATION & EARLY INTERVENTIO N (Previously Young People & Access to Education)
CEF1-1 CYPF1-1 Management & Central Costs expenditure 1,402 100 1 -62 9 1,495 -2,377 568 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,402 100 1 -62 9 1,495 -2,377 568
CEF1-2 CYPF1-2 Additional & Special Educational Needs
Page 155 (Previously Learning Difficulties & Disabilities)
CEF1-21 CYPF1-21 Special Educational Needs (SEN) expenditure 8,605 495 1 0 273 -1 478 9,851 DSG income -5,356 54 0 0 0 0 -9 -5,311 grant income 0 -491 0 0 0 0 0 -491 income -1,374 -11 0 0 0 0 502 -883 1,875 47 1 0 273 -1 971 3,166
CEF1-22 CYPF1-22 SEN Support Services (SENSS) expenditure 6,013 -6 13 0 30 -18 135 6,167 DSG income -5,193 131 0 0 0 0 -200 -5,262 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -773 0 0 0 10 0 156 -607 47 125 13 0 40 -18 91 298
CEF1-23 CYPF1-31 Identification & Assessment expenditure 2,854 61 0 150 21 -512 -1,119 1,455 (Previously Psychological Service) DSG income -583 10 0 0 0 0 573 0 grant income 0 0 0 -150 0 0 0 -150 income -348 -73 0 0 0 0 331 -90 1,923 -2 0 0 21 -512 -215 1,215
3 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Children, Education & Families
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CEF1-24 N/A Early Years SEN Inclusion Teachers expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 867 867 (EY SENITS) DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -867 -867 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000
CEF1-3 Early Intervention
CEF1-31 N/A Early Intervention Hubs expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,930 8,930 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1,153 -1,153
Page 156 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1,266 -1,266 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -414 -414 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,097 6,097
CEF1-32 CYPF2-33 Children's Centres and Childcare expenditure 12,422 0 1 45 0 -13 1,604 14,059 DSG income -1,387 0 0 0 0 0 1,387 0 grant income -10,501 1 0 1,472 0 0 -4,119 -13,147 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -380 -380 534 1 1 1,517 0 -13 -1,508 532
CEF1-33 CYPF1-41 Youth & Inclusion Services expenditure 9,056 58 5 0 17 -3,010 -5,367 759 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income -347 0 0 -2,806 0 0 2,620 -533 income -299 0 0 0 0 0 262 -37 8,410 58 5 -2,806 17 -3,010 -2,485 189
CEF1-34 N/A Engagement in Education, Employment & expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,024 3,024 Training (EEET) DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -260 -260 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2,081 -2,081 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 683 683
4 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Children, Education & Families
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CEF1-4 Education
CEF1-41 N/A Educational Transformation & expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 28,523 28,523 Effectiveness DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -16,784 -16,784 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1,259 -1,259 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -4,034 -4,034 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,446 6,446
CEF1-5 Organisation & Planning
CEF1-51 N/A Early Years Sufficiency & Access expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 645 645 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -241 -241
Page 157 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -404 -404 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000
CEF1-52 CYPF4-6 School Organisation & Planning expenditure 20,382 -399 386 0 169 -2,557 -15,657 2,324 (Home to School Transport budget DSG income -520 -44 0 0 0 0 420 -144 transferred to CEF1-53) grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -2,351 79 -5 0 0 0 384 -1,893 17,511 -364 381 0 169 -2,557 -14,853 287
CEF1-53 N/A Admissions & Transport expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 15,626 15,626 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -420 -420 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -383 -383 0 0 0 0 0 0 14,823 14,823
CEF1-6 CYPF3-4 Business & Skills (Previously 14-19 expenditure 41,731 -41,152 0 -15 3 -252 517 832 Team (Young People's Learning Agency DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer )) grant income -41,327 41,312 0 15 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -194 -194 404 160 0 0 3 -252 323 638
5 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Children, Education & Families
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
Lines to be removed from published budget book N/A CYPF1-32 Attendance & Welfare expenditure 1,387 -7 1 0 8 -5 -1,384 0 Budget Transferred to CEF1-34 DSG income -263 3 0 0 0 0 260 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,124 -4 1 0 8 -5 -1,124 0
N/A CYPF1-33 Alternative Education expenditure 2,353 105 3 0 15 -9 -2,467 0 Budget Transferred to CEF1-41 DSG income -2,205 161 0 -33 0 0 2,077 0
Page 158 grant income 0 -33 0 33 0 0 0 0 income -412 -23 0 0 0 0 435 0 -264 210 3 0 15 -9 45 0
N/A CYPF1-34 Centrally Managed Services expenditure 392 -58 2 0 0 0 -336 0 Budget Transferred to CEF3-2 DSG income -189 11 0 0 0 0 178 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 203 -47 2 0 0 0 -158 0
N/A CYPF2-21 Educational Achievement (Children Looked expenditure 574 -106 0 0 3 -2 -469 0 After) DSG income -420 0 0 0 0 0 420 0 Budget Transferred to CEF1-41 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -107 107 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 1 0 0 3 -2 -49 0
N/A CYPF2-34 Children's Centres and Childcare expenditure 2,449 5 10 0 6 -4 -2,466 0 Development Area Teams DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Budget Transferred to CEF1-32 grant income -2,091 -1 0 28 0 0 2,064 0 income -386 -4 0 0 0 0 390 0 -28 0 10 28 6 -4 -12 0
N/A CYPF3-1 Management & Central Costs expenditure 16,691 3,892 2 0 -344 -462 -19,779 0 Budget Transferred to CEF1-41 DSG income 0 0 0 -17,238 0 0 17,238 0 grant income -13,147 -4,091 0 17,238 0 0 0 0 income -325 0 0 0 0 0 325 0 3,219 -199 2 0 -344 -462 -2,216 0
6 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Children, Education & Families
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
N/A CYPF3-2 Governor Services expenditure 294 0 0 0 3 -2 -295 0 Budget Transferred to CEF1-41 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -151 1 0 0 0 -3 153 0 143 1 0 0 3 -5 -142 0
N/A CYPF3-32 Educational Achievement & Service expenditure 9,735 631 24 -7 30 -550 -9,863 0 Monitoring DSG income -326 0 0 -5,957 0 0 6,283 0 Budget Transferred to CEF1-41 grant income -5,639 -640 0 6,279 0 0 0 0 income -1,025 16 0 0 0 0 1,009 0 2,745 7 24 315 30 -550 -2,571 0
Page 159 N/A CYPF3-33 Curriculum Learning & Inclusion expenditure 28 0 0 0 0 0 -28 0 Budget Transferred to CEF1-41 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 -28 0
N/A CYPF3-34 Partnership Development & Extended expenditure 2,389 59 12 0 11 -6 -2,465 0 Learning DSG income 0 0 0 -59 0 0 59 0 Budget Transferred to CEF1-41 grant income 0 -59 0 59 0 0 0 0 income -1,572 0 -23 0 0 -120 1,715 0 817 0 -11 0 11 -126 -691 0
N/A CYPF3-35 Secondary School Improvement expenditure 2,022 1,073 1 -1,045 0 -380 -1,671 0 Budget Transferred to CEF1-41 DSG income -314 0 0 -1,121 0 0 1,435 0 grant income -1,099 -1,232 0 2,166 0 0 165 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 609 -159 1 0 0 -380 -71 0
N/A CYPF2-31 Early Years and Childcare Countywide expenditure 10,048 -692 1 -4,056 1 -1,500 -3,802 0 DSG income -2,355 515 0 0 0 0 1,840 0 Budget Transferred to CEF1-41 grant income -7,774 234 0 4,081 0 0 3,459 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -81 57 1 25 1 -1,500 1,497 0
7 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Children, Education & Families
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
N/A CYPF2-32 Early Years and Childcare Area Teams expenditure 2,362 0 0 0 0 0 -2,362 0 DSG income -2,382 20 0 0 0 0 2,362 0 Budget Transferred to CEF1-41 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -20 20 0 0 0 0 0 0
N/A CYPF2-4 Extended Services expenditure 3,875 0 0 0 0 -500 -3,375 0 Budget Transferred to CEF1-31 & CEF1- DSG income 0 0 0 -3,269 0 0 3,269 0 41 grant income -3,269 0 0 3,269 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Page 160 606 0 0 0 0 -500 -106 0
N/A CYPF2-6 Locality Working expenditure 141 0 0 0 0 -141 0 0 Transferred to CEF1-31 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 141 0 0 0 0 -141 0 0
SUBTOTAL EDUCATION & EARLY 41,395 12 435 -983 265 -8,552 2,370 34,942 INTERVENTION
CEF2 CYPF2 CHILDREN'S SOCIAL CARE (Previously Children & Families)
CEF2-1 CYPF2-1 Management & Central Costs expenditure 2,118 575 0 0 9 -5 -404 2,293 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -7 0 0 0 0 0 0 -7 2,111 575 0 0 9 -5 -404 2,286
CEF2-2 CYPF2-2 Social Care
CEF2-21 CYPF2-25 Placement & Care Costs expenditure 8,370 9,571 1 0 503 -212 1,488 19,721 (Previously Agency Residential DSG income -1,352 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1,352 Placements) grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -7 -7 income 0 -1,717 0 0 0 0 -121 -1,838 7,018 7,854 1 0 503 -212 1,360 16,524
8 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Children, Education & Families
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CEF2-22 CYPF2-23 Family Placement expenditure 5,857 -4,306 0 0 11 -6 182 1,738 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -212 212 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,645 -4,094 0 0 11 -6 182 1,738
CEF2-23 CYPF2-24 Children Looked After (Including Asylum) expenditure 9,070 -3,294 0 -10 575 -13 -359 5,969 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income -2,033 -10 0 2,043 0 0 0 0 income -1,073 725 -1 0 0 0 -1 -350 5,964 -2,579 -1 2,033 575 -13 -360 5,619
Page 161 CEF2-3 CYPF2-5 Family Support & Assessmen t
CEF2-31 CYPF2-51 Central Support & Child & Adolescent expenditure 723 -33 1 0 2 -61 -277 355 Mental Health DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -122 -122 723 -33 1 0 2 -61 -399 233
CEF2-32 CYPF2-52 Family Support expenditure 3,021 -269 0 0 17 -10 38 2,797 DSG income -103 0 0 0 0 0 0 -103 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -38 -38 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,918 -269 0 0 17 -10 0 2,656
CEF2-33 CYPF2-53 Assessment expenditure 2,546 259 1 0 18 -11 0 2,813 DSG income -316 0 0 0 0 0 0 -316 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -51 0 -1 0 0 0 0 -52 2,179 259 0 0 18 -11 0 2,445
CEF2-4 CYPF4-9 Safe guardin g & Qualit y Assuranc e expenditure 1,078 292 1 0 11 -6 81 1,457 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -150 25 0 0 0 0 36 -89 928 317 1 0 11 -6 117 1,368
9 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Children, Education & Families
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CEF2-5 CYPF1-23 Services for Disabled Children expenditure 7,134 18 7 0 18 -310 -61 6,806 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income -2,037 -25 0 300 0 0 0 -1,762 income -100 0 0 0 0 0 -100 4,997 -7 7 300 18 -310 -61 4,944
CEF2-6 CYPF1-42 Youth Offending Service expenditure 4,230 -152 2 -80 404 -112 -1,731 2,561 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income -1,799 -144 0 1,617 0 0 326 0 income -745 290 0 -259 25 0 455 -234
Page 162 1,686 -6 2 1,278 429 -112 -950 2,327 Lines to be removed from published budget book N/A CYPF2-22 Residential expenditure 3,064 -1,812 0 0 7 -4 -1,255 0 Budget Transferred to CEF2-21 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -122 1 0 0 0 0 121 0 2,942 -1,811 0 0 7 -4 -1,134 0
N/A CYPF2-54 Child and Adolescent Mental Health expenditure 363 -77 0 0 4 -2 -288 0 Budget Transferred to CEF2-31 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -122 0 0 0 0 0 122 0 241 -77 0 0 4 -2 -166 0
SUBTOTAL CHILDREN'S SOCIAL CARE 37,352 129 11 3,611 1,604 -752 -1,815 40,140
CEF3 CYPF4 QUALITY & COMPLIANCE (Previously Commissioning, Performance & Quality Assurance (CPQA))
CEF3-1 CYPF4-1 Children, Education & Families expenditure 16,278 -104 3 -45 1,035 -1,023 -15,271 873 Management & Central Costs DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -81 -81 (Previously CPQA Management & Central grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Costs (including recharges)) income -72 -19 0 0 0 0 91 0 16,206 -123 3 -45 1,035 -1,023 -15,261 792
10 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Children, Education & Families
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CEF3-2 N/A Children, Education & Families Support expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 16,597 16,597 Service Recharges DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -178 -178 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -91 -91 0 0 0 0 0 0 16,328 16,328
CEF3-3 N/A Premature Retirement Compensation expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,809 3,809 (PRC) DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2 -2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,807 3,807
Page 163 CEF3-4 CYPF4-7 DSG Income expenditure -72 131 -1 0 0 0 0 58 DSG income -5,613 -499 0 0 0 0 -35 -6,147 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -5,685 -368 -1 0 0 0 -35 -6,089
CEF3-5 N/A Service Level Agreement with Social & expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,429 2,429 Communit y Services DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -94 -94 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,335 2,335 Lines to be removed from published budget book N/A CYPF4-2 Performance expenditure 1,138 57 1 0 4 -23 -1,177 0 Budget Transferred to CEF3-5 DSG income 0 -44 0 0 0 0 44 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -397 0 0 0 0 0 397 0 741 13 1 0 4 -23 -736 0
11 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Children, Education & Families
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
N/A CYPF4-3 Commissioning expenditure 1,348 0 2 0 3 -42 -1,311 0 Budget Transferred to CEF3-5 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income -238 0 0 -421 0 0 659 0 income -142 21 0 0 0 0 121 0 968 21 2 -421 3 -42 -531 0
N/A CYPF4-4 Business Improvement expenditure 3,161 -455 1 0 4 -102 -2,609 0 Budget Transferred to CEF3-5 DSG income -50 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 grant income -140 12 0 128 0 0 0 0 income -40 -1 0 0 0 0 41 0
Page 164 2,931 -444 1 128 4 -102 -2,518 0
N/A CYPF4-5 Human Resources & Children's Workforce expenditure 5,011 -45 10 -32 354 -46 -5,252 0 Budget Transferred to CEF3-5 & CEF3-3 DSG income -431 0 0 0 0 0 431 0 grant income -197 73 0 124 0 0 0 0 income -366 0 -2 0 0 0 368 0 4,017 28 8 92 354 -46 -4,453 0
N/A CYPF4-8 Participation and Play expenditure 1,113 -7 0 0 0 -151 -955 0 Budget Transferred to CEF3-5 & CEF1-32 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income -192 0 0 -264 0 0 456 0 income -381 7 0 0 0 0 374 0 540 0 0 -264 0 -151 -125 0
SUBTOTAL QUALITY & COMPLIANCE 19,718 -873 14 -510 1,400 -1,387 -1,189 17,173
CEF4 CYPF5 SCHOOLS
CEF4-1 CYPF5-1 Delegated Budgets expenditure 335,217 3,637 0 1,751 0 0 18,461 359,066 DSG income -286,820 -3,599 0 -18,198 0 0 -17,509 -326,126 grant income -46,992 489 0 16,447 0 0 -952 -31,008 income -1,405 -527 0 0 0 0 0 -1,932 00000000
CEF4-2 CYPF2-35 Early Years Single Funding Formula expenditure 10,294 795 0 4,056 0 0 25 15,170 (Nurser y Education Fundin g) DSG income -10,347 -742 0 -4,056 0 0 -25 -15,170 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -53 53 0 0 0 0 0 0
12 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Children, Education & Families
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CEF4-3 CYPF5-2 Devolved Schools Costs expenditure 2,958 -1,548 0 1,021 0 0 470 2,901 DSG income -2,958 1,548 0 -1,021 0 0 -470 -2,901 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000
CEF4-4 CYPF5-3 Licenses and Insurances expenditure 278 0 1 0 0 0 -42 237 DSG income -176 1 0 0 0 0 0 -175 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -61 -22 0 0 0 0 0 -83 41 -21 1 0 0 0 -42 -21
Page 165 CEF4-5 CYPF5-4 Ca pitalised Re pairs & Maintenance expenditure 3,717 1 0 0 0 0 0 3,718 DSG income -3,717 -1 0 0 0 0 0 -3,718 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000
Lines to be removed from published budget book N/A CYPF5-5 City Reorganisation expenditure 597 0 0 0 0 -594 -3 0 DSG income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 597 0 0 0 0 -594 -3 0
SUBTOTAL SCHOOL S 585 32 1 0 0 -594 -45 -21
expenditure 585,817 -32,707 493 1,671 3,234 -11,162 -2,348 544,998 DSG income -333,376 -2,475 0 -50,952 0 0 0 -386,803 grant income -138,822 35,395 0 51,658 0 0 -377 -52,146 income -14,569 -913 -32 -259 35 -123 2,046 -13,815 DIRECTORATE TOTA L 99,050 -700 461 2,118 3,269 -11,285 -679 92,234
13 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/1 2 Social & Community Service s
Restated Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a Budget Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
SCS1 ADULT SOCIAL CAR E
SCS1-1 Older People & Physical Disabilities
SCS1-1A N/A Prevention & Early Support expenditure 7,507 1,077 28 2,050 233 -1,992 -92 8,811 grant income -150 0 0 150 0 0 0 0 income -343 102 0 0 0 0 0 -241 7,014 1,179 28 2,200 233 -1,992 -92 8,570
SCS1-1B N/A Information Advice & Community Building expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Page 166 00000000
SCS1-1C N/A Social Work & Commissioning expenditure 9,541 991 8 1,766 6 -832 0 11,480 income -1,056 0 0 -32 299 0 0 -789 8,485 991 8 1,734 305 -832 0 10,691
SCS1-1D SC3_2 Other Services expenditure 4,137 -2,481 0 0 1,400 -2,800 -191 65 SC3_3 income -191 0 0 0 0 0 191 0 3,946 -2,481 0 0 1,400 -2,800 0 65
SCS1-1E SC2_2A Pooled Budget Contributions expenditure 88,972 69 1,882 2,332 2,388 -7,474 -1,000 87,169 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 88,972 69 1,882 2,332 2,388 -7,474 -1,000 87,169
SCS1-1F SC2_2A Income expenditure 103 0 0 0 0 0 0 103 SC2_2E income -19,687 0 -257 -6,124 -126 448 0 -25,746 -19,584 0 -257 -6,124 -126 448 0 -25,643
Subtotal Older People & Physical 88,833 -242 1,661 142 4,200 -12,650 -1,092 80,852 Disabilities
SCS1-2 Learning Disabilities
SCS1-2A SC2_4C Personalisation/Ongoing Support expenditure 8,946 -230 41 0 60 -652 0 8,165 SC2_4D income -8,946 230 -41 0 -12 604 0 -8,165 SC2_4E 0 0 0 0 48 -48 0 0
14 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/1 2 Social & Community Service s
Restated Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a Budget Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
SCS1-2B SC2_4A Social Work & Commissioning expenditure 2,421 79 0 0 99 -49 40 2,590 SC2_4B income -2,421 -79 0 0 -84 34 -40 -2,590 0 0 0 0 15 -15 0 0
SCS1-2C SC2_4F Pooled Budget Contribution expenditure 42,415 -31 766 19,224 4,940 -4,081 1,040 64,273 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42,415 -31 766 19,224 4,940 -4,081 1,040 64,273
SCS1-2D SC2_4F Income expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 grant income -47 0 0 -19,177 0 0 0 -19,224 income -5,298 0 -38 0 0 0 0 -5,336 -5,345 0 -38 -19,177 0 0 0 -24,560
Page 167 Subtotal Learning Disabilities 37,070 -31 728 47 5,003 -4,144 1,040 39,713
SCS1-3 Mental Health
SCS1-3A SC2_3A Non-Pool Services expenditure 598 181 0 0 0 0 0 779 SC2_3C income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 598 181 0 0 0 0 0 779
SCS1-3B SC2_3A Pooled Budget Contributions expenditure 7,127 -204 177 0 25 -222 0 6,903 SC2_3C income -257 -1 0 0 0 0 -258 6,870 -204 176 0 25 -222 0 6,645
Subtotal Mental Health 7,468 -23 176 0 25 -222 0 7,424
SCS1-4 Services For All Client Groups
SCS1-4A SC2_1F Asylum Seekers expenditure 221 0 0 0 0 0 0 221 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 221 0 0 0 0 0 0 221
SCS1-4B SC2_1C HIV/AIDS expenditure 185 0 0 0 0 0 0 185 grant income -187 0 0 187 0 0 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2 0 0 187 0 0 0 185
15 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/1 2 Social & Community Service s
Restated Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a Budget Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
SCS1-4C SC2_3B Drugs and Alcohol expenditure 814 0 11 0 0 0 0 825 (Previously included within Integrated income -438 0 -1 0 0 0 0 -439 Mental Health Service) 376 0 10 0 0 0 0 386
SCS1-4D N/A Adults At Risk expenditure 0 2 0 7 0 0 0 9 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02070009
SCS1-4E SC2_1D Employment Services expenditure 1,694 -10 7 0 8 -16 0 1,683 grant income -282 0 0 282 0 0 0 0 income -898 6 0 0 0 0 0 -892 Page 168 514 -4 7 282 8 -16 0 791
SCS1-4F SC2_1E Shared Lives expenditure 1,569 -28 24 0 5 -47 0 1,523 income -825 0 -3 0 0 0 0 -828 744 -28 21 0 5 -47 0 695
SCS1-4G SC2_2K Acquired Brain Injury expenditure 398 -100 7 0 0 0 0 305 (Previously included within Physical income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Disabilities in the 2010/2011 budget book) 398 -100 7 0 0 0 0 305
Subtotal Services for All Client Groups 2,251 -130 45 476 13 -63 0 2,592
SUBTOTAL ADULT SOCIAL CAR E 135,622 -426 2,610 665 9,241 -17,079 -52 130,581
SCS2 COMMUNITY SAFET Y (Transferred from Community Safety & Shared Services) SCS2-1 CS1 Fire & Rescue Service expenditure 24,675 -283 7 183 303 -370 -55 24,460 grant income -116 0 0 -67 0 0 0 -183 income -502 222 0 0 0 0 0 -280 24,057 -61 7 116 303 -370 -55 23,997
SCS2-2 CS2 Emergency Planning expenditure 370 -1 0 0 2 -26 20 365 income 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 -1 370 -1 0 0 2 -27 20 364
16 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/1 2 Social & Community Service s
Restated Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a Budget Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
SCS2-3 CS3 Safer Communities expenditure 884 -1 0 0 2 -143 28 770 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 884 -1 0 0 2 -143 28 770
SCS2-4 CS4 Gypsy & Traveller Services expenditure 894 180 0 0 1 -8 28 1,095 income -798 -182 0 0 0 0 0 -980 96 -2 0 0 1 -8 28 115
SCS2-5 CS5 Trading Standards expenditure 2,551 2 3 0 109 -237 195 2,623 income -291 -12 -2 113 0 -24 0 -216 2,260 -10 1 113 109 -261 195 2,407
SUBTOTAL COMMUNITY SAFET Y 27,667 -75 8 229 417 -809 216 27,653 Page 169 SCS3 QUALITY AND COMPLIANC E (Previously Strategy & Transformation and Supporting People )
SCS3-1 SC4_1a Resource Management expenditure 22,512 -2,179 16 0 3 -140 -510 19,702 SC4_1b (Previously Recharges, Information income -1,764 256 -1 0 0 5 1,196 -308 SC4_1c Systems & Processes and Facilities 20,748 -1,923 15 0 3 -135 686 19,394 Mana gement )
SCS3-2 SC4_2a Strategy & Contracts expenditure 1,886 -74 1 0 -40 -100 -81 1,592 SC4_2c (Previously Strategy and Contracts) income -12 0 0 0 0 0 0 -12 1,874 -74 1 0 -40 -100 -81 1,580
SCS3-3 SC4_3 Leadership Team & Contingenc y expenditur e 1,103 -65 1 0 54 -232 0 861 (Previously Directorate Leadership Team) income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,103 -65 1 0 54 -232 0 861
SCS3-4 CYPF4-2 Commissioning & Performance expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,434 3,434 CYPF4-3 (previously Commissioning, Performance grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -576 -576 CYPF4-4 income -2,858 -2,858 CYPF4-5 00000000
17 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/1 2 Social & Community Service s
Restated Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a Budget Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
SCS3-5 SC4_5 Supporting People expenditure 12,092 -2,010 0 0 0 -1,160 0 8,922 (Previously Strategy & Transformation and grant income -185 0 0 185 0 0 0 0 Supporting People ) income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11,907 -2,010 0 185 0 -1,160 0 8,922
SCS3-6 SC4_4 Transforming Adult Social Care expenditure 2,296 0 0 0 0 -2,296 0 0 (Previously Strategy & Transformation and grant income -2,295 0 0 2,295 0 0 0 0 Supporting People ) income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2,295 0 -2,296 0 0
TOTAL QUALITY AND COMPLIANC E 35,633 -4,072 17 2,480 17 -3,923 605 30,757 Page 170 SCS4 COMMUNITY SERVICES
SCS4-1 SC1_1 Library Service expenditure 8,700 35 29 0 375 -589 -130 8,420 income -886 -65 -10 0 0 91 80 -790 7,814 -30 19 0 375 -498 -50 7,630
SCS4-2 SC1_2 Heritage & Arts Services expenditure 2,879 -212 5 0 171 -383 0 2,460 income -514 211 0 0 0 0 0 -303 2,365 -1 5 0 171 -383 0 2,157
SCS4-3 SC1_3 Cultural & Community Development expenditure 868 -21 0 0 3 -160 -73 617 income -59 0 0 0 0 0 59 0 809 -21 0 0 3 -160 -14 617
SCS4-4 SC1_5 Music Service expenditure 2,736 35 23 0 24 -106 -2,712 0 (Transferred to CEF) grant income -673 0 0 673 0 0 0 0 income -1,545 1 -22 0 0 0 1,566 0 518 36 1 673 24 -106 -1,146 0
SCS4-5 SC1_4 Adult Learning expenditure 4,987 -4,987 0 0 0 0 0 0 (Transferred to Oxfordshire Customer grant income -3,718 3,718 0 0 0 0 0 0 Services) income -863 863 0 0 0 0 0 0 406 -406 0 0 0 0 0 0
18 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/1 2 Social & Community Service s
Restated Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a Budget Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
SCS4-6 SC1_6 Registration Service expenditure 1,577 -1,577 0 0 0 0 0 0 (Transferred to Chief Executive's Office) grant income 5 -5 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -1,092 1,092 0 0 0 0 0 0 490 -490 0 0 0 0 0 0
SUBTOTAL COMMUNITY SERVICE S 12,402 -912 25 673 573 -1,147 -1,210 10,404
expenditur e 267,658 -11,843 3,036 25,562 10,171 -24,115 -59 270,410 grant income -7,648 3,713 0 -15,472 0 0 -576 -19,983 income -48,686 2,645 -376 -6,043 77 1,157 194 -51,032 income recharges 00000000 DIRECTORATE TOTA L 211,324 -5,485 2,660 4,047 10,248 -22,958 -441 199,395 Page 171
19 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Environment & Economy
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
EE1 HIGHWAYS & TRANSPOR T
EE1-1 N/A Highways & Transport Management expenditure 0 5,596 308 0 599 -2,850 -1,899 1,754 income 0 -1,301 -15 0 0 -4 0 -1,320 0 4,295 293 0 599 -2,854 -1,899 434
EE1-2 N/A Policy & Strategy expenditure 0 4,455 4 7,300 900 -481 0 12,178 income 0 -332 0 0 0 0 0 -332 0 4,123 4 7,300 900 -481 0 11,846
Page 172 EE1-3 Deliver y
EE1-31 N/A Infrastructure & Design expenditure 0 9,832 100 158 192 -1,408 -7 8,867 income 0 -656 0 0 0 0 0 -656 0 9,176 100 158 192 -1,408 -7 8,211
EE1-32 N/A Operations expenditure 0 9,086 1 0 -750 -20 1,606 9,923 income 0 -176 0 0 0 0 0 -176 0 8,910 1 0 -750 -20 1,606 9,747
EE1-4 N/A Customer & Business expenditure 0 7,451 23 0 0 -43 -185 7,246 income 0 -54 0 0 0 0 0 -54 0 7,397 23 0 0 -43 -185 7,192
EE1-41 N/A On/Off Street Parking and Park & Rides expenditure 0 4,600 4 0 625 -34 1,100 6,295 income 0 -4,930 -74 0 0 -25 -1,100 -6,129 0 -330 -70 0 625 -59 0 166
EE1-42 N/A Integrated Transport Unit expenditure 0 3,240 16 0 0 0 -130 3,126 income 0 -2,450 -1 0 0 0 136 -2,315 0 790 15 0 0 0 6 811
EE1-43 N/A Public Transport expenditure 0 5,829 120 0 371 -820 0 5,500 income 0 -539 0 0 0 0 0 -539 0 5,290 120 0 371 -820 0 4,961
20 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Environment & Economy
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
Lines to be removed from published budget book N/A EE1.1 Transport Management expenditure -464 464 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -984 984 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1,448 1,448 0 0 0 0 0 0
N/A EE1.2 Policy & Strategy expenditure 7,445 -7,445 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -250 250 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,195 -7,195 0 0 0 0 0 0
N/A EE1.2.1 Integrated Transport Unit expenditure 8,692 -8,692 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -2,989 2,989 0 0 0 0 0 0
Page 173 5,703 -5,703 0 0 0 0 0 0
N/A EE1.3 Network Management expenditure 1,561 -1,561 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -48 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,513 -1,513 0 0 0 0 0 0
N/A EE1.3.1 On Street Parking and Park & Ride expenditure 4,602 -4,602 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -4,930 4,930 0 0 0 0 0 0 -328 328 0 0 0 0 0 0
N/A EE1.4 Oxfordshire Highways expenditure 5,512 -5,512 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -834 834 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,678 -4,678 0 0 0 0 0 0
N/A EE1.4.1 Highways Maintenance expenditure 22,841 -22,841 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -436 436 0 0 0 0 0 0 22,405 -22,405 0 0 0 0 0 0
SUBTOTAL HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORT 39,718 -67 486 7,458 1,937 -5,685 -479 43,368
21 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Environment & Economy
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
GROWTH & INFRASTRUCTURE
EE2 Sustainable Development
EE2-1 EE2.1 Sustainable Development Management expenditure 175 0 0 0 1 -79 0 97 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175 0 0 0 1 -79 0 97
EE2-11 EE2.1.1 Flood Defence Levy expenditure 484 0 0 0 0 0 0 484
Page 174 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 484 0 0 0 0 0 0 484
EE2-2 EE2.2 Planning Implementation expenditure 1,591 -6 1 0 -86 -79 0 1,421 income -398 0 -3 0 0 -11 0 -412 1,193 -6 -2 0 -86 -90 0 1,009
EE2-3 EE2.3 Economy, Spatial Planning & Climate expenditure 1,360 -83 1 0 605 -203 75 1,755 Change income -45 0 0 0 0 -21 0 -66 1,315 -83 1 0 605 -224 75 1,689
EE2-31 EE2.3.1 Oxfordshire Economic Partnership expenditure 201 0 0 0 0 0 -201 0 income -126 0 0 0 0 0 126 0 75 0 0 0 0 0 -75 0
EE2-4 EE2.4 Waste Management expenditure 21,716 -116 354 0 4,950 -4,229 -1 22,674 income -626 112 -8 0 0 -25 0 -547 21,090 -4 346 0 4,950 -4,254 -1 22,127
EE2-5 EE2.5 Countryside expenditure 1,335 -4 2 0 3 -111 2 1,227 income -37 0 0 0 0 -5 0 -42 1,298 -4 2 0 3 -116 2 1,185
22 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Environment & Economy
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
EE2-51 EE2.5.1 Funded Projects expenditure 680 86 0 0 0 -94 0 672 grant income -235 -80 0 315 0 0 0 0 income -445 -6 0 0 0 0 0 -451 0 0 0 315 0 -94 0 221
Subtotal Sustainable Development 25,630 -97 347 315 5,473 -4,857 1 26,812
EE3 Property Asset Managemen t
EE3-1 EE3.1.1 Corporate Property expenditure 10,730 985 25 0 1,214 -1,590 -597 10,767 income -14,167 0 0 0 0 0 -747 -14,914
Page 175 -3,437 985 25 0 1,214 -1,590 -1,344 -4,147
EE3-2 N/A Facilities Management expenditure 0 3,176 6 0 4 0 17 3,203 income 0 -63 0 0 0 0 -3,140 -3,203 0 3,113 6 0 4 0 -3,123 0
EE3-3 EE3.1.2 Operational Asset Management expenditure 3,151 -819 24 0 1 -103 -181 2,073 income -2,161 10 0 0 30 0 948 -1,173 990 -809 24 0 31 -103 767 900
EE3-4 EE3.1.3 Strategic Asset Management expenditure 2,666 -1,334 9 0 -34 -52 -26 1,229 income -1,875 -40 0 0 0 0 1,582 -333 791 -1,374 9 0 -34 -52 1,556 896
EE3-5 EE3.1.4 Project Delivery expenditure 584 -3 0 0 2 -34 0 549 income -197 0 0 0 0 -61 0 -258 387 -3 0 0 2 -95 0 291
EE3-6 EE3.1.5 Sustainability & Procurement expenditure 536 -2 6 0 1 -10 1 532 income -71 0 -1 0 0 0 0 -72 465 -2 5 0 1 -10 1 460
23 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Environment & Economy
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
EE3-7 EE3.1.6 Information & Support expenditure 345 0 3 0 -19 -31 0 298 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 345 0 3 0 -19 -31 0 298
Subtotal Property Asset Management -459 1,910 72 0 1,199 -1,881 -2,143 -1,302
EE4 Directors Office EE4-1 EE4.1 Business Improvement expenditure 5,524 -274 0 0 89 0 953 6,292 income -5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
Page 176 5,519 -269 0 0 89 0 953 6,292
Subtotal Directors Office 5,519 -269 0 0 89 0 953 6,292
SUBTOTAL GROWTH & 30,690 1,544 419 315 6,761 -6,738 -1,189 31,802 INFRASTRUCTUR E
EE5 OXFORDSHIRE CUSTOMER SERVICES
EE5-1 CS6.1.1 Management Team expenditure 3,037 74 1 0 9 -195 -695 2,231 income -3,154 0 0 0 0 0 923 -2,231 -117 74 1 0 9 -195 228 0
EE5-2 CS6.1.2 Financial Services expenditure 3,047 0 3 0 18 -32 -239 2,797 income -3,043 -25 -2 0 0 0 273 -2,797 4 -25 1 0 18 -32 34 0
EE5-3 CS6.1.3 Financial and Management Accounting expenditure 4,276 230 1 0 30 -76 -422 4,039 income -4,287 -250 0 0 0 0 498 -4,039 -11 -20 1 0 30 -76 76 0
EE5-4 CS6.1.4 Human Resources expenditure 7,954 15 7 0 44 -310 -740 6,970 grant income -106 -106 income -7,929 -24 -3 0 0 0 1,142 -6,814 25 -9 4 -106 44 -310 402 50
24 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Environment & Economy
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
EE5-5 CS6.1.5 Food with Thought/Quest Cleaning expenditure 8,400 0 0 0 0 0 -102 8,298 income -8,272 1 0 0 0 0 0 -8,271 128 1 0 0 0 0 -102 27
N/A CS6.2 Savings expenditure 426 0 0 0 0 -426 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 426 0 0 0 0 -426 0 0
EE5-6 ICT
EE5-61 CC2.1 ICT Services expenditure 11,871 -285 27 0 72 -549 -248 10,888 income -599 0 0 0 0 0 0 -599
Page 177 11,272 -285 27 0 72 -549 -248 10,289
EE5-62 CC2.2 School Support Service expenditure 520 -87 0 0 0 -3 0 430 income -503 0 -7 0 0 0 0 -510 17 -87 -7 0 0 -3 0 -80
EE5-63 CC2.3 Oxfordshire Community Network (OCN) expenditure 3,325 0 66 0 -324 0 0 3,067 income -972 0 0 0 0 0 0 -972 2,353 0 66 0 -324 0 0 2,095
EE5-64 CC2.4 SAP expenditure 2,285 88 27 0 0 -201 0 2,199 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,285 88 27 0 0 -201 0 2,199
EE5-65 CC2.5 Corporate Information Management Unit expenditure 182 27 1 0 0 -2 56 264 (CIMU) income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 182 27 1 0 0 -2 56 264
EE5-66 CC2.6 Service Recharges expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 income -18,918 234 0 0 0 0 3,454 -15,230 -18,918 234 0 0 0 0 3,454 -15,230
EE5-67 CC2.7 ICT Strategy Investment Fund expenditure 2,810 -2,000 0 0 -408 0 0 402 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,810 -2,000 0 0 -408 0 0 402
25 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Environment & Economy
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
EE5-68 CC2.8 ICT Contract with Oxford City Council expenditure 1,000 -263 0 0 0 -1 0 736 income -1,000 325 0 0 0 0 0 -675 0 62 0 0 0 -1 0 61
Subtotal ICT 1 -1,961 114 0 -660 -756 3,262 0
EE5-7 CC4.3 County Procurement expenditure 671 -2 0 0 5 -40 0 634 income -671 0 0 0 0 0 37 -634 0 -2 0 0 5 -40 37 0
Page 178 EE5-8 CC3.4 Customer Services expenditure 1,278 3,168 6 0 -2,761 -282 35 1,444 income -1,279 -68 0 0 0 0 -27 -1,374 -1 3,100 6 0 -2,761 -282 8 70
EE5-9 SC1_4 Adult Learning expenditure 0 4,826 2 0 25 -37 -32 4,784 (Transferred from Social & Community grant income 0 -3,803 0 0 0 0 0 -3,803 Services) income 0 -899 -11 67 0 0 0 -843 0 124 -9 67 25 -37 -32 138
SUBTOTAL OXFORDSHIRE CUSTOMER SERVICES 455 1,282 118 -39 -3,290 -2,154 3,913 285
expenditure 152,349 7,297 1,148 7,458 5,378 -14,425 -1,860 157,345 grant income -235 -3,883 0 209 0 0 0 -3,909 income -81,251 -655 -125 67 30 -152 4,105 -77,981 DIRECTORATE TOTA L 70,863 2,759 1,023 7,734 5,408 -14,577 2,245 75,455
26 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/1 2 Chief Executive's Offic e
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CHIEF EXECUTIVE & BUSINESS CEO1 SUPPORT
CEO1-1 CC1.1 Chief Executive's Personal Office expenditure 1,085 -54 0 0 7 -171 -54 813 income -147 0 0 0 0 -4 -662 -813 938 -54 0 0 7 -175 -716 0
CEO1-2 CC9 Change Fund expenditure 508 0 0 0 0 0 -200 308 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 508 0 0 0 0 0 -200 308
CEO1-3 CC1.2 Subscriptions expenditure 116 0 0 0 0 0 0 116 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Page 179 116 0 0 0 0 0 0 116
CEO1-4 CC1.4 Big Society Fund expenditure 0 0 0 0 236 0 364 600 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236 0 364 600
SUBTOTAL CHIEF EXECUTIVE & 1,562 -54 0 0 243 -175 -552 1,024 BUSINESS SUPPORT
CEO2 HUMAN RESOURCE S
CEO2-1 CC3.1 Strategic Human Resources expenditure 1,109 -12 1 0 9 -63 -75 969 income -2,040 0 0 0 0 0 332 -1,708 -931 -12 1 0 9 -63 257 -739
CEO2-2 CC3.2 Unison expenditure 143 0 0 0 0 -1 1 143 income -3 0 0 0 0 0 0 -3 140 0 0 0 0 -1 1 140
27 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/1 2 Chief Executive's Offic e
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CEO2-3 CC3.3 Organisational Development expenditure 801 -3 2 0 -196 -5 -50 549 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 801 -3 2 0 -196 -5 -50 549
SUBTOTAL HUMAN RESOURCE S 10 -15 3 0 -187 -69 208 -50
CORPORATE FINANCE & INTERNAL CEO3 AUDIT
CEO3-1 CC4.1 Service Management expenditure 865 -82 0 0 0 -11 -298 474
Page 180 income -865 0 0 0 0 0 385 -480 0 -82 0 0 0 -11 87 -6
CEO3-2 CC4.2 Corporate Finance expenditure 914 75 0 0 6 -58 1 938 income -914 0 0 0 0 0 0 -914 0 75 0 0 6 -58 1 24
CEO3-3 CC4.4 Internal Audit Service expenditure 593 -3 0 0 4 -33 15 576 income -593 0 -1 0 0 0 0 -594 0 -3 -1 0 4 -33 15 -18
CEO3-4 CC4.5 Audit Fee expenditure 500 0 0 0 23 -203 0 320 income -500 0 0 0 0 0 180 -320 0 0 0 0 23 -203 180 0
CEO3-5 CC4.6 Berkshire Pensions expenditure 51 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 0 0 0 0 0 0 51
SUBTOTAL CORPORATE FINANCE & 51 -10 -1 0 33 -305 283 51 INTERNAL AUDI T
28 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/1 2 Chief Executive's Offic e
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CEO4 LAW & GOVERNANCE SERVICE S
CEO4-1 CC5.1 Legal Services expenditure 2,104 -11 1 0 19 -21 -68 2,024 income -2,085 0 -2 0 0 -23 86 -2,024 19 -11 -1 0 19 -44 18 0
CEO4-2 CC5.2 Democratic Services expenditure 1,155 40 1 0 7 -290 -114 799 income -307 0 0 0 0 0 -492 -799 848 40 1 0 7 -290 -606 0
CEO4-3 CC5.3 Coroner's Service expenditure 958 0 7 0 104 -15 -64 990 income -229 0 0 0 0 0 57 -172 729 0 7 0 104 -15 -7 818 Page 181 CEO4-4 CC5.4 Members' Allowances expenditure 1,036 0 0 0 0 -9 0 1,027 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,036 0 0 0 0 -9 0 1,027
CEO4-5 CC5.5 Members' Services expenditure 164 0 0 0 0 -7 6 163 income -10 0 0 0 0 0 0 -10 154 0 0 0 0 -7 6 153
CEO4-6 CC5.6 Political Assistants expenditure 139 -1 0 0 0 -138 0 0 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 139 -1 0 0 0 -138 0 0
CEO4-7 CC5.7 Chairman's Allowance expenditure 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 19
CEO4-8 CC5.8 Council Elections expenditure 127 0 0 0 0 0 0 127 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 127 0 0 0 0 0 0 127
29 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/1 2 Chief Executive's Offic e
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CEO4-9 SC1_6 Registration Service expenditure 0 1,571 3 0 44 -52 20 1,586 (Transferred from Social & Community grant income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Services) income 0 -1,087 -11 0 0 0 0 -1,098 0 484 -8 0 44 -52 20 488
SUBTOTAL LAW & GOVERNANCE 3,071 512 -1 0 174 -555 -569 2,632 SERVICES
CEO5 STRATEGY AND COMMUNICATIONS
Page 182 CEO5-1 CC3.1 Partnership Working expenditure 595 -80 0 0 103 -136 -56 426 income -682 0 0 0 0 0 269 -413 -87 -80 0 0 103 -136 213 13
CEO5-2 CC6.2 Grants expenditure 238 0 0 0 0 0 0 238 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 238 0 0 0 0 0 0 238
CEO5-3 CC6.4 Partnerships & Communities Team expenditure 87 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 0 0 0 0 0 0 87
CEO5-4 CC7.1 Policy & Performance expenditure 1,055 41 0 0 9 -200 -35 870 income -985 0 0 0 0 0 115 -870 70 41 0 0 9 -200 80 0
CEO5-5 CC7.2 Scrutiny expenditure 32 0 1 0 0 -9 0 24 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 0 1 0 0 -9 0 24
CEO5-6 CC7.3 Consultation and Involvement expenditure 276 -1 0 0 0 -1 -1 273 income -277 0 0 0 0 0 4 -273 -1 -1 0 0 0 -1 3 0
CEO5-7 CC7.4 Research and Intelligence expenditure 180 0 0 0 2 -3 -1 178 income -32 0 0 0 0 0 0 -32 148 0 0 0 2 -3 -1 146
30 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/1 2 Chief Executive's Offic e
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Ref. Ref. Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 2011/12 2010/11 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CEO5-8 CC8.1 Communications & Marketing expenditure 1,008 194 0 0 7 -271 -47 891 income -1,023 0 -1 0 0 0 124 -900 -15 194 -1 0 7 -271 77 -9
CEO5-9 CC8.3 Print & Design expenditure 13 -4 0 0 0 0 0 9 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 -4 0 0 0 0 0 9
SUBTOTAL STRATEGY & 485 150 0 0 121 -620 372 508 COMMUNICATIONS
CORPORATE & DEMOCRATIC CORE CEO6
Page 183 CEO6-1 CC10.1 Corporate Management expenditure 2,501 0 0 0 0 0 -10 2,491 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 -228 -228 2,501 0 0 0 0 0 -238 2,263
CEO6-2 CC10.2 Democratic Representation & Management expenditure 1,898 0 0 0 0 0 -575 1,323 income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,898 0 0 0 0 0 -575 1,323
SUBTOTAL CORPORATE & 4,399 0 0 0 0 0 -813 3,586 DEMOCRATIC COR E
expenditure 20,270 1,670 16 0 384 -1,697 -1,241 19,402 grant income 00000000 income -10,692 -1,087 -15 0 0 -27 170 -11,651 DIRECTORATE TOTAL 9,578 583 1 0 384 -1,724 -1,071 7,751
31 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Strategic Measures
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CAPITAL FINANCIN G
Principal expenditure 17,930 1,316 -954 18,292 income 0 0 17,930 0 0 0 1,316 -954 0 18,292
Interest expenditure 20,023 -123 -1,042 18,858 income 0 0 20,023 0 0 0 -123 -1,042 0 18,858
Page 184 Prudential Borrowing costs expenditure 1,350 50 -150 1,250 income 0 0 1,350 0 0 0 50 -150 0 1,250
Net Interest on Balances (split income and expenditure) expenditure 2,222 649 -728 2,143 income -3,563 -2,796 2,389 -3,970 -1,341 0 0 0 -2,147 1,661 0 -1,827
SUBTOTAL CAPITAL FINANCIN G 37,962 0 0 0 -904 -485 0 36,573
Pensions Past Service Deficit Funding expenditure 1,500 1,500 income 0 0 0 0 1,500 0 0 1,500
CONTRIBUTIONS TO/FROM BALANCE S
General Balances expenditure 3,344 -1,225 -500 1,619 income 0 0 3,344 0 0 0 -1,225 -500 0 1,619
SUBTOTAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO/FROM BALANCE S 3,344 0 0 0 -1,225 -500 0 1,619
32 CC8 Annex 4
Draft Revenue Budget 2011/12 Strategic Measures
Budget Permanent Inflation Function Previously Proposed Proposed Budget Service Are a 2010/11 Virements and Agreed Savings Virements 2011/12 Agreed in Funding Funding 2010/11 Changes and New Pressures £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
CONTRIBUTIONS TO/FROM RESERVES
Reserves expenditure 3,405 516 2,714 -4,763 1,872 income 0 0 3,405 516 0 0 2,714 -4,763 0 1,872
SUBTOTAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO/FROM RESERVE S 3,405 516 0 0 2,714 -4,763 0 1,872
expenditure 48,274 516 0 0 4,881 -8,137 0 45,534 income -3,563 0 0 0 -2,796 2,389 0 -3,970 STRATEGIC MEASURES TOTAL 44,711 516 0 0 2,085 -5,748 0 41,564 Page 185
AREA BASED GRANT INCOME expenditure 0 0 income -45,656 2,327 42,609 -720 -45,656 2,327 0 42,609 0 0 0 -720
TOTAL AREA BASED GRANT INCOME -45,656 2,327 0 42,609 0 0 0 -720
COUNCIL TAX FREEZE GRANT expenditure 0 0 income 0 -7,063 -7,063 0 0 0 -7,063 0 0 0 -7,063
TOTAL COUNCIL TAX FREEZE GRANT 0 0 0 -7,063 0 0 0 -7,063
33 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 186 CC8 Annex 5
Council Tax and Precepts 2011/12
Council Tax Data
1. In order to set its council tax, the County Council needs the following information:
(a) the County Council’s budget requirement for 2011/12. This is the County Council’s net expenditure to be financed by the council tax, National Non-Domestic Rates (NNDR) and Revenue Support Grant (RSG). This is determined by the Council when it formally sets the budget;
(b) the amount to be received from National Non-Domestic Rates and Revenue Support Grant. This is determined by Government within the Local Government Finance Settlement. We received our 2011/12 figure on 31 January 2011 in the Final settlement;
(c) any surpluses/shortfalls on the council tax collection funds for earlier years and the estimated position for the current year . Each district council must make this calculation and notify the County Council of its share before 22 January 2011. The County Council must take these adjustments into account in setting its precept and the council tax figures for 2011/12;
(d) the council tax base, expressed in terms of Band D equivalent properties. Each district council must formally notify the County Council of the tax base for its area before 31 January 2011. For 2011/12 the tax base is determined by adjusting the tax base for RSG purposes for any increase arising from reductions in the discounts for second homes and then applying a factor for estimated losses on collection.
2. Based on the final information on funding and assuming a budget of £408.616m as shown in the proposed Medium Term Financial Plan (Annex 1) the calculation of the Band D Council Tax for 2011/12 is as follows:
Page 187 CC8 Annex 5
Council Tax Calculation 2011/12
County Council Budget Requirement £408.616m Less : Revenue Support Grant £-28.844m National Non-Domestic Rates £-93.316m
Less Collection Fund Adjustments £-3.782m
Council Tax Income Required £282.674m (P)
RSG Tax Base (Band D Equivalent Properties) 247,610
Council Tax Base (Assuming losses on collection) 243,325 (B)
Band D Council Tax £1,161.71 (P/B)
Each £1 million variation in budget will change the Band D council tax by about £4.11 or 0.35%.
The calculation of the council tax for the other bands is shown below in Table 1. Table 2 analyses the tax base over each district council area and allocates the estimated County Council precept to each area relative to their tax base.
Table 1
Council Tax by Property Band for Oxfordshire County Council
Assuming a Band D council tax of £1,161.71, the council tax for other bands is as follows:
Property Property Band D 2011/12 Band Values Proportion £ p A Up to £40,000 6/9 774.47 B Over £40,000 and up to £52,000 7/9 903.55 C Over £52,000 and up to £68,000 8/9 1,032.63 D Over £68,000 and up to £88,000 9/9 1,161.71 E Over £88,000 and up to £120,000 11/9 1,419.87 F Over £120,000 and up to £160,000 13/9 1,678.03 G Over £160,000 and up to £320,000 15/9 1,936.18 H Over £320,000 18/9 2,323.42
N.B. The appropriate district/parish and police council tax and the effect of agreed expenditure proposals will need to be added to give the total council tax charge.
Page 188 CC8 Annex 5
Table 2
Allocation of Precept to Districts
The County Council precept (£282.674m) is the sum of the council tax income required to fund the Council’s budget.
Assumed Council Tax Base Precept Due Collection RSG Rate Adjusted District Council Tax Base for Losses on Collection/ Discount Number £000 Reductions % Cherwell 51,305.0 98.11 50,337.0 58,477 Oxford City 47,790.0 98.31 46,983.8 54,582 South 56,438.0 98.09 55,359.7 64,312 Oxfordshire Vale of White 49,509.0 97.81 48,426.0 56,257 Horse West 42,568.0 99.18 42,219.0 49,046 Oxfordshire TOTAL 247,610 .0 98.27 243,325 .5 282 ,674
Formal approval is required under the council tax legislation for:
− The County Council’s precept, allocated to district councils pro rata to their share of the council tax base for the County Council; − The council tax figures for the County Council for a Band D equivalent property and a calculation of the equivalent council tax figure for all other bands.
The information must be given to district councils by 1 March 2011.
Page 189 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 190 Annex 6a
Dedicated Schools Grant 2011/12
Calculation of Guaranteed Unit of Funding (GUF PLUS)
Number of Pupils 81,352.50
2010/11 DSG Allocation per pupil £ 4,182.34
Mainstreamed Grants LA Schools Academies TOTAL Per Pupil £ £ £ £ £ £ £
School Standards Grant (SSG) 14,774,786 249,003 15,023,789 184.68 SSG (Personalisation) 3,456,370 100,315 3,556,685 43.72 School Development Grant 11,917,217 454,110 12,371,327 152.07 Specialist Schools 4,395,542 129,656 4,525,198 55.62 High Performing Schools 679,480 0 679,480 8.35 School Lunch Grant 873,027 15,757 888,784 10.93 Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant 640,219 0 640,219 7.87 1-2-1 tuition 2,749,616 26,180 2,775,796 34.12 Extended Schools Sustainability 1,981,406 0 1,981,406 24.36 Extended School Subsidy 1,287,583 0 1,287,583 15.83 National Strategy Primary Targeted Element 404,948 Universal Element 519,680 EY Foundation Stage 74,240 Leading Teachers 60,680 Modern Foreign Languages 209,597 Every Child a Writer 129,830 Every Child a Reader 285,600 Every Child Counts 212,000 National Strategy Primary - TOTAL 1,896,575 0 1,896,575 23.31 National Strategy Secondary Targeted Element 740,132 13,971 Universal Element 120,000 2,265 Leading Teachers 18,720 353 National Strategy Secondary - TOTAL 878,852 16,589 895,441 11.01 Diplomas 286,304 0 286,304 3.52 Exceptional Circumstances 0 0 0 0
Total Mainstreamed Grants 45,816,977 991,610 46,808,587 575.38
2011/12 Guaranteed Unit of funding per pupil £ 4,757.72
Page 191 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 192 Annex 6b Service & Resource Planning 2011/12 - 2014/15 Dedicated Schools Grant Provisional Allocation 2011/12
ISB PVI ISB/PVI Central Total £000s £000s £000s £000s £000s
2010/11 Base, excluding YPLA 293,494.6 11,089.0 304,583.6 35,662.4 340,246.0 Change in pupil numbers from January 2011 ( pupils) * 0.0 0.0 Revised Baseline 293,494.6 11,089.0 304,583.6 35,662.4 340,246.0
Mainstreamed Grants (as initially allocated in 2010/11) 37,031.5 37,031.5 10,322.6 47,354.1
Additional Funding Extension of Early Years Free Entitlement - Increased Hours at 2010/11 GUF rate * 767.7 3,197.1 3,964.8 3,964.8
School Forum Merging Grants Proposals for 2011/12 - Reduction in Advanced Skills Teacher allocations -340.0 -340.0 -340.0
School Forum Formula Change Proposals for 2011/12 - Forces Factor Allocation amendment -50.0 -50.0 -50.0 - Temporary Delegation of SEN Provision 369.6 369.6 -369.6 0.0 - SEN Provision no longer qualifying -120.0 -120.0
School Forum Proposals for 2011/12 (1) Early Years Single Funding Formula 0.0 0.0 (2) National Strategies Programme 0.0 147.0 147.0 (3) Services Supporting Behaviour - On course Programme Back on track 0.0 150.0 150.0 - Fair Access Panels 0.0 260.0 260.0 - Behavioural Support Services to Priamry Schools 0.0 178.0 178.0 - Meadowbrook College 0.0 275.0 275.0 - Hill camp reengagement of pupils 0.0 25.0 25.0 (4) Safeguarding Training for Schools 0.0 64.0 64.0 (5) Extended Services/Partnership Provision 1,579.0 1,579.0 -3,269.0 -1,690.0 (6) Intevention Strategy Primary 0.0 70.0 70.0 (7) Free School Meals (increased eligibility) 400.0 400.0 400.0 (8) Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG) (addition) 520.0 520.0 520.0 (9) Specific Schemes ended 0.0 -326.0 -326.0 (10) Carterton Schools 100.0 100.0 100.0 Headroom balance held against implications on MFG of above 335.1 335.1 335.1 334,207.5 14,286.1 348,493.6 43,069.4 391,563.0 less Oxford Academy * 4,575.0 4,575.0 185.0 4,760.0
Dedicated Schools Grant Provisional Allocation 329,632.5 14,286.1 343,918.6 42,884.4 386,803.0 There is no increase in the per pupil funding rate for 2011/12. No deduction yet included for the new Oxford Spires Academy.
* 2011 pupil count data not yet available
Acronyms: GUF - Guaranteed Unit of Funding ISB - Individual Schools Budgets PVI - Private, Voluntary & independent Peoviders
Page 193 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 194 CC8 Annex 7
Service & Resource Planning 2011/12 - 2015/16
Virement Rules 2011/12
Introduction
1. Under the Constitution the Council is required to specify the extent of virement within the approved budget which may be undertaken by the Cabinet. Any other changes to the budget are reserved to the Council, other than any changes necessary to ensure compliance with the law, ministerial direction or government guidance.
2. Virement for these purposes is taken to include not only the transfer of budget provision between budget heads 1 (including contingency provisions if such exist) but also the transfer of funds from balances by way of a supplementary estimate.
Virements requiring Council approval
3. The approval of Council is required for any virement which:
a) Involves the transfer of funds between revenue and capital budgets; or
b) Is a permanent virement and involves a major change in policy as described by the Policy Framework Documents 2; or
c) Is a temporary virement, involves a major change in policy as described by the Policy Framework Documents and is for £500,000 or more; or
d) Where in the opinion of the Chief Finance Officer a Council decision is required.
The Chief Finance Officer must consider if virements are a major change in policy.
4. These provisions are reviewed annually as part of the budget setting process.
1 i.e. the expenditure heads specified in the budget as approved by Council 2 Set out in the Constitution, Section D (Full Council) Paragraph 4
Page 195 CC8 Annex 7
Virements for which the Cabinet is responsible
5. Virements that are not the responsibility of the Council become the Cabinet’s responsibility. Cabinet delegates responsibility for temporary virements worth less than £250,000.
6. Thus the approval of the Cabinet is required for:
a) Any permanent virement that does not involve a major change in policy. These are the permanent virements not covered by 3b); or
b) Any temporary virement that does not involve a major change in policy and is less than £500,000 in value, but is more than or equal to £250,000 in value. These are higher value temporary virements that are not covered by 3c); and
c) Where the relevant Cabinet member or members have concerns.
7. Thus Cabinet delegates approval of any remaining temporary virements with a value below £250,000.
Virements delegated by the Cabinet
8. The Cabinet delegates responsibility for the remaining temporary virements as follows:
a) Responsibility for agreeing temporary virements worth less than £250,000 but greater than or equal to £100,000 is delegated to the relevant Director and Chief Finance Officer (or their nominated officer), subject to the approval of the relevant Cabinet member.
b) Responsibility for agreeing temporary virements worth less than £100,000 but greater than or equal to £50,000 is delegated to the relevant Deputy Director or Head(s) of Service. These virements should be reported as part of the monthly monitoring process.
c) Responsibility for agreeing temporary virements worth less than £50,000 is delegated to budget holders and managers affected.
9. Delegated virements that the relevant Cabinet member or members have concerns about must be referred to the Cabinet for approval.
Monthly monitoring
10. As part of monthly monitoring procedures directorates should be forecasting the full year outturn position. Where action plans to address potential overspends do not reduce the forecast overspend, temporary virements should be made from underspendings elsewhere to reflect the forecast overspend that is not covered by measures in the action plan. Action plans
Page 196 CC8 Annex 7
that address overspends of £250,000 or more should be approved by the Chief Finance Officer and the Cabinet Member for Finance.
11. When virements are reported they will be assumed to be temporary virements unless it is specifically stated that they are permanent virements.
Temporary and Permanent virements
12. Temporary virements only affect the current financial year. Permanent virements affect the current financial year and all future financial years.
Cumulative virements
13. Successive virements to or from the same budget will produce a cumulative effect. If the cumulative effect would require approval at a higher level – for example by Council instead of the Cabinet, this should be obtained.
14. Once the higher level of approval has been obtained for a cumulative virement the cumulative total is reset to zero. This means that any subsequent virement is a separate request that should be treated as set out above.
Chief Finance Officer Powers
15. If directorates do not make virements in accordance with the Virement Rules the Chief Finance Officer has the power to make other virements to remedy the position.
Page 197 CC8 Annex 7
Who approves any Virement?
The following series of questions are intended to help managers decide who should approve virements.
Question Question If ‘Yes’, this virement is number approved by:
1 Is it a transfer of funds from revenue to Council capital? If not… 2 Is it a permanent virement that involves a Council major change in policy? (Note 1) If not… 3 Is it a temporary virement that involves a Council major change in policy and is for £500,000 or more? (Note 1) If not… 4 Does the Chief Finance Officer consider that Council a Council decision is required? If not… 5 Is it a permanent virement that does not Cabinet involve a major change in policy? (Note 1) If not… 6 Is it a temporary virement that does not Cabinet involve a major change in policy and is less than £500,000 but more than or equal to £250,000? (Note 1) If not… 7 Does the relevant Cabinet member or Cabinet members have concerns? If not… 8 Is the temporary virement worth less than Relevant Director, Chief £250,000 but greater than or equal to Finance Officer (or their £100,000? nominee) subject to approval by the relevant Cabinet member If not… 9 Is the temporary virement worth less than Deputy Director or £100,000 but greater than or equal to Head(s) of Service, to be £50,000? reported in the Monthly Monitoring If not… 10 Is the temporary virement worth less than Budget holders and £50,000? Managers affected
Note 1 – The Chief Finance Officer must consider whether these virements involve a major change in policy.
Page 198 CC8 Annex 8
Service & Resource Planning 2011/12 – 2015/16
Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Annual Investment Strategy for 2011/2012
Introduction
1. The Local Government Act 2003 and supporting regulations requires the Council to ‘have regard to’ the Prudential Code and to set Prudential Indicators for the next three years to ensure that the Council’s capital investment plans are affordable, prudent and sustainable.
2. The Act therefore requires the Council to set out its treasury strategy for borrowing and to prepare an Annual Investment Strategy (as required by Investment Guidance issued subsequent to the Act). The Annual Investment Strategy sets out the Council’s policies for managing its investments and for giving priority to the security and liquidity of those investments.
3. The proposed strategy for 2011/12 in respect of the following aspects of the treasury management function is based upon the views of the Council’s Treasury Management Strategy Team (TMST) 1, informed by market forecasts provided by the Council’s treasury advisor, Arlingclose Limited. The strategy covers:
• Treasury limits in force which limit the treasury risk and activities of the Council; • Prudential Indicators; • the current treasury position; • prospects for interest rates; • the borrowing strategy; • the borrowing requirement; • the investment strategy;
4. It is a statutory requirement under Section 33 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, for the Council to produce a balanced budget. In particular, Section 32 requires a local authority to calculate its budget requirement for each financial year to include the revenue costs that flow from capital financing decisions. This, therefore, means that increases in capital expenditure must be limited to a level whereby increases in charges to revenue caused by increased borrowing to finance additional capital expenditure, and any increases in running costs from new capital projects are limited to a level which is affordable within the projected income of the Council for the foreseeable future.
1 Comprising the Assistant Chief Executive & Chief Finance Officer, Acting Head of Corporate Finance, Principal Financial Manager – Treasury & Pension Fund Investments and Financial Manager – Treasury & Pension Fund Investments
Page 199 CC8 Annex 8
5. The Council is also required to indicate if it has adopted the CIPFA Code of Practice on Treasury Management. The code was adopted by Council on 1 April 2003. Subsequent amendments to the code have also been adopted.
Treasury Limits for 2011/12 to 2013/14
6. It is a statutory duty under Section 3 of the Local Government Act 2003 and supporting regulations, for the Council to determine and keep under review the amount it can afford to borrow. This amount is termed the ‘Affordable Borrowing Limit’. In England and Wales the Authorised Limit represents the legislative limit specified in section 3 of the Local Government Act 2003.
7. The Council must have regard to the Prudential Code when setting the ‘Authorised Borrowing Limit’. The Authorised Limit, essentially requires the Council to ensure that total capital investment remains within sustainable limits and, in particular, that the impact upon future council tax levels is ‘acceptable’.
8. Whilst termed an “Affordable Borrowing Limit”, the capital plans to be considered for inclusion incorporate financing by both external borrowing and other forms of liability, such as credit arrangements. The Authorised Limit is to be set, on a rolling basis, for the forthcoming financial year and two successive financial years.
Prudential Indicators for 2011/12 to 2013/14
9. The Prudential Indicators set out below are part of the integrated treasury management strategy.
10. It is recommended that Cabinet recommends Council to approve the authorised limits for total external debt, gross of investments for the next three financial years.
Page 200 CC8 Annex 8
PRUDENTIAL INDICATOR 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 201 3/14
(2). TREASURY MANAGEMENT £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 PRUDENTIAL INDICATORS probable estimate estimate estimate outturn Authorised Limit for exter nal debt - borrowing 540,000 553,000 535,000 520,000 other long term liabilities 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 TOTAL 580,000 593,000 575,000 560,000
Operational Boundary for external debt - borrowing 530,000 543,000 525,000 510,000 other long term liabilities 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 TOTAL 570,000 583,000 565,000 550,000
Upper limit for fixed interest rate exposure expressed as: Net principal re fixed rate 150% 150% 150% 150% borrowing / investments
Upper limit for variable rate exposure expressed as: Net principal re variable rate 25% 25% 25% 25% borrowing / investments
Upper limit for total principal sums £100m £100m £100m £100m invested for over 364 days
Maturity structure of fixed rate Lower Limit Upper Limit borrowing during 2011/12 % % Under 12 months 0 20 12 months and within 24 months 0 25 24 months and within 5 years 0 35 5 years and within 10 years 5 40 10 years and above 50 95
Total Ext ernal Debt as at 31.03.10 £’000 External Borrowing 412,093 Financing Liability 18,021 Total 430,114
Page 201 CC8 Annex 8
Forecast Treasury Portfolio Position
11. The Council’s treasury forecast portfolio position for the 2011/12 financial year comprises:
Principal Average Rate £m % Opening External Debt Balance PWLB 384.414 4.76% Money Market Loans 50.000 3.94%
TOTAL EXTERNAL DEBT 434.414 2011/12 Average Cash Balance Average Monthly Cash Balance* 185.88 Average Monthly Externally Managed 24.36
TOTAL INVESTMENTS 210.24
*In response to a change in Pension Fund regulations, the Council is no longer able to commingle its own cash with that of the Pension Fund. This figure is therefore exclusive of Pension Fund cash.
Prospects for Interest Rates
Current Medium Term Financial Plan
12. The strategy for 2010/11 approved by Council in February 2010 set out forecast interest rates over the medium term. The forecast was for an average base rate of 0.63% in 2010/11, 1.75% in 2011/12, 2.63% in 2012/13, 2.75% in 2013/14 and 2.75% in 2014/15. These interest rates were used as a basis for constructing the strategic measures budget for 2010/11 to 2014/15.
Arlingclose’s View
13. The Council uses the services of Arlingclose Limited to provide investment advice to the Council, as part of this service they help the Council to formulate a view on interest rates.
14. Arlingclose’s current view on interest rates is that the Bank Rate:
• Will remain at 0.5% until August 2011 • Will gradually increase from September 2011 to June 2013 to 2.75%
15. There is a downside risk to these forecasts if the economy could not sustain such a rapid increase in interest rates. There is also an upside risk that the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee may begin the process of base rate increases earlier than forecast.
Page 202 CC8 Annex 8
• Arlingclose are of the view that short term money market rates are likely to remain at very low levels, although they have not quantified what spreads over Base Rate to expect.
Treasury Management Strategy Team’s View
16. The Council’s TMST, taking into account the advice from Arlingclose, and the current economic outlook, have determined the rates to be included in the Strategic Measures budget for 2011/12 and over the medium term. The Bank Rate forecasts set out below represent the average rate for the financial year:
• 2011/12 0.75% • 2012/13 1.75% • 2013/14 2.50% • 2014/15 2.75% • 2015/16 2.75%
17. It is the view of the team that as rates achieved on deposits in the past have been over and above that of the Bank Rate that a return rate should also be budgeted for. The team has agreed that the target return rate should be 0.40% higher than the average Bank Rate for each year over the medium term. The rate this gives is set out below. These rates have been incorporated into the strategic measures budget estimates:
• 2011/12 1.15% • 2012/13 2.15% • 2013/14 2.90% • 2014/15 3.15% • 2015/16 3.15%
Borrowing Strategy
Arlingclose’s View
18. Arlingclose’s forecasts have an upside risk of between 25 and 50 basis points, and a downside risk of between 25 and 50 basis points depending on the economic and political climate.
19. For the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB) new borrowing rates Arlingclose have forecast as follows:
• The 50 year PWLB rate is expected to start the financial year at 5.50%, increasing to 5.75% in September 2011. A decrease is forecast back to 5.50% in September 2012, remaining at that level for the rest of the forecast period. • The 20 year PWLB rate is expected to start the financial year at 5.75% rising to 6.00% in September 2011, remaining at that level for the rest of the forecast period.
Page 203 CC8 Annex 8
• The 10 year PWLB rate is expected to start the financial year at 4.75%, gradually rising to 5.75% by June 2012 and remaining there for the rest of the forecast period. • The 5 year PWLB rate is expected to start the financial year at 3.75% with gradual quarterly increases forecast to reach 5.00% by June 2012, remaining at that level for the rest of the forecast period.
20. This forecast indicates, therefore, that there is a range of options available when setting a borrowing strategy for 2011/12. Short dated gilt yields are forecast to be lower than medium and long dated gilt yields during the financial year. Despite additional gilt issuance by the UK Government, short dated gilts are expected to benefit from expectation of lower interest rates as the economy struggles. Variable rates are expected to remain low as the Bank Rate is maintained at historically low levels.
Treasury Management Strategy Team’s View
21. 2011/12 is expected to be a time of continued low Bank Rate. Therefore the “cost of carry” associated with the long term borrowing compared to temporary investment returns means that the appetite for new long term borrowing brings with it additional short term costs. Financing the Council’s borrowing requirement internally would reduce the “cost of carry” in the short term, however this must be weighed against the possibility of refinancing any short term internal borrowing at a time when PWLB rates exceed those currently available.
22. The Council’s TMST therefore have agreed that they should continue to have the option to fund new or replacement borrowing up to the value of 25% of the portfolio (currently approximately £50m) through internal borrowing. This will have the effect of reducing some of the “cost of carry” of funding.
23. If the market conditions change during the 2011/12 financial year such that the policy to borrow internally is no longer in the interests of the council, the TMST will review the borrowing strategy and report any changes to Cabinet.
24. The team’s forecast for PWLB rates over the medium term are set out below. These rates have been incorporated into the strategic measures budget estimates:
• 2011/12 5.00% • 2012/13 5.00% • 2013/14 5.00% • 2014/15 5.00% • 2015/16 5.00%
25. These rates take into account the forecast gilt yields for the period plus the higher premium applied to the PWLB borrowing rates from October 2010.
26. These rates are based on short to medium term borrowing rates. Longer dated borrowing rates are forecast to be at 6% across the medium term.
Page 204 CC8 Annex 8
LOBOs (Lender’s option/Borrower’s option)
27. The Council has set a maximum limit of 20% of the debt portfolio to be borrowed in the form of LOBOs. It is recommended that this remain as the limit for 2011/12. As at 30 November 2010, LOBOs represent 11.51% of the total external debt.
28. The Council has three £5m LOBO’s with call options in 2011/12. The first has call options in April 2011 and October 2011, the next two with call options in July 2011. If the lender chooses to increase the current rate of interest payable, the Council will evaluate alternative financing options before deciding whether or not to accept the new rate offered.
Borrowing Requirement
29. The TMST is proposing to fund capital expenditure through internal balances in the short to medium term. This will result in external debt balances falling from £434m to £374m by 2013/14.
2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 £m £m £m £m Probable Estimate Estimate Estimate Net New Borrowing – 4.70 -9.38 -6.55 -12.00 Internal Net New Borrowing – 22.32 - - - External Replacement 1.68 27.00 17.00 16.00 Borrowing - Internal* Replacement 6.00 - - - Borrowing - External TOTAL 34.70 17.62 10.45 4.00 Cumulative Internal Borrowing 6.38 24.00 34.45 38.45
*replacement borrowing in 2011/12 includes potential repayment of three £5m LOBO loans. In 2012/13 the replacement borrowing figure includes £10m potential LOBO loan repayments. A further £5m LOBO loan could potentially be called in 2013/14.
30. Henley College has recently been designated a sixth form college. Under the ASCL Act 2009, the Council will have regard to, and where appropriate give consent to the College to arrange borrowing for its own purposes
Annual Investment Strategy
31. The Council has regard to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s Guidance on Local Government Investments (“the Guidance”) issued in March 2004 and CIPFA’s Treasury Management in Public Services Code of Practice and Cross Sectoral Guidance Notes (“the CIPFA TM Code”). It also has regard to the
Page 205 CC8 Annex 8
subsequent Communities and Local Government (formerly ODPM) update to the Investment Guidance, Capital Finance Regulations and Minimum Revenue Provision Guidance issued in April 2010. The Council’s investment priorities are:-
(a) The security of capital and (b) The liquidity of its investments
32. The Council also aims to achieve the optimum return on its investments commensurate with proper levels of security and liquidity. The borrowing of monies purely to invest or on-lend and make a return is unlawful and the Council will not engage in such activity.
33. Investment instruments identified for use in the 2011/12 financial year are listed below under the ‘Specified’ and ‘Non-Specified’ Investment categories. Guidance states that specified investments are those requiring “minimal procedural formalities”. The placing of cash on deposit with banks and building societies ‘awarded high credit ratings by a credit rating agency’ and investments with the UK Government and local authorities qualify as falling under this phrase as they form a normal and minimum part of day to day treasury management.
34. Non specified investment products are those which take on greater risk. They are subject to greater scrutiny and should therefore be subject to more rigorous justification and agreement of their use in the Annual Investment Strategy; this applies regardless of whether they are under one year investments and have high credit ratings.
35. The Council uses Fitch ratings as the basis by which to set its minimum credit criteria for deposits and derive its counterparty limits. The TMST may further limit these by using other available information such as Credit Default Swap Rates, Share prices, Ratings Watch & Outlook notices and other quality Financial Media sources. Counterparty limits and maturity limits are derived from the credit rating matrix as set out in the tables at paragraphs 47 and 48 respectively.
36. The updated CIPFA Code of Practice on Treasury Management (2009) recommends that Council’s have regard to the ratings issued by the three major credit rating agencies (Fitch, Moodys and Standard & Poors) and to use the lowest common denominator approach when determining which credit ratings to apply.
37. Whilst the Council will have regard to the ratings provided by these three ratings agencies, it is the opinion of the TMST that using the lowest common denominator approach is too prescriptive and overly mechanical and may engender an over reliance on credit ratings alone.
38. Notification of any rating changes (or ratings watch and outlook notifications) by Fitch are monitored daily by a member of the Treasury Management Team.
Page 206 CC8 Annex 8
Rating changes by other credit rating agencies are reported to the TMST by Arlingclose.
39. Where a change in credit rating places a counterparty on the approved lending list outside the credit matrix (as set out in tables at paragraphs 47 and 48, that counterparty will be immediately removed from the lending list.
40. Where a counterparty has been placed on Negative Watch or Outlook by a credit rating agency, the counterparty will be immediately suspended from the approved lending list. The TMST will then consider the notification and any other information as described in paragraph 34 before deciding whether the counterparty should be reinstated or removed from the approved lending list.
41. In addition, the TMST apply further limits, to mitigate risk by diversification. These include:
• Limiting the amount lent to banks in any one country (excluding the UK) to a maximum of 20% of the investment portfolio. • Limiting the amount lent to any bank, or banks within the same group structure to 15% of the investment portfolio.
42. Where the Council has deposits on instant access, this balance will not be considered when limiting the amount lent to any bank or group of banks to 15%, however the limits as set out in paragraphs 47 and 48 will still apply.
43. Counterparty limits as set out in paragraphs 47 and 48, may be temporarily exceeded by the accrual and application of interest amounts onto accounts such as call accounts and money market funds. Where the application of interest causes the balance with a counterparty to exceed the agreed limits, the balance will be reduced when appropriate, dependent upon the terms and conditions of the account and cashflow forecast.
44. Any changes to the approved lending list will continue to be reported to Cabinet as part of the monthly Financial Monitoring Report
Specified Investments
45. All such investments will be sterling denominated, with maturities up to a maximum of 1 year, meeting the ‘high’ credit rating criteria where applicable.
Investment Instrument Minimum Credit Use Criteria Debt Management Agency N/A In-house and Deposit Facility Fund Managers Term Deposits – UK N/A In-house Government
Page 207 CC8 Annex 8
Investment Instrument Minimum Credit Use Criteria Term Deposits – Banks and Fitch short-term F1, Long- In-house and Building Societies term A, Fund Managers Individual rating C with support rating 2 or individual rating B with support rating 3, Minimum Sovereign Rating AA Term Deposits with N/A In-house Nationalised Banks with Government Guarantee for wholesale deposits Term Deposits with Part N/A In-house Nationalised banks by the UK Government Certificates of Deposit issued A1 or P1 In-house on a by Banks and Building buy and hold Societies basis. Fund Managers Money Market Funds with a AAA In-house and Constant Net Asset Value Fund Managers Other Money Market Funds Minimum equivalent credit In-house and and Collective Investment rating of A+ across all 3 Fund Managers Schemes 2 Ratings Agencies. These funds do not have short- term or support ratings. UK Government Gilts AAA In-house on a buy and hold basis. Fund Managers Treasury Bills N/A Fund Managers
2 I.e., credit rated funds which meet the definition of a collective investment scheme as defined in SI 2004 No 534 and SI 2007 No 573.
Page 208 CC8 Annex 8
Non-Specified Investments
46. A maximum of 50% of the portfolio will be held in non-specified investments.
Investment Minimum Use Max % of Max Instrument Credit total Maturity Criteria Investmen Period ts Debt Management N/A In-house 50% 3 years Agency Deposit Facility and Fund (maturities in excess of 1 Managers year) 3 Term Deposits – UK N/A In-house 50% 3 years Government (maturities in excess of 1 year) Term Deposits – other N/A In-house 50% 3 years Local Authorities (maturities in excess of 1 year) Term Deposits – Banks Fitch short- In-house 50% in- 3 years and Building Societies term F1+, and Fund house; (maturities in excess of 1 Long-term Managers 100% year) AA-, External Individual Funds rating B, with support rating 2 Structured Products (eg. Fitch short- In-house 50% in- 3 years Callable deposits, range term F1+, and Fund house; accruals, snowballs, Long-term Managers 100% escalators etc) AA-, External Individual Funds rating B, with support rating 2 or Individual rating B/C with support rating 1
3 Debt Management Agency Deposit Facility currently limit deposits to 6 months. The ability to deposit in excess of 1 year is retained if such deposits become available.
Page 209 CC8 Annex 8
Investment Minimum Use Max % of Max Instrument Credit total Maturity Criteria Investmen Period ts UK Government Gilts with AAA In-house 50% in- 5 years maturities in excess of 1 on a buy house; in-house, year and hold 100% 10 years basis. External fund Fund Funds managers Managers Bonds issued by AAA In-house 50% in- 5 years Multilateral development on a buy house; in-house, banks and hold 100% 10 years basis. External fund Fund Fund managers Managers Bonds issued by a AAA In-house 50% in- 5 years financial institution which on a buy house; in-house, is guaranteed by the UK and hold 100% 10 years Government basis. External fund Fund Fund managers Managers Supranationals N/A In-house. 50% in- 5 years Fund house; in-house, Managers 100% of 30 years External fund Fund managers N/A In-house 50% In- Pooled Money Market Funds and and Fund house; Funds do Collective Investment Managers 100% not have Schemes 4 but which are External a defined not credit rated Funds maturity date Sovereign Bond Issues AAA In-house 50% in- 5 year in- on a buy house; house, 30 and hold 100% years basis. External fund Fund Funds managers Managers
4 Pooled funds which meet the definition of a collective investment scheme as defined in SI 2004 No 534 and SI 2007 No 573.
Page 210 CC8 Annex 8
Counterparty Limits
47. The Council also manages its credit risk by setting counterparty limits. With the forecast average cash balance due to decrease in 2011/12 it is proposed that there should be a reduction in counterparty limits. The matrix below sets out the proposed limits for 2011/12.
Short Term Rating F1+, Long Term Rating AAA, AA+, AA, AA - Support Individual 1 2 3 4 A – Current £30m* £30m* £22 m A – Proposed £25m £25m £20m A/B – Current £30m* £22 m* £10 m A/B – Proposed £25m £20m £10m B – Current £22 m* £22 m* £10 m B – Proposed £20m £20m £10m B/C – Current £15 m £15 m B/C – Proposed £15m £15m C – Current £10m £10m C – Proposed £10m £10m
Minimum Short Term Rating F1, Long Term Rating A+, A Support Ind ividual 1 2 3 4 A – Current £15 m £15 m £10m A – Proposed £15m £15m £10m A/B – Current £15 m £15 m £10m A/B – Proposed £15m £15m £5m B – Current £15 m £15 m £10m B – Proposed £15m £15m £5m B/C – Current £10m £10m B/C – Proposed £10m £10m C – Cur rent £10m £10m C – Proposed £5m £5m
* Included an additional £5m overnight limit.
Maturity Limits
48. The Council also manages its counterparty risk by setting maturity limits on deposits, restricting longer term lending to the very highest rated counterparties. The table below sets out the maximum approved limits. The TMST may further restrict lending criteria in response to changing market conditions.
Page 211 CC8 Annex 8
Short Term Rating F1+, Long Term Rating AAA, AA+, AA, AA - Support Individual 1 2 3 4 A 3 years 3 years 6 mths A/B 3 years 3 years 3 mths B 3 years 3 years 3 mths B/C 364 days 6 mths C 6 mths 3 mths
Minimum Short Term Rating F1, Long Term Rating A+, A Support Individual 1 2 3 4 A 6 mths 6 mths 3 mths A/B 6 mths 6 mths 3 mths B 6 mths 6 mths 3 mths B/C 3 mths 3 mths C 3 mths 3 mths
Other institutions included on the councils lending list
49. In addition to highly credit rated banks and building societies the authority may also invest in AAA rated Money Market funds, Collective Investment Schemes (including LAMIT property fund) and deposits with local authorities.
50. Given the ongoing turmoil in the banking sector it is proposed that any further changes required to the Annual Treasury Management Strategy & Annual Investment Strategy continues to be delegated to the Chief Finance Officer in consultation with the Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Finance.
Structured Products
51. As at 30 November 2010, the Council had £10m of structured products within its investment portfolio. Structured products involve varying degrees of additional risk over fixed rate deposits, with the potential for higher returns. It is recommended that the authority continue to use structured products up to a maximum of £20m of the investment portfolio. The Council will continue to monitor structured products and consider restructuring opportunities as appropriate.
External Fund Managers
52. The Council currently has £24.15m invested with external fund managers (as at 30 November 2010). £12.04m with Scottish Widows Investment Partnership (SWIP) and £12.11m with Investec. The aim of the funds is to outperform the Council’s in-house investment performance over a rolling three year period.
53. The benchmark for SWIP and Investec is the 7 day LIBID (London Interbank BID rate) compounded weekly. SWIPs target return is 128% of the benchmark
Page 212 CC8 Annex 8
over a 3 year rolling period. Investec are targeted to return 7 day LIBID + 1.02% net of fees over a 3 year rolling period. The Council will continue to monitor the performance of the externally managed funds against both their benchmarks and the in-house investment returns.
54. On December 1 st 2010 the mandate with Investec was switched to one where predefined proportions are invested in 3 different types of investment fund, known as the Dynamic approach. The weighting in each fund is as follows:
Fund Name Weighting Liquidity Fund 5% Short Dated Bond Fund 65% Target Return Fund 30%
55. The investment objectives of each fund are as follows:
• Liquidity Fund – to achieve a superior return to that of cash deposits while maintaining capital and preserving liquidity
• Short Dated Bond Fund – to provide capital stability and income through investment in short term fixed income and variable rate securities listed or traded on one or more Recognised Exchanges
• Target Return Fund – to produce a positive return over the longer term regardless of market conditions by investing primarily in interest bearing assets and related derivatives
56. The Liquidity and Short Dated Bond Funds are AAA rated funds with varying degrees of liquidity. The target return fund is an unrated fund and is deemed to be of higher risk. The weighting of the funds under the Dynamic approach is designed to benefit from the upside risk of the Target Return fund whilst dampening volatile returns with the more stable Liquidity and Short Dated Funds.
57. It is recommended that authority to withdraw or advance additional funds to/from external fund managers be delegated to the TMST if economic conditions indicate that this would be in the best interest of the Council.
Investment Strategy
58. The weighted average maturity (WAM) of in-house deposits as at 30 th November 2010 was 42.1 days. This is made up of £71m of instant access balances with a maturity of 1 day, and £145m of deposits with a WAM of 60.9 days.
59. With the prospect of interest rates remaining lower for longer, and to protect against the downside risk of the timing of base rate increases, the TMST will be aiming to increase the WAM of deposits. The increased WAM of deposits will still continue to be offset by a relatively high instant access balance whist
Page 213 CC8 Annex 8
market conditions are still appropriate. The benefit of increasing the WAM is that it will give a greater degree of certainty, and dampen the volatility, of investment returns.
60. During 2010/11 the Treasury Management team tailored a rolling programme of 6 month deposits with a selection of counterparties deemed to be of higher credit quality. The rolling programme has benefited by the pick up in yield for 6 months deposits whilst maintaining a relatively low WAM. The Treasury Management team will continue with this rolling programme if market conditions are appropriate.
61. The Council has the facility to invest directly in UK Government Gilts, Certificates of Deposits and other Sovereign Bonds since early 2010. The Council will continue to keep this facility in place and may invest in such products if market conditions are favourable.
Performance Monitoring
62. The Council will monitor its Treasury Management performance against other authorities, through its membership of the CIPFA Treasury Management benchmarking club. Latest performance figures will be reported in the Annual Review Report which will be considered by Cabinet in June 2011.
63. The Council will benchmark its internal return against 3 month LIBID.
Investment Training
64. All members of the Treasury Management Strategy team are members of a professional accounting body. In addition, key Treasury Management officers receive in-house and externally provided training as deemed appropriate. Key Treasury Management officers will also be encouraged to study towards the new CIPFA and ACT 5 joint Certificate on International Treasury Management – Public Finance.
Recommendations
65. The recommendations arising from the updated strategy are set out in the main body of the report.
5 Association of Corporate Treasurers
Page 214 CC8 Annex 9
Service & Resource Planning 2011/12 - 2015/16 Minimum Revenue Provision Policy Statement for 2011/12
Introduction
1. The Council is required by statute to charge a Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) to the General Fund Revenue account each year for the repayment of debt. The MRP charge is the means by which capital expenditure which has been funded by borrowing is paid for by council tax payers.
2. Until 2007/08, the basis of the calculation for the MRP was specified in legislation. New legislation (Statutory Instrument 2008 no. 414 s4) which came into force on 31 March 2008, gives local authorities more freedom to determine what is a prudent level of MRP.
3. The new legislation requires local authorities to draw up a statement of their policy on the annual MRP, for full approval by Council before the start of the financial year to which the provision will relate.
4. The early implementation of part of the IFRS requirements brought some service concession arrangements on balance sheet. Part of the service charge is taken to reduce the balance sheet liability rather than being charged to revenue accounts. To ensure that this does not result in a one-off increase in the capital financing requirement and in revenue account balances, an amount equal to the amount that has been taken to the balance sheet is included in the annual MRP charge.
5. The move to full IFRS is expected to result in some leases being reclassified as finance leases instead of operating leases. Where this happens, a part of the rent payable will be taken to reduce the balance sheet liability rather than being charged to revenue accounts. This change would result in a one off increase in the capital financing requirement and an equal increase in revenue account balances. By including in the annual MRP charge an amount equal to the amount that has been taken to the balance sheet, including the retrospective element in the first year, this ensures the Council in the same position as if this change had not occurred.
Options for Prudent Provision
6. Guidance on the legislation sets out a number of options for making ‘prudent provision’. Options 1 and 2 relate to Government supported borrowing. Options 3 and 4 relate to new borrowing under the Prudential system for which no Government support is being given and is therefore self-financed. Authorities are able to use any of the four options for MRP. The options are explained below.
Page 215 CC8 Annex 9
Option 1 - Regulatory Method
7. This is the current method, and for debt supported by Revenue Support Grant (RSG), authorities can choose to continue to use the formula. This is calculated as 4% of the council’s general fund capital financing requirement, adjusted for smoothing factors from the transition to the prudential capital financing regime in 2003.
Option 2 – Capital Financing Requirement (CFR) Method
8. Option 2 differs from Option 1 only in that the smoothing factors are removed. This is a simpler calculation; however for most authorities including Oxfordshire, it would result in a higher level of provision than Option 1.
Option 3 – Asset Life Method
9. For new borrowing under the Prudential system, Option 3 is to make provision in equal instalments over the estimated life of the asset for which the borrowing is undertaken or the alternative is the annuity method which has the advantage of linking MRP the flow of benefits from an asset where the benefits are expected to increase in later years. As with the existing scheme of MRP, provision for the debt will normally commence in the financial year following the one in which the expenditure is incurred. There is however one exception to this rule under Option 3. In the case of the construction of a new building or infrastructure, MRP would not have to be charged until the new asset came into service. The MRP ‘holiday’ would perhaps be two or three years in the case of major projects and could make them more affordable.
Option 4 – Depreciation Method
10. For new borrowing under the Prudential system, Option 4 is to make MRP in accordance with the standard rules for depreciation accounting.
MRP Methodology Statement
11. The policy already in place in the Council is reflected in Options 1 and 3; consequently the statement requiring approval by Council is a confirmation of existing practice and continuation of the policy approved by Council in June 2008. The Council is recommended therefore to approve the following statement:
12. For capital expenditure incurred before 1 April 2008 or which in the future will relate to Supported Capital Expenditure, the MRP policy will be based on existing regulations (Option 1 – Regulatory Method).
13. From 1 April 2008, for all unsupported borrowing, the MRP policy will be based on the estimated life of the assets for which the borrowing is undertaken (Option 3 – Asset Life Method or Annuity Method).
Page 216 CC8 Annex 9
14. In the case of finance leases and on-balance sheet Private Finance Initiative (PFI) type contracts, the MRP requirement will be regarded as being met by a charge equal to the element of the rent/charge that goes to write-down the balance sheet liability, including the retrospective element in the first year (Option 3 in modified form).
15. The major proportion of the MRP for 2011/12 will relate to the more historic debt liability that will continue to be charged at the rate of 4%, in accordance with Option 1 of the guidance. Certain expenditure reflected within the debt liability at 31 March 2012 will be subject to MRP under Option 3 , which will be charged over a period which is reasonably commensurate with the estimated useful life applicable to the nature of expenditure, using the equal annual instalment method . For example, capital expenditure on a new building, or on the refurbishment or enhancement of a building, will be related to the estimated life of that building.
Page 217 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 218 CC8 Annex 10
OXFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
THE CAPITAL STRATEGY 2011/12 to 2021/22
Page 1 of 26
Page 219 CC8 Annex 10 DOCUMENT INFORMATION
VERSION HISTORY
The table below outlines the high level changes that have been made to each version of this document and who made them:
Version Notes Changed by & Date Completed 1 Draft prepared by Arzu Ulusoy- 23 November 2010 Shipstone in consultation with √ Directorates 2 Capital Programme Board 26 November 2010 √ 3 Consultation with Cllr Jim 29 Nov- 2nd Dec 2010 Couchman √
4 Capital Investment Board 7 December 2010 √ 5 Arzu Ulusoy-Shipstone following 4 January 2011 Scrutiny Meetings √
6 Arzu Ulusoy-Shipstone following 26 January 2011 the Cabinet Meeting
There may be further revisions to this document given the number of ongoing consultations and reviews.
SIGN OFF
Accepted by: The Cabinet 25 January 2011 ______
Approval by: The Council 15 February 2011 ______REVIEW DATE
This document will be reviewed yearly from date of approval.
Page 2 of 26
Page 220 CC8 Annex 10 1. Introduction
1. The Capital Strategy sets out the County Council’s capital investment plans and explains how capital investment contributes to the Council’s Vision and Priorities. It shows how the Council prioritises, targets and measures the performance of its limited capital resources. It also shows how the Council intends to maximise the value of its investment to support the achievement of its vision and priorities. It provides the framework for determining capital spending plans and the effective use of capital resources.
2. This Capital Strategy, despite the challenging economic and financial environment, emphasises the significant contribution that the capital programme can make in delivering corporate priorities and in bringing benefits for wider communities. It seeks to ensure that resources are used in the most efficient way and they support the Council’s objectives most effectively. It sets out a robust, relevant and sustainable financial policy and strategy that aim to get most out of the scarce capital resources over the next five to ten years.
2. The Vision for Oxfordshire and Council’s Strategic Objectives
3. The Vision for Oxfordshire is set out in the Sustainable Community Strategy, Oxfordshire 2030:
“By 2030 we want Oxfordshire to be recognised for its economic success, outstanding environment and quality of life; to be a place where everyone can realise their potential, contribute to and benefit from economic prosperity and where people are actively involved in their local communities.”
4. The County Council has four strategic objectives: • efficient public services, • world class economy, • healthy and thriving communities, and • environment and climate change. There is also the cross-cutting theme of breaking the cycle of deprivation, which focuses on reducing the gap between the most and least affluent, targeting areas where resources are most needed.
5. The County Council manages a significant capital investment portfolio, which addresses the priorities identified within the Asset Strategy and the Local Transport Plan (LTP).
3. Delivering Corporate Priorities through Capital Investment in a Challenging Financial Environment Page 3 of 26
Page 221 CC8 Annex 10
3.1. National Picture
3.1.1. Current Economic Conditions
6. The UK emerged from recession in late 2009. The recent national economic growth was higher than expected but the UK is still vulnerable to recession. Recovery in employment levels could take up to 5 years. These conditions place a higher demand on public services and significantly affect two critical resources for the capital programme: capital receipts and developer contributions.
7. In the past, the one consistent factor in the funding of the capital programme has been the income derived from the sale of council assets. This has meant that the Council has not only benefited from a stable and predictable income stream but has also been able to use the increased value of capital receipts to deal with cost increases across the portfolio and bring more projects into the capital programme. However, during the last two years, the Council has experienced both a sharp reduction in the value of capital receipts and delays in the delivery of the disposal programme.
8. A second key source of funding for infrastructure delivery, particularly over the last five years, has been developer contributions, principally to the transport and schools programmes. However, the Council, in common with other authorities, is witnessing increasing demands from developers to reassess the need for contributions for infrastructure secured through planning obligations (S106) and review the terms applied to these contributions. This is because of the slow down in the housing market and related viability and timing issues raised by developers.
3.1.2. Local Government Finances
9. The Comprehensive Spending Review introduced reductions of 28% in real terms to local authority settlements over the next four years. Capital funding to local authorities will also be reduced by 45% over the same period. Although the prudential borrowing system has been retained, the cost of borrowing for local authorities has been increased by 0.87% with immediate effect. This affects the capital programme in four ways:
§ there is a reduction capital resources supporting the capital programme; § the reduction in revenue budget allocations makes it very difficult for the Council to increase its prudential borrowing provision significantly; § the increase in the cost of borrowing has the potential to affect the value for money assessment of schemes that are being delivered or proposed as part of the implementation of the business strategy; § Increased cost of revenue financing may impact on the decisions on the level of capital spend.
10. A number of new financial instruments and tools for infrastructure financing are currently being introduced by national government. It is likely that further ones will emerge during the next couple of years as the national policy framework and supporting legislation continue to develop. The common feature of these instruments is Page 4 of 26
Page 222 CC8 Annex 10 their link with future income streams or underlying assets that necessarily require long- term capital investment planning.
11. National government is also further challenging local authorities to tighten their asset management strategies. As a major owner and occupier of property, local authorities are required to justify holding land and buildings and to dispose of assets that are surplus to requirements. This places further pressure on local authorities to sell major assets. At the same time, the reduction in funding and the Big Society agenda are likely to generate pressure for the Council to transfer assets to local community organisations especially where there is a risk that the service will be discontinued without the transfer.
3.1.3. Big Society and Localisation of Power and Funding
12. The Spending Review 2010 announced a significant devolution of financial control to local authorities and removed ring fencing around many resources.
13. The Government stated its intention to roll out the community budget model across the country by the end of the Spending Review period. This will bring further flexibility to the use of the departmental allocations already sent to the Council. It will also bring benefits for places through a joined-up approach in service delivery. Although the Council, with its partners, will have the flexibility to decide for themselves which departmental budgets to pool locally, it is likely that this model will have an influence on how capital allocations will operate in the near future.
14. The Government also introduced new funding mechanisms/ tools to support economic growth and housing development. These include the New Homes Bonus, the Business Increase Bonus, the match funding of every house that is generated or returned back to use and new borrowing powers to enable the implementation of the Tax Increment Financing. 1 These new funding mechanisms combined with the introduction of a “general power of competence” will significantly change the funding composition of the Council’s medium to long-term capital investment plan.
3.2. Local Picture
3.2.1. Population
15. The County is facing significant demographic pressures. Oxfordshire’s population was around 635,500 in 2008 and 640,000 in 2009. It is the most rural county in the South East region; over 50% of Oxfordshire’s population live in settlements of fewer than 10,000 people. A quarter of Oxfordshire’s population lives in the City of Oxford with a similar proportion in its market towns and the remaining half living in rural areas. The population is ageing with substantial recent growth in the number of people aged 85 and over.
1 See Section 4 for further details on these new funding streams and their place in Council’s capital strategy Page 5 of 26
Page 223 CC8 Annex 10
16. It is forecast that Oxfordshire’s population could grow to 675,000 by 2018. 2 There could be 736,500 people living in the county by 2033, 16% more than in 2008. The number of very elderly people (85 years plus) is expected to increase by almost 40% by 2018, and to more than double by 2033 with one in four requiring intensive support from the social and health care system. It is expected that there will be an increase in the number of clients with learning disabilities as well as an increase in this client group’s life expectancy. In addition, the increase in fertility rates in the existing population residing in existing housing will lead to an increase in the number of children requiring school places. This will result in an erosion of existing and forecast spare capacity in many primary schools and in time, secondary schools.
3.2.2. Economic Development and Housing Growth
17. The Council and its partners are committed to the delivery of the Local Investment Plan (LIP) for Oxfordshire. The LIP and the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) Bid identify a number of spatial priorities for the next five to ten years. These include Science Vale UK (becoming a National Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation), Bicester (delivering an international exemplar of sustainable development) and Oxford (sustaining a world-class centre of education, research and innovation). They also place “investing in the transport and communications infrastructure” at the heart of the long-term strategy to achieve sustainable economic growth.
18. Oxfordshire will experience significant housing growth over the next fifteen to twenty years. Growth points have been designated within the county at Oxford and Didcot. Bicester (through the identification of North West Bicester as a location for an Eco- town) and Grove/Wantage are other county towns where major housing growth is planned.
19. Initial analysis of long-term infrastructure implications of future growth shows that significant investment in schools and transport infrastructure will be required as well as considerable investment in extra care housing, community facilities, green infrastructure and recreational resources. It is not yet clear what scale of investment will be required by our partners responsible for health and utilities infrastructure.
20. As is the case for all Spatial Planning and Infrastructure Partnership partners, the Council faces challenges in managing this growth in a way that meets economic, housing and regeneration pressures and provides sufficient infrastructure. The increased housing development, the population growth and aging profile create demands both for infrastructure investment and better quality public services while at the same time there is a significant reduction in the available capital funding at the national and local level. Other major considerations include the protection of the environment and responding to the challenges of climate change.
21. In this context, the Council needs to balance the considerable investment need in infrastructure to meet the pressures on essential services such as schools, highways and transport, waste and extra-care housing provision with the need to make
2 Office for National Statistics, 2008 based Sub-national Population Projections. May 2010 Page 6 of 26
Page 224 CC8 Annex 10 significant savings through the implementation of the new asset strategy. One of the key challenges in the medium term therefore is to make best use of limited resources to fund, forward plan and implement growth effectively.
3.2.3. Standard of Living
22. Oxfordshire is a diverse and changing county with areas of outstanding natural beauty and areas of significant housing and commercial development. It has a modern and prosperous economy, which demands a highly skilled workforce and well- developed infrastructure. Many residents enjoy a high standard of living and a good quality of life, supported by high quality County Council services.
23. There is, however, a significant shortage of affordable housing across Oxfordshire and pockets of relative deprivation where residents have lower wages and low skills. In these areas there is poor housing, young people do not fulfil their potential at school and older people have poorer health than most. These pockets of the county’s population derive little benefit from its economic success.
24. One of the key aspects of the County Council’s corporate plan is to narrow the gap between the most disadvantaged people and communities. The overall challenge is to reduce inequalities and break the cycle of deprivation by addressing the regeneration needs of disadvantaged groups and communities.
3.3. County Council’s Infrastructure and Asset Base
25. The County Council has a wide range of infrastructure and property assets including schools, offices, highways depots, roads, bridges, park and ride sites, waste recycling centres and county farms. The Council’s capital assets were valued at £1,514.6m in the 2009/10 Statement of Accounts. The summary of the balance sheet is set out in the table below.
Category Operational Non operational Total Assets assets assets £m £m £m Intangible Assets 5.0 0 5.0
Land & Buildings 1,146.5 37.9 1,184.4
Vehicles & Plant 24.9 0 24.9 Infrastructure 300.3 0 300.3 TOTAL 1,476.7 37.9 1,514.6 26. This total excludes road and bridges. It is estimated that County Council roads alone represent approximately £2.5 billion infrastructure.
3.3.1. Non-Schools Property Infrastructure
27. The new Property Asset Strategy (2011/26) brings significant change to the way the Council’s assets are managed. This is a necessary response to the business efficiency agenda, growth pressures, sustainability and environmental drivers and new work patterns. The Council’s Asset Policy Objectives are set out below. Page 7 of 26
Page 225 CC8 Annex 10
Objective 1 Aim to reduce the size of the property portfolio by 25%, contributing to MTFP savings targets Objective 2 Change the portfolio to support and enable locality working
Objective 3 Increase co-location of services and sharing with partners and community organisations to improve service delivery and reduce costs Objective 4 Put in place property that is fit for purpose and supports corporate priorities and service business model Objective 5 Reduce energy consumption and avoid or reduce tax liabilities
28. The Council’s Asset Management Plan reports a £77.5m repair and maintenance backlog figure at the end of 2008/09. Only 41% of the overall asset portfolio, composed of approximately 850 properties, is fit for purpose. The Plan aims to drive a 25% cost reduction in the running costs of Council’s non-schools asset portfolio by 2014/15 and includes a number of new asset programmes which require up-front investment where the scale of investment and the pay-back period are currently uncertain (given the current economic conditions and the state of the property market). In addition, the ownership composition of the portfolio presents challenges in terms of benefit realisations and timely delivery.
3.3.2. Schools Infrastructure
29. One of the key investment challenges for the Council is the rapid and substantial growth in demand for primary school places forecast over the period 2011/12 – 2016/17 in Oxford City, Witney, Wantage and Henley in particular. The current economic climate leads to further pressure due to the number of pupils being shifted from private schools to state schools. Although, there remain surplus school places across the secondary schools estate, there is likely to be a demand for these places from 2015/16 onwards and earlier pressure in some areas due to the mis-match between available places and the demand pattern.
30. The Council, working with the schools, the Schools Forum and other partners, is committed to transforming education and the creation of an increasing number of schools with a distinctive character to deliver a consistently high standard of outcomes for students. However, this transformation is going to be delivered in a different way, given that capital spending by national government will be reduced by 60% in real terms by 2014/15 and that revenue funding reductions will have an impact on matters related to schools organisations.
31. The future shape of the education sector is still uncertain as the policy framework continues to evolve and a new market develops. Free Schools and Academies proposals will influence Council strategy around how investment is shaped across its schools estate in the medium to long-term. There will be new models of school organisation including the creation of more federations, trusts and academies and other arrangements that generate greater collaboration between early years, primary, secondary and post-16 providers. These models will be encouraged as a means of
Page 8 of 26
Page 226 CC8 Annex 10 improving the educational experience of children and young people. These changes to school organisations are likely to have an impact on the required school infrastructure and lead to the use of available capital funding to support more collaborative working among schools and other education partners.
32. It is difficult to predict the changes to future years’ local government finance settlements for local authorities in this area given the ongoing education capital review. Only one year’s settlement from the Department of Education confirms this uncertainty. However, the Education White Paper clearly states that national priorities are addressing the poor condition of the existing schools estate and providing sufficient places to meet the predicted increase in the number of school age children. The Council intends to use the majority of this allocation to address the basic needs pressure and utilise the immediate change in the distribution of capital resources between local authorities and school to address the assessed needs with respect to condition and suitability in schools infrastructure. This position will be reviewed following the confirmation of future years’ allocations and in light of emerging basic needs pressures.
3.3.3. Transport Infrastructure
33. The Council has a statutory responsibility to maintain the transport infrastructure in a safe condition. The Transport Asset Management Plan identifies the need to develop a more detailed network hierarchy for maintenance given that the current investment level only enables the management of decline in the condition of the infrastructure. Technical models under different financial scenarios confirm that reductions in capital funding will add to the existing maintenance backlog. There will be a consequential increase in the demand for reactive maintenance and in the cost of repairs.
34. The Council also aims to create an efficient and effective highway network, maximising access to education, employment and other services, reducing congestion, carbon emissions and other environmental impacts, and supporting growth and development. The Local Transport Plan (2011/30) stresses that a substantial level of investment in transport infrastructure and services is needed to support the new developments planned in local development frameworks. It identifies major packages of transport investment to support growth and development at Science Vale UK and Eco-Bicester, along with several other major development locations.
35. The significant level of cuts in capital settlements means that the majority of the funding will be used for structural maintenance schemes for the foreseeable future. There is currently no regional allocation for specific major transport schemes for Oxfordshire for the next four years. The reduced availability of other capital funding places increased importance on using developer contributions to help deliver the highest priority needs while taking into account the flexibility of the funding. The challenges in this area mean that early delivery needs focus on schemes that can be fully funded or are needed to support development sites that are ready to be delivered. In the long term, the strategy needs to focus on the effective use of new financial instruments and frameworks to secure the necessary funding.
Page 9 of 26
Page 227 CC8 Annex 10 3.3.4. Business Strategy Implementation and Service Transformation
Transforming Adult Social Care
36. Another key challenge for the Council is to enable the development of extra care housing (ECH) throughout the County. The Council targets the provision of 30 units of residential accommodation per annum for adults with physical disabilities. There is an ongoing need for purpose built premises for adults with learning disabilities, and for mental health housing. The Council’s strategy in relation to social care for older people also means that health and social care sectors need to work together, both to stop people going into hospital unnecessarily and to provide alternatives to staying in hospital as soon as the patient is medically fit to leave. The move from care home provision to ECH means that the Council will no longer own the majority of assets (an asset-less strategy) through which a significant part of the care for Older People will be provided.
37. These service areas are already under pressure from the aging population and housing growth and are further affected by the self-directed support, personalised care/ prevention agendas, and by related major service transition. Programmes are being developed or implemented to provide an increased level and a wide range of support to enable people to remain in the community. This means that these services will also be subject to a comprehensive review of systems and processes to support future working practices. Investment in those systems and processes is likely to be required in the near future.
38. In order to support the promotion of independence and enabling people to live full and successful lives there may need to be further work carried out on local community assets (Day and Resource Centres) in order to provide appropriate facilities to deliver the Council’s strategy. This is likely to be a key feature for all client groups. Capital investment may be required in the form of acquisition of land for development or funding to part-fund the build costs or adaptations to an existing property.
Waste Management
39. Waste Management is facing a period of rapid and radical change on a national level due to European Legislation, government targets, public expectations and the tighter financial environment. The Council has revised its Waste Management Strategy in light of its success in diverting waste from landfill and in alignment with waste hierarchy principles. The priority for the future is to ensure that Waste Recycling Centres (WRCs) are well located to close to the largest urban areas whilst minimising the number of facilities. Investment is required to help minimize the increasing landfill tax, avoid financial penalties from the Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme (LATS) and ensure that WRCs remain fit for purpose.
Youth Services
40. The approach to the delivery of non statutory youth services to young people will change significantly. There will be a shift towards funding more targeted youth support rather than universal services in all areas. This more streamlined service will be
Page 10 of 26
Page 228 CC8 Annex 10 largely managed through the Early Intervention teams delivered in seven hubs and through a small number of satellite centres; located mainly in centres of higher need and deprivation, with an outreach aspect to areas further afield.
41. The council will seek to facilitate community led solutions in areas where we are no longer funding provision. Each community will have the opportunity to deliver individually tailored services which may or may not involve council assets. It is expected that this will be one of the major transformational programmes for the Council in this capital programme planning period and that it will have a significant impact on the Council's asset portfolio and its use.
Library Services
42. Another key area of service transformation is Libraries. The current provision has been largely driven by a history of development and growth. As a result, access to services is unevenly distributed across both urban and rural areas. The Council is currently looking for new ways of developing sustainable local library services based on a model of provision which focuses on the reading, learning and information needs of customers, now and in the future.
43. The delivery of this new model will involve the provision of library hubs in the main town and key rural areas, using technology to modernise the service, exploring commercial or community partnering opportunities and delivering mobile or community based services from existing or alternative community buildings such as children’s centres, community centres, schools, and health centres. The forthcoming changes in this service area will have a significant impact on the size, ownership and use of the Council’s asset portfolio.
3.3.5. Energy Consumption, Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change
44. The Council started to develop and implement its long-term strategy early to address its carbon emissions through the Carbon Management Programme. It is already investing in improvements to street lighting and energy conservation schemes across the county. Announcements in the Spending Review 2010 changed the Carbon Reduction Commitment from a trading scheme to a straightforward tax on energy consumption. This means that the primary driver for change is the need to reduce the overall energy consumption level. A new delivery model that will embed energy efficiency across the Council is emerging in response to these changes.
45. It is clear from the initial analysis that achieving a level of reduction which will eliminate a possible additional tax pressure for the Council will require further investment in the Council’s assets and activities that result in increased carbon emission (property, street lighting, travel and waste). The enlarged programme is likely to focus in particular on improving the performance of the property portfolio and the street lighting infrastructure. The Council is also planning to work with the Schools Forum to devise a funding strategy for the further expansion of this programme to the schools estate.
Page 11 of 26
Page 229 CC8 Annex 10 46. Another fundamental challenge is to deliver infrastructure that responds effectively to the challenges of climate change through the sustainable design and construction of new developments. The Council is committed to enhancing the environmental sustainability of building infrastructure by achieving the BREEAM (Very Good) Standard for its new-build portfolio. It is also committed to improving the environmental performance of its existing infrastructure through investing in innovative solutions that will reduce energy use, water use, and waste, improve energy efficiency, increase the proportion of energy generated from renewables and minimise environmental pollution or the likelihood and impact of flooding. 4. Capital Strategy - Use of Capital Resources
47. It is of the utmost importance that the Council’s limited capital resources are managed effectively given the picture described above. Also of utmost importance is the task of successfully managing the Council’s assets and infrastructure base, and managing growth and developing related infrastructure provision in timely manner.
48. The Council ensures its effectiveness in this area by § Allocating capital resources in line with corporate objectives and priorities and considering what outcomes can be achieved by a particular project and how effectively it uses corporate capital resources; § Using capital resources prudently and flexibly in line with the agreed capital funding strategies to ensure their affordability, longevity and sustainability; § Providing contingencies across the capital programme to manage the resources pressure arising from housing growth and uncertainties related to ongoing service transformations.
4.1. Central Government Settlements
49. The Council is committed to achieving more flexible use of settlement allocations and use this flexibility as a key to achieving most effective use of capital resources and to generating efficiency savings for local areas by increasing the potential for multi agency working. In order to achieve this, all capital programmes have been brought together and the overall capital programme is now owned corporately. The determination of priorities for the overall capital programmes is very transparent and broad member engagement is at the heart of the decision-making process.
50. Where formulaic allocations and grants are issued as “not ring-fenced”, the Council uses the opportunity to allocate these resources in line with the Council’s priorities based on this capital strategy and the underpinning asset management plans. The residual amount of ring-fenced or earmarked funding received from central government in the form of grant and borrowing approval continue to be used for the purposes for which it is issued.
51. The Council is also looking for opportunities to use some strategic programme allocations in more flexible ways where local needs/pressures also represent a national issue. In this context, the Council has been successful in using all of the formulaic basic needs settlement and other resources from the schools capital funding to respond to the increasing demand for school places due to changes in demography Page 12 of 26
Page 230 CC8 Annex 10 and parental choice. However, the Council recognises that such flexibility is and always will be within the discretion of the funding body and will continue to work with the relevant government departments to look for such opportunities for further flexibility. In particular, the Council considers pursuing this approach as an important part of its strategic response to meeting and containing demographic pressures.
52. The Council is also critically observing the impact of community based budgeting on central government allocations. It is observing how strategic programmes and settlement allowances and their future operation will be influenced by this agenda. It is likely that this approach will enable the Council to progress with its own localities investment agenda subject to the scale and timing of the forthcoming funding provision.
4.2. Usable Capital Receipts
53. Council policy is to treat capital receipts as a thoroughly corporate resource, not automatically allowing the originating service to utilise them. The Council seeks to maximise capital receipts from the disposal of surplus land and buildings, unless another option gives greater overall benefit. This approach will stay firmly in place while it is likely that there will be increased pressure to sell major assets and reduce the size of the property portfolio.
54. Although services can still make a case for the replacement of an asset, the Council, in principle, does not support the ring-fencing of capital receipts for the re-provision of assets. This is due to the fact that the Council’s Business Efficiency Strategy requires a rationalisation of the asset base to help deliver the targeted level of savings in the Business Strategy between 2010/11 and 2014/15. This is in order to
§ encourage a case to be made for joint proposals, where the use of assets benefits more than one service area; § influence and challenge, in a firm manner, business cases for service re-provision based on ring-fenced capital receipt funding;
55. The Capital Investment Board will continue to consider each case on its merits. This is particularly important when current economic conditions do not favour the disposal of assets and proposals based on ring-fencing assets on an individual basis are likely to have viability and cash flow problems from the start.
56. As the Big Society agenda redefines the state’s relationship with communities and looks for ways of empowering communities to be independent and self-sufficient, the Council also needs to think about how it can leverage and direct its capital assets to communities. Whilst the Council supports this approach in principle, its challenge in this area is to design ownership vehicles that can ensure sustainable solutions and take into account current liabilities. The Council will work with its partners to develop mutually beneficial and sustainable solutions by undertaking ‘joined up’ reviews of assets, by assessing how proposals meet local needs and generate value for those communities and by analysing any associated risks. The new asset strategy
Page 13 of 26
Page 231 CC8 Annex 10 determines the detailed policies around disposal of the Council’s property assets including school buildings.
4.3. Prudential Borrowing
57. The Council has established a strong links between the use of prudential guidelines and the delivery of its Business Efficiency Strategy. It is currently using funding under prudential guidelines for two categories of expenditure:
§ capital investment which will result in future revenue savings; the cost of borrowing is met from these savings by services. Examples include Energy Conservation and the ECH programmes. In such cases, the specific prudential borrowing provision is considered as ring-fenced subject to the end of year financing strategy. § capital investment where the Council has a significant unmet capital need; a decision can be taken for capital investment to be funded by borrowing. In such circumstances, the borrowing is repaid corporately from revenue over a number of years and therefore treated as a thoroughly corporate resource.
58. The Council’s policy is to utilise unsupported borrowing to finance capital investment where there is a clear proven need and where this borrowing does not result in unacceptable increases in Council Tax levels. Currently, under prudential guidelines, the revenue implications of every initiative are taken into account when estimating affordability of these proposals. As part of its medium term planning process the Council also evaluates the relative merits of funding revenue or funding capital proposals. In the case of capital proposals it ensures that there is on-going revenue funding available to meet the impact of any additional borrowing requirements.
59. The Council also uses prudential borrowing as part of strategic response to meeting and containing demographic pressures. In 2008/09, The Council approved £25m additional prudential borrowing to respond to the investment need in services not receiving capital settlement from central government. This was to ensure that the Council was able to strike a better balance between those needs arising from changing service priorities and those arising from changes/shifts in the demographic picture.
60. The Council is considering the effects of additional borrowing to replace low or non- existent capital receipts and to deal with the timing issues in funding infrastructure. In the short-term unsupported borrowing is the only alternative to using capital receipts. Although interest rates are low at the moment, this option would still mean an increase in revenue costs from paying interest on the additional loans. Additionally, interest rates are likely to rise in the medium to long term. Therefore, a prudent strategy for increased prudential borrowing on an invest-to-save basis is currently being employed to deal with the immediate pressures on capital resources.
4.4. External Funding and Project Specific Grants
61. The Council will try wherever possible to influence investment through the targeted use of its limited capital resources to lever in other investment to meet its objectives. However, the Council is clear that projects that may bring in further investment will only be supported if they meet the Council’s priorities and objectives. Page 14 of 26
Page 232 CC8 Annex 10
62. Once secured, the Council uses these external resources for the purposes for which they are issued as per the guidance and conditions determined by funding providers. The Council also evaluates long-term implications of accepting any external funding provision, in particular on its revenue budget and allows such projects to proceed only if they are affordable and demonstrate value for money.
63. The Council has benefited from this approach by securing approval for £4.6m co- location funding and £1.5m “Back on Track” funding from the Department for Education and approval for its Local Investment Plan (LIP) from the Homes and Communities Agency. The Council will build on these successes and use its considerable experience in aligning funding streams and strategic programmes to meet its priorities in the context of its Capital Strategy.
64. It will also enhance this strategy by using the LIP and the LEP to align available funding streams further in relation to economic development and housing growth, including those from partner organisations at local, sub-regional, regional and national levels. The Council believes that this approach will ensure funding is generated for the longevity of the capital strategy and the capital programme and will make maximum impact.
4.5. Funding Growth and Developer Contributions
65. The Council is proactive in ensuring, as far as possible, that all additional capital investment needs arising from new developments are funded from developer contributions. It has benefited from its good track record of effectively identifying infrastructure needs arising from new developments and securing developer contributions to enable required infrastructure delivery.
66. However, developer contributions historically have not been able to fund all new infrastructure requirements and the scale of infrastructure provision needed to respond to the described level of growth requires a different approach to capital investment planning and a stronger emphasis on funding infrastructure. In addition, the range of contributions now sought from development has broadened, meaning that less money is available for more ‘traditional’ contributions such as schools and transport.
67. Due to the effect of current economic conditions on developer contributions, several issues have become critical when managing this scale of growth: § Maintaining the viability of development proposals due to the reduction in land values; § The funding implications of providing infrastructure up-front due to timing issues; § Securing central government funding for some of the major infrastructure requirements following the Spending Review 2010; § Being prepared to deal with uncertainties around the exact cost of infrastructure provision when the development takes place; § Identifying the wider impacts of ad hoc or small scale developments and securing reasonable contributions from them;
Page 15 of 26
Page 233 CC8 Annex 10 68. In order to address these issues, the Council has been working on establishing stronger links between infrastructure planning and the asset management planning process through the effective use of section 106 agreements. This approach ensures that future community assets are affordable and sustainable in the long term.
69. The Council works closely with district councils and other partners under the umbrella of the established Spatial Planning and Infrastructure Partnership to identify further infrastructure funding streams. The application for Oxfordshire’s share of the Eco-Town Pilots Support Funding (£11 to £13 million) 3 has been successful. The Council and its partners are also trying to take advantage of the new Regional Growth Fund to support the delivery of infrastructure in growth areas. The use of these new funding streams is expected to unblock stalled developments to a degree. The Council also continuously looks for opportunities to deliver capital projects using external funding not necessarily related to development, 4 e.g. looking at where key private sector beneficiaries could contribute to the capital funding of schemes.
70. However, it is recognised that these are still relatively short-term solutions. More sustainable and long-term funding models are needed to manage the growth agenda effectively and deliver the related infrastructure in a timely manner. Hence, the Council is committed to investigating different funding mechanisms based on the identified funding gap to help deliver infrastructure. The Council therefore considers the new financial incentives announced for local economic growth as an integral part of its long- term capital strategy. The next section lists some of the funding options that the Council is looking into in the context of significant cuts in capital allocations and changing financial and procurement models in capital project and infrastructure funding.
4.6. Emerging Funding Models to Meet the Investment Challenge
71. The level of funding available from central government and the private sector is constantly changing and current economic conditions put further constraints on available future infrastructure funding. There are a number of innovative funding options and delivery models available or under development to support infrastructure delivery.
72. The Council therefore aims to use the devolution of power to local authorities and these options and models to address the viability issues regarding new developments and related up-front funding requirements. It acknowledges that these options and models need to be fully evaluated to determine the most appropriate solution based on the nature of the infrastructure need, the scale of the funding gap and the availability of funding sources offered by Central Government. Early analysis indicates that how the Council packages infrastructure investment or regeneration proposals to make them attractive for capital markets will play a critical role in determining its ability to benefit from such incentives. It is also clear that these flexibilities will be a strong base for institutional financing options for the Council in the medium and long-term.
3 £60m start- up funding for local infrastructure relating to eco-towns. 4 The example here is Sainsbury’s funding the £2m junction upgrade at Heyford Hill. Page 16 of 26
Page 234 CC8 Annex 10 73. The Council is committed to exploring all relevant options in consultation with its partners in delivery to ensure the effective management of its asset portfolio, facilitation of economic development and housing growth and the timely provision of related infrastructure. However, the Council is also aware that a major constraint when employing the instruments listed below in practice is the minimum level of capital that must be raised through their use.
4.6.1. Public Private Partnerships (PPP), Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and Local Asset Backed Vehicles (LABVs)
74. The PPP/PFI funding models are used as long-term contracts between the public sector client and a private sector special purpose vehicle to deliver infrastructure and services in exchange for an annual performance related payment. The Council looks at these models of funding for its major schemes and takes a decision on the merits of each individual case. It has successfully used PPP funding to develop the Oxford Castle site working with the private sector and SEEDA. It has also upgraded homes for the elderly in partnership with the Order of St John.
75. The Council’s policy regarding this funding model has always been to carry out a full and robust assessment of its long-term implications to determine value for money for the Council. This is due to the fact that while this model works well in many circumstances, it has not been found appropriate in financial terms. In line with this policy, the Council has fully investigated PFI options but has not so far decided it has been appropriate for any scheme. However, the Council is still working on employing similar models when they are suitable for its objectives. The Council is currently procuring a residual waste treatment contract that utilises similar principles to a Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and is based on the Government’s standard contract.
76. Following the Spending Review, the Council expects to see more competitive versions of this model, such as competitive or incremental partnerships as the costs of such funding streams are transferred to individual departments at the central government level. It also expects to see a simpler procurement framework that is applicable to shorter-term contracts 5. Decisions in relation to this funding stream will be made based on its applicability to the specific circumstances or infrastructure requirements following new Treasury guidance. The Council’s priority in this area will be to build the right delivery model in order to derive real benefits from capital finance in a partnership environment.
77. Similarly, Local Asset Based Vehicles aim to encourage private sector investment by making regeneration projects appealing on a long-term basis. Current economic conditions and their impact on public finances and land values mean that it is likely that very limited levels of funding from the public and private sector will be available. The use of this funding mechanism will increase in the coming years given the expected increase in asset rationalization by local authorities. The Council continues to work with its partners, in particular District and Town Councils, on key regeneration programmes and evaluate opportunities as they arise in this area.
5 It is likely that the minimum level of capital investment PFI will be raised from £20m to £50m in order to apply PFI only to the largest infrastructure. Page 17 of 26
Page 235 CC8 Annex 10 4.6.3. Financial Incentives for Local Economic Growth
78. The Council’s approach to infrastructure planning looks to influence and shape the investment decisions at the national level through the provision of leadership in the co- ordination of investment. Oxfordshire City-Region Enterprise Partnership was approved by central government in October 2010. Improving the alignment of investment across public and private sectors to deliver a shared ambition for economic growth is the central theme of this new partnership. The Government has introduced a number of financial measures in order to provide incentives for local authorities to deliver sustainable economic growth. The Council is committed to obtaining as much investment as possible into Oxfordshire through the effective use of these new instruments where they prove to be affordable and value for money.
Regional Growth Fund
79. The Regional Growth Fund has increased to £1.4bn (£580m capital) with no ring fencing. The fund will run from April 2011 until April 2014 with the minimum thresholds for bids being set at £1m. It is presented as a key component in establishing a better balance between public and private investment in the economy. Although the detailed criteria for this funding stream is still under development, it is clear that it will focus on helping the transition to sustainable private sector-led growth from places that currently rely on the public sector. Therefore, the Council’s and its partners' success in relation to this funding stream will depend on how much private sector funding can be brought to the table through proposals that generate sustainable employment growth.
New Homes Bonus
80. The New Homes Bonus will be introduced in 2011/12. It will fund the additional council tax 6 for six years for each new home or property that is brought back into use after the home is built. Although the model for implementing this scheme is still under development, it is clear that it will have an impact on the available funding for infrastructure development in growth localities 7. The Council will work with its partners to develop a mechanism to use this funding stream in order to address infrastructure bottlenecks in those localities. The Council hopes that the allocation of the New Homes Bonus will be determined by local authorities working collaboratively to support delivery of the infrastructure and services that arise as a consequence of new development.
Business Increase Bonus Schemes and Ability to Retain Locality- Raised Business Rates
81. The Business Increase Bonus Scheme will enable the Council to keep, up to a “certain level”, the increase in business rates for a period of six years where the growth in business rates yield exceeds a “certain threshold”. This is a clear incentive to seek long-term sustainable growth in the business rate base. The Government is also considering more radical financial options to enable local authorities to retain locally raised business rates in the context of the Local Government Resources Review.
6 Based on a national average for the Council Tax band. 7 Although this will be funded through a top slice of the formula grant. Page 18 of 26
Page 236 CC8 Annex 10 82. It is currently difficult to estimate the benefits from these schemes in terms of raising capital funding without more knowledge of how they will be implemented and how much of the funding will be directed to support Oxfordshire’s economic infrastructure and asset base through local arrangements. The Council will work with its partners to channel a level of funding that will help establish a 21 st Century economic infrastructure and bring increased competitiveness to Oxfordshire.
Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and Accelerated Development Zones
83. Tax Increment Financing 8 is a mechanism that enables the use of anticipated future increases in tax revenue to finance the current improvements (such as new or improved infrastructure) that are expected to generate those increased revenues. The UK central government is working on introducing new borrowing powers to enable local authorities to carry out TIF. By using TIF, the Council will be able to borrow against future additional increase in their business rate base to fund infrastructure and capital projects. Legislation is needed to introduce this scheme, so it will take at least two years to arrive.
84. Accelerated Development Zones are a form of TIF that can include ring-fencing business rates for an agreed period of time or attributing a proportion of any business rates supplement levy to projects specified within the zone. This mechanism can also raise funds for public infrastructure investment on a transformational scale. A number of pilots are underway supported by the UK central government.
85. The Council will closely monitor the progress made in the development of the TIF model and results of early ADZ pilots to determine what these models can offer for the Council as a means of maintaining the investment in infrastructure in this tight financial environment. Because the TIF model will initially be introduced through a bid-based process, there is also an opportunity for the Council and its partners to assess their current priorities in the LIP in order to derive early benefits from this funding stream where eligible.
4.6.4. A New Tariff (Levy) Based Mechanism
86. A new tariff based mechanism is being introduced to give local authorities extra resources to invest in vital facilities, public services and social infrastructure and to give developers greater certainty about their role and contribution. Although this mechanism aims to bring much needed flexibility to the use of contributions from developers, it is still not clear how the tariff/ levy income will be apportioned, how it will be transferred from charging bodies to infrastructure delivery organisations, and how it will affect the future of the S106 agreements. Hence, the coalition government’s response to concerns raised by county councils across the UK will be critical in determining the future capital strategy implications of this new funding mechanism. Meanwhile, the Council considers how the existing S106 regime can be developed to incorporate the latest thinking on tariffs and/or incentives for new housing.
87. It is also considering how to establish a forward funding arrangement to enable investment in infrastructure on the back of future funding secured through developer
8 British Property Federation (November 2008): Tax Increment Financing Page 19 of 26
Page 237 CC8 Annex 10 contributions. There is a growing interest in creating a Rolling Fund in order to fund infrastructure up-front. This is a mechanism by which local authorities along with their partners use initial public money to forward-fund major infrastructure schemes where infrastructure is needed to support the planned development. The cost of infrastructure is then recovered from public and private sector funding streams as they come forward. It is important to structure and manage the fund in a way that it takes into account any delays or reductions in the recovery.
4.6.5. Local Authority Bonds
88. Local authority bonds are a common feature of local capital finance outside the UK and although they have been legislatively possible for UK local authorities to raise capital in this way, it has not been frequently used. The coalition government is looking into promoting this instrument and making it an attractive alternative to loans from the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB). The Council expects to see more tax incentives to emerge in relation to these bonds in the near future. As the key barrier to bond issuance is issuing bonds on a large enough scale to make them viable, the Council also expects to see new opportunities for collective deals and to package a number of projects at local, regional and sub-regional levels.
5. The Capital Programme: Governance, Development & Implementation
5.1. Capital Programme
89. The current capital programme for 2010/11 to 2015/16 totals £478.5m capital investment and covers a wide range of projects. While it is good practice to have a five-year capital programme, the Council recognises that when the external environment is changing rapidly, the policy framework is evolving and the economic outlook is uncertain, it is important to have a flexible approach to investment decisions. Clearly, significant changes to the resources profile will affect the level of planned investment within the next five to ten years. Therefore, only the first two years of the programme are considered as “the firm capital programme”. The figures for the years 2013/14 onwards are a draft and constitute the provisional part of the capital programme.
90. This provisional programme includes some indicative projects where no firm costings or business cases have been produced. As these projects are not part of the firm capital programme, they can only be progressed after a formal approval process has been followed and if funding is available. Consequently, decisions about which projects to be brought forward into the firm capital programme rest with the Cabinet. Where there is urgency, projects can be brought forward into the firm programme with the joint approval of the Chief Executive and the Chief Finance Officer after consultation with the Leader of the Council and the Cabinet Member for Finance & Property. Such urgent decisions are then reported to the Cabinet at the earliest opportunity as part of the Financial Monitoring Report.
5.2. Governance Page 20 of 26
Page 238 CC8 Annex 10
91. The Council has the vision of “developing a truly corporate approach to strategic capital investment, infrastructure and asset planning”. It recognises that implementing a high-profile capital governance structure is essential in fulfilling this vision and ensuring success in the capital arena.
92. That is why capital governance arrangements were reviewed in the context of the immediate challenges presented by the infrastructure gap and the growth, total place, co-location and cross service delivery agendas. A new capital governance structure has been in operation since September 2009. It will be improved further with the changes planned to be introduced in March 2011.
93. The new structure establishes a strong direct link between the mainstream capital programme and capital investment needs arising from the growth agenda (in particular strategic sites) and from cross-departmental and cross-organisational co-location and joint service delivery initiatives. The key features of this structure are listed below:
5.2.1. The Council & the Cabinet
94. The Council and the Cabinet continue as the key democratic decision-making bodies as per the Council’s constitution. The Council approves the key policy documents and the capital programme as part of the Council’s Policy and Budgetary Framework. The Cabinet recommends priorities, policy direction and the capital programme to the Council for approval. The Cabinet also approves new inclusions to the capital programme in line with the scheme of delegation and the financial procedure rules.
5.2.2. The Capital Investment Board (CIB)
95. The Capital Investment Board is a high-level political platform providing a cross- portfolio approach to and political steer on policy developments, strategic infrastructure development, the use of resources discussion and the growth, co-location and joint service delivery agendas.
5.2.3. The Capital Programme Board (CPB)
96. The Capital Programme Board is a strong officer group with a clear remit and function to be the single point of contact in all capital and asset matters across the organisation with clear accountability and a sufficiently high level of authority and decision-making power within the limits of delegated responsibility.
97. The Council is looking to ensure a better integration between the capital governance structure and the implementation of its Business Strategy. It is expected that this will lead to a joint-use of the Capital Investment Board for business transformation initiatives and the next year will see its transformation into a wider forum with a stronger focus on using capital investment to facilitate business transformation.
98. The Council has already revised its financial procedure rules related to capital following the introduction of the new governance structure. The principle behind these adjustments is ensure that the overall structure is supported by appropriate officer
Page 21 of 26
Page 239 CC8 Annex 10 teams operating clear, agreed, open and transparent corporate policies, protocols and procedures. Detailed protocols are under development and will follow the approval of the capital strategy.
5.3. Capital Programme Development & Implementation
99. The Council has recently strengthened the development framework for the capital programme. In particular, the Council has taken steps to enhance the strategic alignment of the capital programme with corporate priorities and balance capital investment needs arising from planned growth and the maintenance of the existing portfolio.
100. It has also developed a two-stage approval process for capital resources allocation. If a project is approved at stage 1, it is accepted in principle to the Council’s capital programme and allocated a project development budget. This stage is also called “commit to investigate”. At stage 2, the project receives full political approval for work to commence and expenditure to be incurred, subject to the budget constraints of the project delivery budget allocation.
5.3.1. Principles of Prioritisation and Capital Resource Allocation
101. The Council’s capital programme deals with a wide range of property and other infrastructure asset needs across all service areas. The Council recognises the challenges around making prioritisation decisions when comparing the relative merits of investment into these assets. It therefore agreed a set of principles for prioritising capital investment proposals.
102. The application of these principles ensures that the Council allocates capital resources in line with corporate objectives and priorities and considers what outcomes can be achieved by a particular project and how effectively it uses our very limited corporate capital resources. These principles are integrated into the service and resource planning process.
103. Priority is given to programmes and projects (or proposals) in the following order:
• Priority 1: projects which enable compliance with our legal/ statutory duties including projects which address any infrastructure deficits related to statutory compliance. For projects in this category, there is still a need to justify the cost level.
• Priority 2: projects where a major proportion (50% or more) of the capital from external sources which will be lost if the project fails to go ahead but subject to consideration of future revenue requirements.
• Priority 3: projects that generate revenue savings through the delivery of the new business strategy or service transformation proposals. For projects in this category, there is still a need to explore whether or not they could be self-financing, for example through prudential borrowing.
• Priority 4: projects that contribute to the delivery of a smaller property portfolio through increased co-location or space utilisation or adaptation of new ways of working.
Page 22 of 26
Page 240 CC8 Annex 10 • Priority 5: projects that facilitate economic development and housing growth - in particular in priority localities (Banbury, Bicester, Abingdon, Oxford City, Didcot and Carterton).
• Priority 6: projects that address cross-cutting issues, facilitate joint-working with partners or generate new/ additional income;
104. It is not effective to have every individual scheme assessed and prioritised across the Council when they are very low cost relative to other areas of Council capital expenditure. Instead, once a programme level allocation is approved by the cabinet, a scheme assessment and prioritisation methodology is expected to be devised for new schemes in order to asses those schemes below a certain financial threshold value (determined by the financial procedure rules) and to support their prioritisation within those programmes. The delivery of these programmes would then be determined by the availability of capital funding, either from the Council’s capital programme or elsewhere, for a ‘block’ of these schemes. Schemes above the threshold value and identified as being in line with Council objectives, are assessed as part of the Council’s overall capital prioritisation and programming as per the principles listed above.
5.3.2. Technical Assessment (Options, Deliverability and Affordability Appraisals)
105. Given the scarcity of both land and capital in relation to future needs, OCC must ensure that each investment decision represents the best possible use of these limited resources, and the best long-term solution for the authority and its citizens a whole. It is critical for the long-term future of the Council’s infrastructure base and to ensure the wise and responsible use of resources that each investment decision is based on a full consideration of all possible solutions and a full recognition of life cycle cost.
106. The Council is in the process of streamlining its technical assessment process for evaluating readiness and value for money of all its capital investment proposals. The agreed principles are:
§ Analyse a range of possible solutions at the feasibility phase of each major capital investment; § Base the options appraisal on the life cycle costs of possible solutions, including the discounted cost of future expenditures to determine their affordability; § Explore different project delivery models that, where possible, include partnerships, sharing costs with other organisations, obtaining grant contributions or generating revenue income;
107. This approach will further ensure that investment in assets carries the underlying principle of seeking maximum benefit from the sum invested. Indeed, the revenue implications of any scheme are considered at both stages of the process. However, more details are provided prior to full political approval being granted.
108. Similar processes are also in place for prioritising and resourcing Highways Maintenance schemes, which are peer reviewed within a value engineering process. The merits of each scheme are assessed in conjunction with condition survey information, build-ability, value for money and environmental factors. A priority list of
Page 23 of 26
Page 241 CC8 Annex 10 schemes is developed that addresses Oxfordshire’s strategic objectives whilst contributing to improving national road condition indicators
5.3.3. Procurement
109. The Council has established collaborative partnerships with both the professional services and construction services supply chains through innovative strategic procurement initiatives. It operates a category management approach to the delivery of its works and services. This approach ensures that the Council can utilise ‘best of breed’ suppliers to minimise risk and cost as well as delivering a ‘right first time’ solution.
110. The Council’s portfolio of contracts include: § Framework Consultants (three Multi-Disciplinary and one Cost Management), selected for their expertise and capability to deliver education projects; § Framework Construction arrangements that deliver up to 60% of the Council’s Capital Programme, with the remainder procured in the open market. § Core Multi-Disciplinary Consultants appointed on a seven to ten year term and capable of delivering the Council’s Capital Programme.
111. The Council has entered into new contractual arrangements for the delivery of the Transport service and is operating in an integrated organisational structure that is generating a more efficient operation. This integrated partnering contract provides a flexible vehicle for the procurement of professional and mainstream construction services, primarily for transport related projects. It enables the Council to plan the overall resource from inception to delivery on the ground thus smoothing the workflow throughout the year, enabling planning for future years and consequently gaining greater effectiveness and efficiency.
112. The Council is also engaged with Improvement and Efficiency South East (IESE) in co-ordinating expenditure on a regional basis to drive standardisation and benefit from the resulting economies of scale. This collaborative approach enables the Council to have more leverage over the supply base. The Council can also adopt the Office of Government Commerce (OGC)’s portfolio of framework contracts for both professional services and construction. These collaborative and flexible arrangements with the OGC and IESE are necessary to complement the Council’s portfolio so that it is responsive and scalable in today’s financial climate. The Council will draw on the experience of its peers in order to deliver a value for money solution if a more specialist vehicle of procurement such as Strategic Partnerships is needed.
5.3.4. Partnership Working
113. The Council has a strong vision to create sustainable places by working closely with its partners. It recognises that it can only achieve its objectives through partnership working and is therefore committed to working with public, private, voluntary and community organisations.
Page 24 of 26
Page 242 CC8 Annex 10 114. The Council already has a history of pursuing joint-working and joint-service delivery initiatives for better outcomes for communities and citizens of the County. The Council is currently § working on the West End Project in partnership with Oxford City Council and other partners. The renaissance of Oxford’s West End is the single biggest regeneration project that Oxford has seen for some decades and will shape the city centre experience for a hundred years to come. § operating a private public partnership with the Oxfordshire Care Partnership (Orders of St John – referred to as OCP/OSJ) to provide residential care homes for Older People; § working in partnership with District Councils in collection and treatment of waste, including delivering improved recycling and reduction in landfill; § working with the Housing and Communities Agency and other partner organisation under the Single Conversation Framework to deliver the Local Investment Plan (LIP) for Oxfordshire. This plan, resulting from Oxfordshire’s Single Conversation with the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA), sets out a shared vision and priorities for delivering housing growth, economic development, regeneration, and infrastructure. § procuring a residual waste treatment contract to direct waste away from landfill and to address the major investment required to meet national targets and those stated in the Oxfordshire Joint Municipal Waste Strategy.
5.3.5. Performance Management
115. The Council agrees a rolling five-year capital programme annually in accordance with its priorities. The capital programme is updated quarterly and its performance is reported monthly to the Cabinet. The Council’s use of capital resources indicator was 94% at the end of 2009/10. This is a significant improvement from 18.6% and 10% slippage reported in 2007/08 and 2008/09 respectively. The Capital, Strategy and Transformation Manager is working closely with directorates to achieve further improvements in performance in future years.
5.4. Provide contingency across the capital programme
116. The Council’s capital budget setting principle is “a balanced position with sufficient level of contingency”. A 3% contingency, in line with the audit recommendation, is built into the capital programme planning assumptions in order to respond effectively to unforeseen capital pressures and to accommodate possible changes in the capital resources position supporting the programme. The Capital, Strategy and Transformation Manager manages this corporately held provision and other contingencies in relation to the capital programme on behalf of the Cabinet and reviews them on a regular basis based on the risks associated with the overall programme.
117. The Council continues to employ an effective year-end financing strategy for its capital programme. The capital financing strategy is aimed at minimising the on-going liabilities to the Council’s revenue budget arising from capital investment. The first calls on capital resources are therefore external funding (including S106), grants, supported borrowing, and capital receipts and reserves. The final calls, where necessary, are on unsupported borrowing and revenue contributions.
Page 25 of 26
Page 243 CC8 Annex 10
APPENDIX 1 Capital Programme 2010/11 to 2015/16 (February 2011)
County Wide £291.1m
£14.4 m
£26.9m
£7.4m
£10.3m
£58 .2m £4.2m £22.6m £2.7 m £3.4 m
£0.5m £3.5 m £2.4m £29 .5m
£1.3m
Page 26 of 26
Page 244 CC8 Annex 11 a
Corporate Asset Management Plan 2010
Introduction
1. The Corporate Asset Management Plan (CAMP) was changed last year with the aim of providing a shorter, higher level document that intentionally avoids detailed explanations of needs or proposals for property and detailed action plans. Instead it sets out how our property will need to change to help meet efficiencies and objectives. It sets out a clearly defined Asset Strategy, derived from corporate objectives and priorities.
Purpose of the Corporate Asset Management Plan
2. The purpose of the CAMP is to:
• Give an overview of the Council’s strategic direction and objectives and the implications this has for its property and how property needs to change and can be used to help achieve those objectives • Describe the objectives for property that arise from this and the strategy for each category of its assets (the asset strategy) • Set out the action to be taken, at a high level • Provide a clear statement of the Council’s approach to its property
3. The Asset Strategy is part of the CAMP. It is a high level corporate strategy which establishes the role of the Council’s assets in meeting strategic objectives and the business efficiency strategy. The strategy is driven by corporate and service objectives, rather than a bottom up approach.
4. The Council’s property will need to change significantly in terms of its size, composition, use and cost if it is to positively contribute to meeting the Business Strategy objectives.
5. Asset Management is a contributor to business resource planning and seeks to ensure that the property asset base is optimally structured in the best corporate interest of the organisation. The Asset Strategy drives the asset management process.
6. The benefits of good asset management are clearly set out in best practice guidance. Land and buildings are the slowest of all strategic resources to respond to change, due to legal, financial, construction, organisational and development constraints and therefore it is necessary to plan for change in a systematic, long term way. Incremental change will not be sufficient as it cannot respond to the challenges of delivering service transformation and delivery of community objectives. The Asset Strategy will help to deliver a structured and programmed approach to change in assets.
7. There will also be a lower level Asset Programme which sets out how the strategy will be implemented, where possible involving cross-directorate
Page 245 CC8 Annex 11a
shared use and funding, putting these into programmes of action. The programmes will include acquisitions; capital projects; refurbishment; maintenance, disposals and transfer of assets to community organisations.
8. The CAMP considers the period from 2011/12 to 2014/15 to allow forward planning and integration with the Council’s Business Strategy, Service & Resource Planning process, and Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) but also considers longer term business drivers and asset needs.
Objectives and Business Efficiency Strategy
9. The County Council’s objectives and Business Strategy determine decisions about the Council’s direction and therefore its assets.
10. The Corporate Plan contains the following priorities and themes:
Efficient Public Services
• Delivering our savings target • Business Strategy including changing the way we work including re- engineering staff work practices and processes; improving our use of technology; rationalising property and other assets; streamlining the organisational structure; giving priority to vital services; exploiting internal and external opportunities to find savings by moving more functions into our ‘shared service’ centre • Community leadership; • Customer focus; • Collaborative working: identifying opportunities to work with others to deliver services more effectively, and reviewing existing partnership arrangements to maximise the benefit we receive for the investment we make in them.
World Class Economy
• Supporting growth; • Oxfordshire City Region Partnership; • Infrastructure; • Tackling congestion; • Young people – improving educational attainment; • Skill levels – link adult skills provision to the needs of the local economy
Healthy and Thriving Communities
• Community self-help; • Closer to Communities: developing our locality-focused approach to service planning and delivery; • Breaking the cycle of deprivation; • Prevention: early intervention on adult and children’s services;
Page 246 CC8 Annex 11a
• Safeguarding: providing a high quality, focused safeguarding service for vulnerable children and adults; • Demographic Change: supporting the increasing number of older people and people with disabilities to live in their own home rather than a care home
Environment & Climate Change
• Increasing energy efficiency and reduce emissions; • Increasing rates of recycling and reducing the amount of household waste; • Protecting the natural and built environment
11. The Business Strategy requires a rationalisation of the asset base to help deliver £155 million of savings between 2010/11 and 2014/15.
Financial Context
12.The current economic conditions place higher demand on public services and have significant implications on capital and revenue resources. The council has already experienced a sharp reduction in the value of capital receipts as well as delays in delivery of the disposal programme. Similarly, it is witnessing increasing demands from developers to reassess and renegotiate the need for, and terms applied to, contributions and infrastructure secured through planning obligations. We will receive significantly less funding from central government from 2011/12 onwards.
13. This makes the effective use of the Council’s assets and limited capital resources of utmost importance.
How do our Assets Need to Change?
14.The Council’s objectives, overall theme of breaking the cycle of deprivation and Business Strategy mean that the asset base will need to change significantly to support delivery of those objectives. The broad asset implications of the objectives are shown below.
Efficient Public Services
• The cost and size of our assets needs to be significantly reduced • The amount of maintenance that can be carried out will reduce and available funding must be used to support the Business Strategy • Property assets must be treated as a corporate and community resource and their future planned with our partners • Investment will need to be focussed on priority services and joint asset planning with partners.
Page 247 CC8 Annex 11a
World Class Economy
• Infrastructure will need to be provided for growth areas • Schools premises will need to be improved to help raise educational attainment, and sufficient pupil places will need to be provided
Healthy and Thriving Communities
• Changes to the provision of adult social care will mean changes to the property estate • Encouraging community self help through joint and community use of assets • The need to improve health and well-being will require more effective working and co-location with our partners
Environment and Climate Change
• The environmental impact of our property will need to be reduced and the estate be made more resilient to climate change to minimise impacts on services and costs • Improved facilities for waste disposal and recycling will be required
The Council’s Property Portfolio
15.The Council has approximately 850 properties, the vast majority of which are operational rather than investment properties. They have an asset value of approximately of £1.4 billion. The main property types are listed below.
• secondary schools • day centres • primary schools • highway depots • offices • staff houses • special schools • children’s centres • fire stations • young people’s centres • libraries • waste recycling centres • museums
16. There is significant investment in the portfolio each year, through the capital programme and the repairs and maintenance programme. This has led to significant investment in for example schools, offices, children’s centres and libraries. However only 41% of the portfolio is fully fit for purpose and there is required maintenance of £77 million. There will need to be significant change to the portfolio for it to be affordable and to ensure it supports delivery of the Business Strategy. The challenge is to reduce the size of the portfolio and reconfigure it in a way that is strategically driven, affordable and enables and facilitates service change. There will be less investment for the foreseeable future and what investment there is will need to focus on enabling the Business Strategy in a way that as far as possible contributes to Property Objectives.
Page 248 CC8 Annex 11a
Property Objectives
17. In view of the Council’s objectives and Business Strategy the Council’s property objectives are set out below. The purpose of these objectives is to set out the overall approach to property. There are specific and detailed targets for property included in the annual Report on the Performance of the Property Portfolio.
Objective 1 Aim to reduce the size of the property portfolio by 25%, contributing to MTFP savings targets Objective 2 Change the portfolio to support and enable locality working Objective 3 Increase co-location of services and sharing with partners and community organisations to improve service delivery and reduce costs Objective 4 Put in place property that is fit for purpose and supports corporate priorities and service business models Objective 5 Reduce energy consumption and avoid or reduce tax liabilities
Approach to Asset Base
18. Work on developing the Asset Strategy led to 7 recommendations:
a) Strengthen the strategic approach to property assets by taking a corporate landlord approach.
b) Undertake locality reviews with partners to enable service strategies and identify property solutions.
c) Develop an office accommodation strategy to enable New Ways of Working and reduce costs.
d) Establish and own an Oxfordshire Property Forum to enable a partnership approach to asset management.
e) Overhaul the Asset Management Information System to support effective asset management.
f) Put in place a cross council Facilities Management function to enable cost savings and effective servicing of the estate.
g) Dispose of non-operational property unless there is a business case for retention.
19. The recommendations are being progressed as shown in the ‘Strategic Actions’ section of the AMP. The recommendations will all help to achieve the Property Objectives and help support delivery of the Business Strategy. Property Asset Management is working with services as they
Page 249 CC8 Annex 11a
develop their Business Strategies to ensure that proposals are delivered in such a way that Property Objectives are met and a coordinated approach is taken.
20. The scale of budget reductions mean significant change is being proposed to what services are delivered and how they are delivered. It is not, therefore, possible at this time to set out clearly how assets will change. Current proposals are, however, largely consistent with the Property Objectives set out in this plan and should lead to a smaller portfolio, support locality working, increase co-location and reduce energy consumption.
21. Some proposals involve the potential for transfer of assets to community organisations. An approach to Transfer of Assets is being developed and this will need to take into account property, legal and financial considerations. Depending on the basis of transfer there is a risk that the portfolio will not be reduced sufficiently in size and cost to meet MTFP targets.
22. An initial implementation plan for reducing the size of the portfolio will be in place by April 2011. Depending on progress with development of service strategies, the Implementation Plan is likely to need further development beyond April 2011.
Performance Management
23. Performance against national and local property indicators is used to monitor performance of the property portfolio and with benchmarking information and targets for future performance, is included in the annual Report to the Cabinet on the Property Portfolio.
24. The performance of the Council’s property from April 2009 to March 2010 showed: • Capital receipts of £7.2m; • Total required maintenance decreased by 3.86% from 2008/09. Total spend on repairs and maintenance increased from £7.8m in 2008/09 to £9.1m. The split between planned and responsive maintenance improved to 68% planned and 32% responsive. Overall the position on total required maintenance is positive, although further improvement is dependent on continued investment; • 65% of properties perform better than typical in terms of environmental performance, a slight improvement on 2008/09 despite a cold winter; • Consultants are meeting target in terms of time and cost predictability of capital projects at the design/planning stage, and time predictability at the construction stage, but are below target for cost predictability at the construction stage. Gateway procedures have now been put in place to reduce the likelihood of change once a contract has been let and to increase accountability. • The number of properties categorised as fit for purpose remains 41% as survey data for 2010 is still being processed at the time of writing.
Page 250 CC8 Annex 11a
The target of 90% of properties fit for purpose by 2015 will be difficult to achieve, although the Asset Strategy should drive change in the portfolio over the next 4 years, reduce the total number of properties and contribute significantly to improvements in fitness for purpose.
Organisational Arrangements
25. New arrangements have been put in place following a review of capital governance in 2008. The purpose is to improve the delivery of corporate objectives through better management of our assets.
26. The governance structure has a Capital Investment Board (CCMT & Cabinet) and a Capital Programme Board. The new structure is assisting in: § Changing the culture and approach to asset management § Improving planning of capital investment § Making more effective use of assets § Enhanced cross-service working § Improved working and asset sharing with partners
27. The role of the Capital Investment Board is to set the vision and agenda for capital investment and asset planning to put in place the next generation of infrastructure and to deal with the asset implications of the Business Strategy.
28. The role of the Capital Programme Board is to provide a single point of contact for all capital and asset matters, to ensure development and delivery of the asset strategy, enhance cross-service and organisation working, develop a programme of strategic capital investment and to provide officer leadership and challenge.
29. Property Asset Management has been restructured from November 2010 to allow a refocusing of resources to increase the capacity for strategic work, and to ensure that all asset considerations are made in a corporate context.
Strategic Actions
30.The main strategic property actions required to support the achievement of the Council’s objectives are to have:
By the end of 2009/10 • completed the Better Offices Programme – achieved • a consolidated Facilities Management Service in place (for the main offices) – achieved • a strategy in place for the provision and procurement of Property Services from 2012 when most existing contracts come to an end – achieved
Page 251 CC8 Annex 11a
By the end of 2010/11 • a fully developed Asset Strategy approved and in use to help ensure that decisions about property support the Council’s objectives – on target • a plan underway for meeting Business Efficiency savings from reducing the size of the portfolio with savings commencing in 2011/12 – underway and on programme for completion by April 2011. • arrangements in place for joint asset planning with partners – operational level ‘Asset Collaboration Group’ in place. Joint mapping underway. Locality reviews commencing January 2011. • “New Ways of Working” framework in place to allow our staff to work effectively and flexibly and to make the most effective use of our assets – report on approach to be considered by CCMT in April 2011 .
By the end of 2011/12 • the new procurement arrangements for Property Asset Management in place and able to deliver the savings required by the Business Strategy – on target. • Improvement in Asset Management information system complete – action plan in place. • A Corporate Landlord approach to assets in place, with all relevant non-school premises budgets transferred to Strategic Asset Management.
By the end of 2014/15 • delivered the property savings required by the Business Efficiency Strategy – plans for reducing the size of the portfolio by 25% are being prepared.
Annually • meet the fitness for purpose targets – not on target (2009/10) • meet the disposals target – not met (2009/10) • deliver the capital programme – achieved (2009/10) • deliver the repairs and maintenance programme – achieved (2009/10) • meet the target for reducing carbon dioxide emissions – not met (2009/10)
Mark Tailby Acting Head of Property Contact: 01865 816012
Page 252 CC8 Annex 11b
TRANSPORT ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN & PROGRAMME 2011/12 – 2015/16
Introduction
1. Oxfordshire County Council’s Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP) is a ‘live’ document that is continually evolving. The document was approved in its original form by Cabinet in March 2008. This annex provides an update on its development, the overarching structural maintenance strategies and on the 2- year rolling programme of maintenance capital schemes.
2. The TAMP is central to the identification of highway maintenance strategies, and the development of the new Transport Services contract. The TAMP contains both asset and financial data that enables more advanced forward planning, improved budget management and improved working practices. Crucially, in the current financial environment it provides a means of identifying where limited funding may be targeted to best effect through the implementation of the forward programme.
3. The Council sees the reliable asset management information is a key to the effective stewardship of the highway. It informs process, decision-making, and the development of short and longer term maintenance strategies that reflect customer needs and sound value-management. Its prudent and timely use drives operational improvements and the efficient use of funding, whilst managing the Council’s exposure to risk and third party claims.
4. The TAMP spans all highway maintenance activities and all types of highway infrastructure including roads, footways, bridges, street lighting, traffic signals and so forth, Although, the document focuses on the asset groups where the majority of the maintenance budget is spent, information on other asset groups is increasingly being collected and will be incorporated into the document as it develops.
TAMP Development
5. The original TAMP provided the first comprehensive account of the Council’s main highway assets with actions identified for the ongoing development of prudent highway stewardship and efficient asset management practice. Since then, a number of strategies for better managing our highway assets have been progressed and a new contract and establishment put in place that enables more joined-up working.
6. The Council has considerably developed its knowledge of highway assets and made consistent overall improvements to carriageway and footway condition across the County. The level of highway inventory information has been substantially increased and financial/condition models and scenarios produced. The Council’s systems’ functionality and work processes have been developed further. It now has access to much more intuitive data for asset management planning, for operational performance monitoring and for
Page 253 CC8 Annex 11b
managing risk. Undoubtedly, asset management is a tool that must be increasingly utilised to make best use of available budgets, and to limit the effects of funding reductions. This presents a considerable challenge given the size of the network and its fragility.
7. The next stage of TAMP development will be to incorporate a series of annexes into the main body of the document and to update it as necessary. Additional financial/condition modelling will be progressed when forward budgets are confirmed. Decisions will then be made as to how the funds will be assigned to the various maintenance activities.
Service Levels
8. A series of Asset Management Service Standards has recently been developed as a supplement to the TAMP. The Service Standards contain Asset Management priorities, objectives, service levels, performance targets, work plans and risk register that together form a statement of the key areas of asset management focus and development. This work has helped shape the vision for the period following the implementation of the new contract.
Network Condition
9. The overall condition of the Council’s network may be expressed for each road category as ‘the percentage of those roads where structural maintenance should be considered’ (as defined by national performance indicators):
Change in amount of Road Category 2010/11 2009/10 Network requiring Treatment since last year A roads 4.3% 4.6% 0.3% (or 1.1 miles less) B roads 8.1% 7.6% 0.5% (or 1.5 miles more) C roads 10.3% 9.5% 0.8% (or 5.7 miles more) U roads 13.1% 11.6% 1.5% (or 22.1 miles more)
10. With the exception of A roads, the condition of all categories deteriorated during 2009/10. This may be attributed primarily to the effects of the harsh winter; A roads are stronger and in better overall condition – they are therefore more resilient to adverse weather. In contrast, the unclassified roads that make up half of the County’s road network are generally comprised of thin layers and have poor drainage, so they are very susceptible to damage caused by freezing and thawing.
Change in amount of 2010/11 2009/10 Network requiring Treatment since last year Busiest Footways 9% 6% 3% (or 4.3 miles more)
Page 254 CC8 Annex 11b
11. The condition of our busiest footways had remained stable during the previous 3 years. The sudden deterioration in their condition during 2010/11 may again be attributed mainly to the harsh winter, but also because funding has been diverted from footways during the 3 year period to enable costly schemes such as High Street to progress, as well as more drainage improvement schemes. The less busy footways have also deteriorated during the winter months.
12. The fragility of the highway network is evidenced by the effects of last years harsh winter, with a 3-fold increase in reported potholes, many of them hazardous and requiring urgent attention. It is estimated that Oxfordshire’s highway network suffered in excess of £6 million accelerated deterioration during the winter of 2009/10. The number of registered claims relating to pothole and structural defects has also increased, by approximately 130%, and the affects of the current winter are likely to be even more severe.
13. In addition, £3.5m of damage was caused by drought and heat in both 2004 and 2006 respectively. Two years ago, Oxfordshire suffered unprecedented flooding- we have doubled the budget for drainage improvements since then and effectively quadrupled our expenditure on drainage over the last 10 years. The Council has also been investing heavily in programmes of street lighting column replacement, bridge works, and in improving the skidding resistance of our busiest roads.
14. The Council is currently developing defect threshold criteria for the County’s roads that will be used to produce more accurate year by year measures of local network condition. These will also enable defective areas to be identified with greater accuracy for more efficient targeting of treatments. The local indicators will be produced annually along with the national indicators.
Structural Maintenance
15. Structural maintenance activities include carriageway and footway resurfacing and reconstruction, structural patching, surface dressing, specialist treatments, bridge strengthening, street lighting column replacement and drainage improvements. This work is primarily funded through the Council’s Capital Programme.
16. The Council is increasingly using value-engineering to qualify and prioritise work, and in assessing the whole life costs of alternative treatments. The value-engineering approach often means that more substantial treatments are specified to ensure longevity of repair and reduced overall disruption to road users. This means that schemes can cost more initially (but not always) but with the benefit of savings later on. However, the timing of the work is also very important so that interventions ideally take place before the onset of more serious and costly deterioration.
Page 255 CC8 Annex 11b
Financial/ Condition Modelling
17. Analyses have been carried out to predict the effects of various levels of financial investment on the structural condition of the road network. Other relevant data including accidents, traffic and highway claims have also been considered in identifying and prioritising maintenance work. A variety of budget/condition scenarios have been modelled and used to inform the budget process to date.
18. Following considerations have been taken into account when determining the structural maintenance allocation across the next 5 years:
• The County Council has a statutory responsibility to maintain highways in a safe condition. • The life of roads can be extended relatively economically if repairs are carried out in time. Conversely, delays in applying treatments can lead to rapid deterioration and a large increase in the cost of repair. • There is a need to reduce where possible repeated make-shift treatments and considerably more reactive maintenance (potholes and patching) that will cost the Council much more in the medium to long term. • There is a need to reduce pressure on revenue budgets for attending to potholes and other safety defects will need to be increased, along with the workforce to attend to them. • Although road casualty accidents have decreased in recent years the number of accidents occurring in wet conditions has not. Therefore, there is a need to maintain/ improve the skidding resistance of our busiest roads. • The state of our roads and footways remains a key priority for the residents of Oxfordshire • In 2010/11, approximately 50% of the structural maintenance budget was allocated to carriageways, with the remainder being spent mainly on footways, bridges, drainage improvements, and street lighting column replacement. It is envisaged that carriageway integrity will generally take precedence over these other activities where budgets are severely limited.
19. The Council acknowledges that 3rd party highway claims are likely to increase as the network deteriorates given that during the next 5 years all authorities will be managing a decline in the asset conditions across the country. All being equal, the analyses performed to date indicate that it will take 2 or 3 years for budget cuts to be reflected in a significant worsening of overall carriageway condition. Therefore, the Council will consider reinstating funding into structural maintenance if funding becomes available as part of the annual capital budget setting process with a view to preserve the existing asset by early intervention where possible.
Systems & Inventory
20. The Council’s highway network comprises over one million individual items of apparatus. A detailed knowledge of the location, type and condition of the highway inventory is vital to the establishment of appropriate service
Page 256 CC8 Annex 11b
standards and efficient maintenance regimes. The Council has also a statutory duty in accordance with the new Flood & Water Management Act to publish drainage asset inventory data for interrogation by the public by April 2011.
21. A number of highway management systems are used currently to manage highway data and resources. These are vital for effective asset management and for responding efficiently to customer enquiries. These require significant investment and development. Geographical information systems (GIS) are being used increasingly to analyse asset inventory, condition information, and other data, and to display the information against map backgrounds for greater interaction of information and easier interpretation of results.
22. Until recently, the majority of existing inventory information was held in databases in tabular form and not represented spatially. Work recently undertaken by the asset management team has addressed this prior to the start of the new Transport Services contract so that we now have a framework of inventory and attributes visible on GIS that can be easily updated.
23. A project plan and specification has now been produced and processes put in place to survey additional elements of highway asset inventory. Furthermore, it is a main objective of the new Transport Services contract to update the inventory as part of the routine day to day business to ensure data is current and easily interrogated.
Highway Valuation
24. The value of our Highway and Transport assets exceeds £4.6 billion and that a considerable backlog of maintenance work has accrued over the years. From this year, it is a requirement of central government that highway authorities collate sufficient highway inventory information for the submission of progressively accurate annual calculations of highway network net present values, gross replacement values and maintenance backlog. This will require more regular and detailed surveys of highway assets, and rural footways in particular. The information gathered will also enable life cycle plans to be created for sections of the network and for various assets so that treatment types and intervention periods can be optimised. The collection of this information is subject to national audit.
Route Hierarchy
25. The County Council is responsible for over 4,500 kilometres of carriageway and a similar length of footway. An exercise has recently been undertaken to re-categorise these routes according to the type and volume of traffic they carry and by their relative importance to one another. This exercise has enabled a modified network hierarchy to be established that may be used to inform budgetary decisions and treatment types, and to prioritise activities such as the frequency of statutory safety inspections and winter maintenance gritting routes.
Page 257 CC8 Annex 11b
Safety Inspections
26. In its role as Highway Authority, Oxfordshire County Council has a statutory duty to maintain the network in a safe condition. Failure to do so can lead to accidents, third party claims and other significant liability and reputational issues.
27. A revised policy for Statutory Safety Inspections is currently being produced that aligns with the revised network hierarchy and new operational processes. The new policy and practice will assist the Council in managing resources and risk, and provide a robust mechanism for claims defence. The aim is to have the new policy approved and in place for the new financial year.
Customer Satisfaction
28. There is a strong correlation between customer satisfaction and the condition of local roads. In a 2009 survey, 58% of respondees said they were dissatisfied with the condition of roads and pavements in Oxfordshire (NHT). More recent research work suggests that more than 60% of customers are dissatisfied with a Council’s service when more than 12% of its local roads are defective or have poor surface condition (Seasig). In Oxfordshire, 13.1% of local roads are currently defective, and the reduction in capital funding is likely to have an impact on this figure.
Additional Pressures
29. We are currently assessing the implications of new guidance relating to the exposure, treatment and disposal of coal tar and derivatives. These substances are found in many existing road constructions and are classified as hazardous waste. It is likely that coal tar will be identified at many locations on our network, but the financial implications of dealing with the problem will only become clearer after further site investigation work and research has been carried out.
30. In the absence of further advice from government agencies, our approach to dealing with this problem is to undertake early site testing and to design maintenance treatments to limit disturbance of the coal tar as far as possible or, where feasible, to utilise suitable on-site recycling methods that should help reduce disposal costs. Where its presence is detected we may have to recycle material on site, or remove it to special treatment facilities or to approved disposal sites.
31. Consequently, dealing with the coal tar will add significant costs in addition to the extra cost of increased coring and testing. Core samples are now taken at the majority of sites in the forward programme. The cost of coring, testing, analysis and associated Traffic Management is approximately £3k/ km and has been allowed for in our budget planning.
Page 258 CC8 Annex 11b
32. It is harder to budget for the additional cost of dealing with the coal tar, once identified. At some sites where coal tar was detected the increased costs have varied between 11% and 38%.
Resilience to Extreme Weather and Climate Change
33. The County‘s highway network is particularly susceptible to the effects of harsh winters. Water and ice entering the road construction are the main factors that cause widespread damage, with the prospect of massive repair costs and increased claims. To help address this, additional funds have been directed to surface dressing and similar treatments in the forward programme that economically seal road surfaces from water ingress.
34. Work has commenced to identify the areas of County road network that are most at risk from weather events with an aim to inform management action plans, material and apparatus specification, life cycle planning and risk management.
35. Effective targeting of these treatments and increased coverage should go some way to protecting vulnerable roads and footways. A more pro-active approach is also being taken to the management of the structural patching programme to ensure that these repairs are targeted and specified to best effect. Similarly, more funds will be directed to certain drainage activities such as grip and ditch clearing in an effort to keep road formations drier.
Budget
36. The proposed 5 year structural maintenance allocations as identified in the capital programme are presented below:
Page 259 CC8 Annex 11b
Structural Maintenance Budget Allocations (5 -Year)
Financial Period 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 £m £m £m £m £m Major Schemes Iffley Road 1.340 1.010 Ruscote Ave 0.606 Total 1.946 1.010
Carriageways 7.239 7.240 7.430 7.505 7.490 Footways 1.696 1.350 1.350 1.350 1.300 Bridges 1.105 1.400 1.060 1.015 0.930 Street Lighting 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 Drainage 1.200 1.100 1.100 0.950 0.950 Total 11.740 11.590 11.440 11.320 11.170
Carriageways: Assessed C'way Schemes (inc VE) 3.359 3.250 3.495 3.530 3.500 Safety Schemes (sites of low skid resistance) 1.400 1.100 1.150 1.100 1.250 Routine Surface Dressing (2011/12) 1.450 1.900 1.800 1.950 1.800 Surface Dressing Pre-Patching (2012/13) 0.950 0.900 0.900 0.850 0.850 Advance Site Investigation/ Coring/ Testing 0.080 0.090 0.085 0.075 0.090 7.239 7.240 7.430 7.505 7.490 Note: Previous years expenditure for major schemes has not been shown in this table.
37. In line with the asset management strategies, the proposed programme allocates the extra funding mainly to carriageway surface dressing and schemes on non-principal roads, and the remainder primarily to footways and drainage. This enables prioritisation of schemes to best effect and provides additional protection to the network by investing in treatments that seal and protect the transport infrastructure. Although these treatments do not generally last as long as resurfacing and reconstruction type repairs, they do provide good value in the medium term. The proposed programme also enables the Council to maintain a balance between management of the carriageway and footway asset. Whilst footway schemes are generally cheaper to deliver they tend to also account for higher claim settlement values.
38. Prior to last year, we have managed to consistently improve the overall condition of Non-Principal Roads whilst maintaining funding for Principal Roads at a reasonable level. The Council considers that it is now necessary to transfer funds from Principal Roads in order to control deterioration of non- Principal Roads as best we can, by enabling a managed decline of Principal Roads from the current level of 4%, if necessary, down to an overall condition of 8%.
39. This approach was approved in principle by Cabinet in 2008, when the Transport Asset Management Plan was originally produced. The rationale for taking this approach is that Principal Road condition has remained fairly stable in recent years, and significantly better than the condition of other categories of road in Oxfordshire. Schemes on Principal Roads are also considerably more expensive to deliver.
Page 260 CC8 Annex 11b
40. If further reductions to capital funding are announced if future years, the bridges, street lighting and drainage improvement budgets will be mainly unchanged as it is unrealistic to cut these further. Consequently, the number of carriageway and footway schemes will be reduced.
41. It should also be noted that future year’s allocations may subsequently be influenced by potential pressures arising from the Flood & Water Management Act, which may require additional capital investment in drainage depending upon the level of responsibility imparted upon the authority within its duty as Lead Flood Authority.
42. Funding is also identified in the capital programme for the major schemes at Iffley Road (£2.536m) and Ruscote Avenue (£0.724m). Other major highway maintenance schemes will be subject to future bids for funding. However, in the absence of any additional funding, schemes would have to be paid for from the highway maintenance block allocation in order to be progressed.
Structural Maintenance Programme
43. Draft programmes for carriageway and footway schemes for 2011/12 and 2012/13 have been included as an annex to this plan. The schemes form a 2 year rolling programme of maintenance work. Provisional forward programmes of work for Bridges and Drainage Improvements are also included. The proposed programmes are provisional for a number of reasons. a) More feasibility work is required to be carried out on some of these schemes. b) When the implications of the harsh winter, coal tar, the Flood & Water Management Act and other factors are known, there may be changes to the overall structural maintenance budget
44. Oxford City’s S42 allocation is based on a combination of capital and revenue maintenance activities. The City’s qualifying capital schemes for carriageways and footways are shown in the programme lists in Appendix 1. The City’s surface dressing allocation is based on a proportional split of the County’s surface dressing budget (capital). The City’s revenue allocation is based on a proportion of the County’s allocations for relevant routine maintenance activities which have yet to be decided.
Kevin Haines Highways Asset Manager Contact: 01865 815687
Page 261 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 262 CC8 Annex 11b Appendix 1
PROVISIONAL 2011-12 STRUCTURAL MAINTENANCE WORKS PROGRAMME Note: This Programme is subject to change. Any major changes will be reported back to the Cabinet and maintained within the approved funding envelope.
2011-12 Value Engineered / Non-Principal Roads Programme
Scheme Parish Locality
IFFLEY ROAD, THE PLAIN RBT TO BOUNDARY BROOK RD (SUBJECT ADDITIONAL TO FUNDING) OXFORD OXFORD RUSCOTE AVENUE, RETAIL PARK RBT TO LONGLANDES WAY RBT (SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL FUNDING) BANBURY BANBURY B4001 HACKPEN HILL SPARSHOLT GROVE AND WANTAGE ENSTONE ROAD CHARLBURY CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK VICTORIA MEAD (WITH ASSOCIATED FOOTWAY & KERBING WORKS) THAME CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY KINGS ROAD THAME CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY QUEENS ROAD THAME CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY WEST ST HELENS STREET ABINGDON ABINGDON ST MARTINS STREET WALLINGFORD BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD ST MARYS STREET WALLINGFORD BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD M40 WHEATLEY SERVICES ROUNDABOUT WHEATLEY CHALGROVE, THAME WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY NORTH STREET, WEST STREET TO EAST STREET BANBURY BANBURY MURCOTT ROAD,280M W OF WHITECROSS GREEN FARM MURCOTT KIDLINGTON & YARNTON SANDY LANE, STATION ROAD TO WEST END CHOLSEY DIDCOT FRIDAY LANE, CHURCH ROAD TO HIGH STREET WHEATLEY CHALGROVE, THAME WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY PLOUGHLY, ROAD AMBROSDEN VILLAGE SIGN TO NO. 73 PLOUGHLEY ROAD AMBROSDEN/ARNCOTT BICESTER BRUSCOMBE LANE, 8M NORTH OF BAYWORTH MOBILE HOME PARK TO ORCHARD LEA AND THE LODGE SUNNINGWELL ABINGDON KING AVENUE, KINGS END TO CHALVEY ROAD BICESTER BICESTER A44/SANDY LANE ROUNDABOUT YARNTON KIDLINGTON & YARNTON SANDY LANE, A44 ROUNDABOUT TO 20M EAST OF LIVINGSTONE CLOSE YARNTON KIDLINGTON & YARNTON Page 263 ROSEMARY LANE, CHURCH VIEW TO CHEAPSIDE BAMPTON BURFORD AND CARTERTON BLADON CLOSE, WOODSTOCK ROAD ALLOUND OXFORD OXFORD CITY MERRIVALES LANE BLOXHAM BANBURY KINECROFT, GOLDSMITHS LANE WALLINGFORD BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD LITTLEWORTH ROAD, OLD ROAD TO 2A LITTLEWORTH ROAD WHEATLEY CHALGROVE, THAME WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY DEAN VILLAGE RD, CHADLINGTON ROAD TO BRIDLEWAY TO SPELSBURY DEAN CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK THAME ROAD, CHINNOR ROAD TO WINDMILL ROAD TOWERSEY CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY TRENDELL PLACE, WOOTTON ROAD TO THORNHILL WALK ABINGDON ABINGDON WEST END, MILL LANE TO TOP LANE WOOTTON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK ROAD TO WORTON, YARNTON ROAD TO THE OLD RECTORY WORTON NR CASSINGTON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK CROSS LANE, WILLOW BROOKE TO 23M WEST OF ROAD TO BLAYTHORNE CHADLINGTON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK MILL ST, THE WHARF TO DENCHWORTH ROAD WANTAGE GROVE AND WANTAGE SOUTH STREET, KIDDLINGTON ROAD TO CHURCH LANE MIDDLE BARTON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK THE AVENUE, COURTINGTON LANE TO END BLOXHAM BANBURY MITCHELL CLOSE, WATSON CRESCENT TO END WOOTTON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK FIELD CLOSE, AYSEARTH ROAD TO END YARNTON KIDLINGTON & YARNTON LARKINS LANE, ST ANDREWS ROAD TO ST ANDREWS LANE OXFORD OXFORD CITY PLECK LANE, B4009 TO BAKERS PIECE ASTON ROWANT CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY PUCK LANE, MILL STREET TO GLOUCESTER PLACE WITNEY WITNEY GORWELL, HIGH STREET TO BROOK STREET WATLINGTON CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY STATION ROAD, BYEWAYS TO HOOK NORTON VILLAGE SIGNS HOOK NORTON BANBURY OLD FORGE ROAD, ROBINS CLOSE TO BARN COTTAGE GREAT ROLLRIGHT CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK GRAVEL HILL, ANCASTLE GREEN TO TOWN HALL MARKET PLACE HENLEY GORING & HENLEY SOUTH STREET, LOWER HEYFORD ROAD TO GREENWAY CAULCOTT BICESTER MAIN VILLAGE ROAD, GRANGE FARM LANE TO A41 CHESTERTON BICESTER BARN'S ROAD COMMUNITY CENTRE A, BARNS ROAD TO END OXFORD OXFORD CITY RADLEY ROAD (PART),OXFORD ROAD TO 14M EAST OF AUDLETT DRIVE ABINGDON ABINGDON ROAD TO EMMINGTON, B4445 THAME ROAD TO END CHINNOR CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY LOWER FARM ROAD, BAMPTON ROAD A4095 TO LOWER FARM LEW CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK AVENUE ROAD, STATION ROAD B4000 TO 220M WEST OF STATION ROAD BOURTON BANBURY SIBFORD ROAD, CHAPEL STREET TO 18M NORTH OF THE GLEBE HOOK NORTON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK PARK LANE, GRANGE LANE TO SWALCLIFFE ROAD SWALCLIFFE BANBURY STONESFIELD ROAD, 20M EAST FOXHOLE BARN ROAD TO 193M EAST RED GABLES COMBE CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK DRY LANE, THE GREEN TO 6 DRY LANE CRAWLEY CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK CC8 Annex 11b Appendix 1 2011-12 Value Engineered / Non-Principal Roads Programme
Scheme Parish Locality CHURCH LANE, B4026 TO END SPELSBURY CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK A361 OXBOW LAYBY, A361 TO A361 SWERFORD BANBURY GREEN FARM, THE GREEN TO END ADDERBURY BANBURY CROWN LANE, B4009 TO 20 CROWN LANE BENSON BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD OXFORD ROAD, CADOGAN PARK TO OXFORD ROAD WOODSTOCK CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK ROAD TO B4425 (ALDSWORTH), WESTWELL VILLAGE RD TO 68M NORTH WEST OF RD TO MITFORD COTTAGES WESTWELL BURFORD AND CARTERTON MAIN STREET, ASHWELL TO ENTRANCE TO MONTROIG MOLLINGTON BANBURY COLMORE LANE, 42M SOUTH OF ENTRANCE TO CHERRY CROFT TO 17M NORTH OF DRIVE TO GREAT D ROTHERFIELD PEPPARD GORING & HENLEY UN-NAMED ROAD TO HANDLEY PLAIN, SWINBROOK ROAD TO 440M WEST OF SWINBROOK ROAD SWINBROOK BURFORD AND CARTERTON FIFIELD HOUSE ROAD, CHURCH STREET TO END FIFIELD CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK EAST STREET, HUDSON STREET TO GEORGE STREET BICESTER BICESTER GRANGE PARK, 25 GRANGE PARK TO 33 GRANGE PARK STEEPLE ASTON BANBURY GREEN LANE, SHIPTON ROAD TO HEATH FARM MILTON UNDER WYCHWOOD CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK
APPROXIMATE VALUE OF VALUE ENGINEERED AND NON-PRINCIPAL CARRIAGEWAY WORKS £3,359,000
2011-12 Safety Surface Treatments Programme
A361/610 A361, 3 SITES BETWEEN B4450 AND B4026 JUNCTIONS CHIPPING NORTON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK A329/110 A329, 2 SITES, A329 APPROACH TO A40 & A329 JUNCT WITH RYCOTE HOUSE ENTRANCE MILTON COMMON CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY A4155/305 ASH COPSE BENDS, SHIPLAKE SHIPLAKE GORING AND HENLEY A4074/495 OXFORD RD ROUNDABOUT PASSED BENSON LOCK BENSON BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD
Page 264 A420/195 RAILWAY BRIDGE FERRY HINKSEY ROAD, OSNEY OSNEY OXFORD CITY A361/116 WILLIAMSCOTT HILL FARM TO WILLIAMSCOTT WILLIAMSCOTT BANBURY B4100/545 JUNCTION AT STOKE LYNE VILLAGE ROAD STOKE LYNE BICESTER A44/795 A44, SOUTH OF RAILWAY BRIDGE YARNTON KIDLINGTON AND YARNTON A4144/170 WOODSTOCK ROAD, OAKTHORPE ROAD, PEDESTRIAN CROSSING OXFORD OXFORD CITY A415/662 A415 TRAFFIC SIGNAL JUNCTION CLIFTON HAMPDEN BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD A415/217 A415 DIGGIN LANE JUNCTION KINGSTON BAGPUIZE GROVE AND WANTAGE A361/468 MILCOMBE VILLAGE ROAD, MILCOMBE MILL JUNCTION MILCOMBE BANBURY A4130/265 SOUTHBOUND APPROACH TO BASIL HILL ROAD ROUNDABOUT DIDCOT DIDCOT A415/106 WESTBOUND APPROACH TO STATIN ROAD TRAFFIC SIGNALS WITNEY WITNEY B4495/370 B4495 APPROACH TO PEET MOORS PEDESTRIAN CROSSING HEADINGTON OXFORD CITY A329/365 SHILLINGFORD ROUNDABOUT TO PLOUGH CLOSE SHILLINGFORD BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD
APPROXIMATE VALUE OF SAFETY SURFACE TREATMENT WORKS £1,400,000
2011-12 Routine Surface Dressing Programme
Bampton Road Buckland BURFORD AND CARTERTON Filkins to Langford Filkins BURFORD AND CARTERTON j/o A40 to T Junction Westwell BURFORD AND CARTERTON Bowling Green Close/Colville Close Bampton BURFORD AND CARTERTON Nine Acres Lane Charlbury CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK Village limits to j/w A4095 Brize Norton BURFORD AND CARTERTON B4022, Railway Bridge to Patch Riding Finstock CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK A44 Enstone limits to Radford Enstone CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK B4026 Charlbury to Wychwood Way Spelsbury CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK Holwell Downs to Westwell Westwell BURFORD AND CARTERTON A40 to South Leigh South Leigh WITNEY Swan Lane Long Hanborough WITNEY B4477 Brize Norton to A40 Junction Brize Norton BURFORD AND CARTERTON Tramway Banbury BANBURY B4035 Main Road Swalcliffe BANBURY Highlands Tadmarton BANBURY Elms to Tyne Hill Sibford Ferris BANBURY A4260 Oxford Road Adderbury BANBURY Weeping Cross Bodicote BANBURY Station Road Hook Norton BANBURY CC8 Annex 11b Appendix 1 2011-12 Value Engineered / Non-Principal Roads Programme
Scheme Parish Locality Elms to Wiggington Heath Sibford Ferris BANBURY Sandfines Road Broughton BANBURY Milton Road Bloxham BANBURY Rattlecombe Road Shennington BANBURY Barford Road Bloxham BANBURY Calthorpe Street Banbury BANBURY Hornton - Horley Horton BANBURY Sibford Road Hook Norton BANBURY The Slade Oxford City OXFORD CITY B480 Garsington Rd Oxford City OXFORD CITY B480 Watlington Rd ( Berry Close to Grenoble Rd ) Oxford City OXFORD CITY Hythe Brdige Street Oxford City OXFORD CITY Donnington Bridge Rd ( Wier Lane to B4495 Oxford City OXFORD CITY J/o B4027 to Marston Flyover Woodeaton KIDLINGTON AND YARNTON Old Road Wheatley Littleworth CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK Sandy Lane Tiddington CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY Croft Road Wallingford BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD Station Road Chinnor CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY Nicolas Road Henley GORING AND HENLEY Elizabeth Road Henley GORING AND HENLEY B4000 The Bungalow to County Boundary Shrivenham FARNINGDON B4000 Shrivenham to Ashbury Shrivenham FARNINGDON A417 Faringdon Road SITV Faringdon FARNINGDON Godstow Road Wytham ABINGDON A4130 Milton Hill Milton DIDCOT
Page 265 Duxford to Hinton Waldrist Duxford FARNINGDON Bagley Wood Road Kennington ABINGDON Old Boars Hill Boars Hill ABINGDON The Avenue (Service Roads) Kennington ABINGDON The Croft Harwell DIDCOT
APPROXIMATE VALUE OF ROUTINE SURFACE DRESSING WORKS £1,450,000
2011-12 Footways Programme
DUKE STREET, BOTLEY ROAD TO MARLBOROUGH COURT OXFORD OXFORD CITY FIELD AVENUE, PAGASUS RD TO PAGASUS RD (WITH ASSOCIATED FOOTWAY & KERBING WORKS) OXFORD OXFORD CITY BRIDLEWAY NO.7, CHAPEL WAY TO ORCHARD GARDENS CHILDREY GROVE AND WANTAGE ST MICHAELS CLOSE, BY NO. 2 ST MICHAELS CL TO BOUNDARY 24/7 ST MICHAELS CL SHIPTON UNDER WYCHWOOD CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK ST JOHNS STREET,BEAUMONT STREET TO WELLINGTON SQUARE OXFORD OXFORD CITY CALDECOTT CLOSE, CALDECOTT ROAD ALL ROUND ABINGDON ABINGDON PARTRIDGE CLOSE, WALLINGFORD STREET TO 8 PARTRIDGE CLOSE WANTAGE GROVE AND WANTAGE THORNECLIFFE ROAD, WOODSTOCK ROAD TO BANBURY ROAD OXFORD OXFORD CITY CHESTER STREET, STRATFORD STREET TO ARGLE STREET OXFORD OXFORD CITY BELL LANE, HIGH STREET TO GREYHOUND LANE THAME CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY WITHINGTON ROAD, LONGFIELDS TO VICTORIA ROAD BICESTER BICESTER EAST ST HELENS STREET, MARKET PLACE TO NO. 61 EAST ST HELENS STREET SOUTH BOUNDARY ABINGDON ABINGDON NALDERTOWN, FRAMLAND TO CHALLOW ROAD WANTAGE GROVE AND WANTAGE OXFORD ROAD, BIRCHWOOD TO THE HAWTHORNS A4260 BANBURY BANBURY BANBURY ROAD, THE LEYES TO LAYBY NORTH ENTRANCE A4260 DEDDINGTON BANBURY BRIZE NORTON ROAD, UPPER CRESCENT TO NO. 12 BRIZE NORTON RD MINSTER LOVELL BURFORD AND CARTERTON WOODSTOCK ROAD, SOUTH PARADE TO RIGEMONT CLOSE A4144 OXFORD OXFORD CITY ASTON VIEW, 38M SOUTH OF SOMERTON ROAD TO ASTON VIEW SOMERTON BANBURY BAYSWATER ROAD SERVICE ROAD EA, WAYNFLETE ROAD TO WAYNFLETE ROAD (FS=418m, KR=855m) OXFORD OXFORD CITY ILGES LANE, THE FORTY TO END NO. 65 CHOLSEY DIDCOT RIDGEWAY ROAD, KYNASTON ROAD TO SINODUN ROAD DIDCOT DIDCOT CIRCOURT ROAD, BARN CLOSE TO 6 CIRCOURT ROAD DENCHWORTH GROVE AND WANTAGE A44 BANBURY ROAD, OVERNORTON ROAD TO OPP CROMWELL PARK A0044 CHIPPING NORTON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK WHIRE ROAD, COULINGS CL TO ORCHARD CL (FS=120m, KR=105m) EAST HENDRED GROVE AND WANTAGE CC8 Annex 11b Appendix 1 2011-12 Value Engineered / Non-Principal Roads Programme
Scheme Parish Locality RADBONE HILL, ENTRANCE WITTS FAM TO FAIRACRES CROSS ROADS OVER NORTON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK BEAUMONT STREET, GLOUCESTER STREET TO WORCESTER STREET (FC=90m, KR=100m) A4144 OXFORD OXFORD CITY OXFORD ROAD, ISLIP ROAD TO ENTR PLAYING FIELDS BLETCHINGDON KIDINGTON AND YARNTON HAMFIELD, HAM ROAD TO HAMFIELD WANTAGE GROVE AND WANTAGE FARINGDON ROAD, BARROW ROAD TO CHOLSWELL ROAD ST HELEN WITHOUT ABINGDON GODFREY CLOSE, MAYFIELD AVENUE ALL AROUND GROVE GROVE AND WANTAGE GRUNDEY CRESCENT, THE AVENUE TO THE AVENUE KENNINGTON ABINGDON WEST ST HELENS ST, EAST ST HELENS STREET TO LOMBARD STREET ABINGDON ABINGDON STERLING CLOSE, STERLING ROAD ALL AROUND (FS=95m, KR=173m) KIDLINGTON KIDINGTON AND YARNTON HENLEY ROAD, BRICK KILN LANE TO 41 HENLEY ROAD SANDFORD ON THAMES OXFORD CITY RICHMEREK ROAD, SINODUN ROAD TO THE CROFT (FS=388m, KR=404m) DIDCOT DIDCOT HAMFIELD, NO. 36 HAMFIELD TO NALDERTOWN WANTAGE GROVE AND WANTAGE BRYAN WAY, ALDSWORTH AVE TO BARNARDS WAY WANTAGE GROVE AND WANTAGE KEATS ROAD, MASEFIELD ROAD TO BURNS ROAD BANBURY BANBURY EDINBURGH DRIVE, SPRINGFIELD ROAD TO QUEENS AVUENUE BOTH SIDES KIDLINGTON KIDINGTON AND YARNTON LEACH ROAD, FOOTWAY TO LANGFORD GARDENS TO DANES ROAD BICESTER BICESTER TANNERS LANE, THORNHILL ROAD / LARK RISE TO ROUND CLOSE ROAD ADDERBURY BANBURY UNION CLOSE, UNION STREET TO NO. 43 BOUNDARY WALL BANBURY BANBURY READING ROAD, GORING ROAD TO GREENMORE WOODCOTE GORING AND HENLEY DIVINITY ROAD, COWLEY ROAD TO WARNEFORD LANE (FS=716m, KR=1327m) OXFORD OXFORD CITY QUEENSWAY (SOUTHSIDE FOOTWAY), PARK ROAD TO GREEN CLOSE DIDCOT DIDCOT BOSWELL ROAD, BARNS ROAD TO BAILEY ROAD OXFORD OXFORD CITY
Page 266 LONDON RD, DRIVEWAY, ASHURST COURT TO END OF BITMAC AT BRIDGE WHEATLEY CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY PIXTON CLOSE, SHERWOOD ROAD ALL AROUND DIDCOT DIDCOT HIGH STREET, GARAGE TO BUS SHELTER A4130 NETTLEBED GORING AND HENLEY FRANCIS LITTLE DRIVE, CHAUNTERELL WAY TO MILL ROAD ABINGDON ABINGDON MASEFIELD ROAD, 4 MASEFIELD RD TO KEATS RD BANBURY BANBURY WELCH WAY, TOWER HILL/CORN ST TO 2ND TURN MOORLAND ROAD WITNEY WITNEY BANBURY ROAD, STABLE CLOSE TO 35M SOUTH RAILWAY BRIDGE BICESTER BICESTER BARNARDS WAY, CLEMENET CLOSE TO ELM ROAD WANTAGE GROVE AND WANTAGE
APPROXIMATE VALUE OF FOOTWAY WORKS £1,696,000
ADVANCED SITE INVESTIGATION, CORING & TESTING FOR 2011-13 PROGRAMME (SI) £80,000
SURFACE DRESSING PRE-PATCHING FOR 2012-13 PROGRAMME £950,000 Carriageways Total: £7.239m
TOTAL BUDGET FOR CARRIAGEWAY WORKS, NOT INCL CORING & PREPATCHING £6,209,000
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE £1,105,000
STREET LIGHTING £500,000
DRAINAGE £1,200,000
TOTAL £11,740,000
NOTES: SCHEMES MAY BE ADDED, SUBSTITUTED OR B/F IF OVERALL PROGRAMMES DELIVERED FOR LESS THAN TOTAL BUDGET, OR IF PRIORITIES CHANGE SCHEMES WILL BE C/F TO FOLLOWING YEAR IF IN-YEAR BUDGET IS INSUFFICIENT (UNLESS HIGHER PRIORITY SCHEMES ARE SUBSEQUENTLY IDENTIFIED)
= OXFORD CITY DC SCHEME CC8 Annex 11b Appendix 1
PROVISIONAL 2011-12 STRUCTURAL MAINTENANCE WORKS PROGRAMME Note: This Programme is subject to change. Any major changes will be reported back to the Cabinet and maintained within the approved funding envelope.
2012-13 Value Engineered / Non-Principal Roads Programme
Scheme Parish Locality BENSON ROAD, COVERLEY ROAD TO DENE ROAD OXFORD OXFORD CITY ADELAIDE STREET, OBSERVATORY STREET TO KINGSTON ROAD OXFORD OXFORD CITY CHAPEL WAY, HIGH STREET TO END CHILDREY GROVE AND WANTAGE GOLDEN ROAD, HOWARD STREET TO BARNET STREET OXFORD OXFORD CITY LEWINGTON CLOSE, RECTORY RD FOR 20 M GREAT HASELEY CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY FIENNES ROAD, DASHWOOD ROAD TO ASHURST WAY OXFORD OXFORD CITY ST LUKES ROAD, 42 ST LUKES ROAD TO GARSINGTON ROAD OXFORD OXFORD CITY EASTFIELD LANE, HIGH STREET - END WHITECHURCH ON THAMES GORING AND HENLEY WOODSTOCK ROAD EAST SERVICE RO, NO. 186 SERVICE ROAD TO NO. 160 SERVICE ROAD YARNTON KIDLINGTON AND YARNTON QUEEN STREET, CUMBERFORD TO END BLOXHAM BANBURY LOWER END, ARNCOTT ROAD TO FOOTPATH TO BLACKTHORN PIDDINGTON BICESTER BUSCOT DRIVE, WELFORD GARDENS ALL ROUND ABINGDON ABINGDON MILL LANE, TOKERS GREEN ROAD TO 710M e OF TtOKERS GREEN ROAD KIDMORE END GORING AND HENLEY WARBOROUGH ROAD, A329 TO HENLEY ROAD A4074 WARBOROUGH BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD BRILL ROAD, OAKLEY ROAD TO 200M NORTH OF OAKLEY ROAD HORTON CUM STUDLEY KIDLINGTON AND YARNTON
Page 267 CHURCH LANE, THE ELM TO 6 CHURCH LANE CHIPPING NORTON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK LITTLEWORTH ROAD, 10M SOUTH OF FOOPATH TO HORSPATH TO 2A LITTLEWORTH ROAD WHEATLEY CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY UPPER RED CROSS ROAD, HIGH STREET TO ELMHURST GORING GORING AND HENLEY RUSKIN ROAD, SPRINGFIELD AVENUE TO BANBURY SCHOOL BANBURY BANBURY LONDON STREET, 23M EAST OF STANFORD ROAD TO MARKET PLACE FARINGDON FARINGDON PLECK LANE, BAKERS PIECE TO OUTSIDE NO. 10 THE RISE ASTON ROWANT CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY PINNOCKS WAY (PART), EYNSHAM ROAD TO 161 PINNOCKS WAY CUMNOR ABINGDON THE LANE, NORTH STREET TO MAYS CLOSE FRITWELL BICESTER LETCOMBE AVENUE, 4 SMALL SECTIONS ABINGDON ABINGDON LOWER ROAD, FREEMANS ROAD TO DEERS CLOSE BODICOTE BANBURY DOWNS ROAD, WITNEY GREENS TO RANGE ROAD WITNEY WITNEY GRAVEL PITS LANE, WOODSTOCK ROAD SERVICE ROAD TO END YARNTON KIDLINGTON AND YARNTON GREEN PLACE (NORTH), VICARAGE ROAD TO END OXFORD OXFORD CITY HAYWARDS CLOSE, GRANDISON HO TO 110M EAST OF GRANDISON HO HENLEY GORING AND HENLEY COCKCROFT ROAD, LOYD ROAD TO BARNES ROAD DIDCOT DIDCOT THE CRESCENT, HUDSON STREET TO END BICESTER BICESTER RECTORY LANE, THE GREEN TO THE OLD RECTORY FRINGFORD BICESTER ST MICHEALS LANE, SPRING HILL ROAD TO END BEGBROKE KIDLINGTON AND YARNTON TENNYSON CLOSE, BROWNING ROAD TO END BANBURY BANBURY CHERWELL DRIVE, MARSTON ROAD TO 19 CHETWELL DRIVE B4495 OXFORD OXFORD CITY STALLPITS ROAD, HIGHWORTH ROAD TO A420 SHRIVENHAM FARINGDON MILTON LANE, HIGH STREET TO SHEEPWASH LANE STEVENTON GROVE AND WANTAGE TANNERS LANE, TANNERS LANE TO SWEEPS LANE BURFORD BURFORD AND CARTERTON MACKNEY LANE, SUNNSIDE TO LUCKS ALL BRIGHTWELL CUM SOTWELL BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD LITTLE WITTENHAM ROAD, CHRISTMAS COTTAGE TO150M N W OF CHRISTMAS COTTAGE LITTLE WITTENHAM DIDCOT FOLLY VIEW ROAD, FERNHAM ROAD TO END FARINGDON FARINGDON UPPER MILL HOUSE ROAD, CLEVELEY ROAD TO FOOTPATH ENSTONE CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK CC8 Annex 11b Appendix 1 2012-13 Value Engineered / Non-Principal Roads Programme
Scheme Parish Locality BICESTER ROAD, 30M N W RAILWAY BRIDGE TO EDGE OF VILLAGE LAUNTON BICESTER CASTLE SQUARE, HIGH STREET TO 6M WEST OF WATLINGTON ROAD BENSON BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD COLMORE LANE, COLLIERS LANE 3M NORTH OF TO FLIINT BARN (SOUTH BOUNDARY) KINGWOOD GORING AND HENLEY MILL LANE, CHURCH LANE TO RIVER DORN MIDDLE BARTON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK IFFLEY ROAD SERVICE ROAD WEST, DONNINGTON BRIDGE ROAD TO NO. 340 IFFLEY ROAD OXFORD OXFORD CITY DRAYTON ROAD, FOOTPATH BY 6 DRAYTON ROAD TO PAGE FURLONG (11M WEST OF) DORCHESTER BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD OAKLEY ROAD, CORNER FARM JUNCTION TO 30MPH SIGNS EDGE OF VILLAGE HORTON CUM STUDLEY KIDLINGTON AND YARNTON THE RIDINGS, PURRANTS LANE TO 40M SOUTH HONEYSUCKLE COTT BOUNDRY LEAFIELD CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK UN-NAMED ROAD, GREAT BARRINGTON ROAD TO GARRY COTTAGE ENTRANCE TAYNTON BURFORD AND CARTERTON DENE HOLLOW, LIME TREES TO PUMPING STATION CHILTON DIDCOT MARLBOROUGH GARDENS, FOLLY VIEW ROAD TO PARK ROAD A417 FARINGDON FARINGDON FANE DRIVE, WEST CROFT TO BARRINGTON CLOSE BERINSFIELD BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD STERLING CLOSE, STERLING ROAD TO END KIDLINGTON KIDLINGTON AND YARNTON BONDSEND LANE, THE LONG COTTAGE TO LEASOWE SIBFORD GOWER BANBURY CHADLINGTON ROAD, 28M W OF B4026 TO 46M W OF FOOTPATH TO CHARLBURY SPELSBURY CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK SCHOOL LANE, B4027 TO END STANTON ST JOHN CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY WILLOW WAY, 9 WILLOW WAYA TO 23 WILLOW WAY BEGBROKE KIDLINGTON AND YARNTON
Page 268 PARKERS HILL, BACK STREET TO CHILTERN VIEW NO. 1 TETSWORTH CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY BUNGALOW CLOSE, WOODPERRY ROAD TO END BECKLEY CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY KING ALFRED DRIVE, EDINBURGH DRIVE TO BOUNDARY NO.1/NO.2 EDINBURGH DRIVE DIDCOT DIDCOT THE GLEBE, HIGH STREET TO NO. 24 THE GLEBE CULHAM BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD WEST END, DIDCOT ROAD TO OLD NURSERY LANE BRIGHTWELL CUM SOTWELL BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD SIBFORD ROAD, 99M NORTH OF REDLANDS FARM ENTRANCE TO 126M NORTH OF BOURNE ROAD HOOK NORTON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK TOWERSEY ROAD, DUNWATEN TO COTMORE WELL TOWERSEY CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY LAMBRIDGE WOOD ROAD, FAIRMILE TO CAMBRIDGE WOOD HENLEY GORING AND HENLEY FANE DRIVE, GREEN FURLONG TO 13M EAST OF TOWER ROAD BERINSFIELD BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD BOLTONS LANE, 15M WEST OF LANE TO 1/2 EAST END TO END COMBE CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK ST MARYS CLOSE, ELIZABETH ROAD TO END HENLEY GORING AND HENLEY ST ANDREWS ROAD, ELM DRIVE TO 8M WEST OF UPPER FIELD CHINNOR CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY GREEN PLACE (SOUTH), VICARAGE ROAD TO END OXFORD OXFORD CITY ST THOMAS STREET, HOLLYBUSH ROW TO KING WILLIAM HOUSE APARTMENTS OXFORD OXFORD CITY LONGLANDES WAY, ROAD SAFETY HUMPS RUSCOTE AVE TO DAIMLER AVE BANBURY BANBURY TUDOR CLOSE, ASHCROFT ROAD TO END BANBURY BANBURY GODSTOW ROAD, AIRMANS BRIDGE TO RED LION PUB OXFORD OXFORD CITY MARGARET ROAD, WALTON AVENUE TO 17 MARGARET ROAD ADDERBURY BANBURY PEMBROKE STREET, ST ALDATES TO ST EBBES STREET OXFORD OXFORD CITY WOOD LANE, KENNYLANDS ROAD TO PEPPARD ROAD SONNING COMMON GORING AND HENLEY A41 TO LITTLE CHESTERTON, A41 OXFORD ROAD TO ORCHARD BARN LITTLE CHESTERTON BICESTER LEYSHON ROAD, AMBROSE RISE TO ROMAN ROAD WHEATLEY CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY BULWARKS LANE, GEORGES STREET MEWS TO SLAB FOOTWAYS OXFORD OXFORD CITY ST MICHAELS AVENUE, BOSTOCK ROAD TO END ABINGDON ABINGDON ELM DRIVE, GREEN WOOD AVE TO END CHINNOR CHALGROVE, THAME, WATLINGTON AND WHEATLEY EPWELL ROAD, M WEST OF EPWELL GROUNDS FARM TO MAPLE DOWN HOUSE EPWELL BANBURY
APPROXIMATE VALUE OF VALUE ENGINEERED / NON-PRINCIPAL CARRIAGEWAY WORKS £3,250,000 CC8 Annex 11b Appendix 1 2012-13 Value Engineered / Non-Principal Roads Programme
Scheme Parish Locality
2012-13 Safety Surface Treatments Programme (new data to be analysed during spring 2011) SCHEMES TO BE INCLUDED UP TO THE VALUE OF £1,100,000
APPROXIMATE VALUE OF SAFETY SURFACE TREATMENT WORKS £1,100,000
2012-13 Routine Surface Dressing Programme (new data to be analysed during summer 2011) SCHEMES TO BE INCLUDED UP TO THE VALUE OF £1,900,000
APPROXIMATE VALUE OF ROUTINE SURFACE DRESSING WORKS £1,900,000
2012-13 Footways Programme
THORNCLIFFE ROAD, WOODSTOCK ROAD TO BANBURY ROAD OXFORD OXFORD CITY VILLIERS ROAD, KINGSCLERE ROAD TO 23 VILLIERS BICESTER BICESTER HAMPDEN ROAD, FOLIAT DRIVE TO END WANTAGE GROVE AND WANTAGE STANWAY ROAD, THE LINK TO GROVELANDS ROAD OXFORD OXFORD CITY CHURCH CLOSE, MAIN STREET TO NO9 CHURCH CLOSE FRINGFORD BICESTER FRAX CLOSE, A415 KINGSTON BAGPUIZE FARINGDON ALBERMARLE DRIVE, WOODHILL DRIVE GROVE GROVE AND WANTAGE Page 269 ARLINGTON DRIVE, 100 TO 63 OXFORD OXFORD CITY GILES ROAD, ST NICHOLAS ROAD TO CHAMPION WAY OXFORD OXFORD CITY FOOTPATH LINK, LINK FOOTPATH BETWEEN BLOXHAM ROAD TO REAR OF 17 WALLER DRIVE BANBURY BANBURY MANOR ROAD, HIGH STREET TO 54 MANOR ROAD WHITCHURCH GORING AND HENLEY TIRROLD WAY, HARCOURT ROAD TO HUMBER DITCH WANTAGE GROVE AND WANTAGE OXFORD ROAD SERVICE ROAD, NO. 244 OXFORD ROAD TO NO. 302K OXFORD ROAD KIDLINGTON KIDINGTON AND YARNTON WATLINGTON ST, ELMS WAY TO RESTRICTED BYWAY B0481 NETTLEBED GORING AND HENLEY HOLLOWAY ROAD, NO. 24 HOLLOWAY ROAD TO NO. 50 HOLLOWAY ROAD WITNEY WITNEY KINGS CLOSE, KINGS ROAD ALL AROUND HENLEY GORING AND HENLEY KEMPS ROAD, NO. 3 KEMPS ROAD TO NO. 31 KEMPS ROAD ADDERBURY BANBURY ST ANNES CLOSE, CHURCHILL ROAD ALL AROUND BICESTER BICESTER FOOTPATH NEAR RECREATION GROUN, PRINCES DRIVE TO RECREATION ROAD WOODSTOCK CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK MAIN STREET, A423 TO HILL FARM ENTRANCE GREAT BOURTON BANBURY RUSCOTE AVENUE, SINCLAIR AVENUE TO NO. 112 RUSCOTE AVENUE BANBURY BANBURY RUSCOTE AVENUE, SINCLAIR AVENUE TO NO.112 RUSCOTE AVE A422 BANBUIRY BANBURY TYRRELLS WAY, BRADSTOCK TO 62 TYRRELLS WAY SUTTON COURTENAY DIDCOT FALLOWFIELDS, LONGFIELDS TO NO 48 FALLOWFIELDS BICESTER BICESTER PUCK LANE, MILL STREET TO GLOUCESTER PLACE WITNEY WITNEY COLLINGWOOD AVENUE, DRAKE AVENUE ALL ROUND DIDCOT DIDCOT NEWNHAM GREEN, OLD READING ROAD TO THAMES MEAD CROWMARSH GIFFORD BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD DOWNSIDE ROAD, KILN LANE TO DOWNSIDE END OXFORD OXFORD CITY CURBRIDGE ROAD, MIRFIELD ROAD TO TOWER HILL CEMETERY A4095 WITNEY WITNEY THE BOURNE, 1 THE BOURNE TO 25 THE BOURNE HOOK NORTON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK WELLINGTON CLOSE, BRISTOL ROAD ALL AROUND BICESTER BICESTER DRAYTON ROAD, 163 DRAYTON ROAD TO 127 DRAYTON ROAD SUTTON COURTENAY DIDCOT SYCAMORE ROAD, STATION ROAD ALL ROUND (FS=730m, KR=659m) LAUNTON BICESTER CC8 Annex 11b Appendix 1 2012-13 Value Engineered / Non-Principal Roads Programme
Scheme Parish Locality NORREYS CLOSE, NORREYS ROAD ALL ROUND DIDCOT DIDCOT PADDOCK CLOSE, OLD LONDON RD ALL AROUND BENSON BENSON, BERINSFIELD AND WALLINGFORD CHESTNUT DRIVE, MAPLE WAY ALL ROUND ASCOTT-UNDER-WYCHWOOD CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK HARCOURT ROAD, HARCOURT GREEN TO 29 HARCOURT ROAD WANTAGE GROVE AND WANTAGE CHURCHILL CLOSE, GREEN LANE ALL AROUND WOODSTOCK CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK GROVE ROAD, OPP HOMESTEAD TO 94 GROVE ROAD A4095 BLADON CHARLBURY, CHIPPING NORTON AND WOODSTOCK TATLINGS ROAD, STONEBRIDGE ROAD ALL AROUND STEVENTON GROVE AND WANTAGE EDWIN ROAD, PARK ROAD TO COCKCROFT ROAD DIDCOT DIDCOT ST MARYS ROAD, 57 ST MARYS ROAD TO MILTON ROAD ADDERBURY BANBURY KIDLINGTON ROAD, NO. 8 KIDLINGTON ROAD TO NO. 24 KIDLINGTON ROAD ISLIP KIDINGTON AND YARNTON OAKLAND ROAD, LABURNUM GROVE TO NO. 10 OAKLAND ROAD BANBURY BANBURY WEDGEWOOD ROAD, STANFORD HOUSE TO HARDIDE LTD BICESTER BICESTER FARMERS CLOSE, VANNER ROAD TO 21 CHESTNUT CLOSE (REAR OF) WITNEY WITNEY PARK CLOSE, HEYFORD ROAD ALL ROUND KIRTLINGTON KIDINGTON AND YARNTON ST HUGHS CLOSE, SOMERVILLE DRIVE ALL ROUND BICESTER BICESTER GODSTOW ROAD, WLOVERCOTE COMMON TO MEADOW PROSPECT OXFORD OXFORD CITY BURTON CLOSE, FRANCIS LITTLE DRIVE ALL ROUND ABNGDON ABINGDON
Page 270 GLEBE GARDENS, VALE AVENUE ALL ROUND GROVE GROVE AND WANTAGE LOYD ROAD, EDWIN ROAD TO NO. 34 LOYD ROAD DIDCOT DIDCOT HARDWICK ROAD NORTH SIDE, MAIN STREET TO VILLAGE HALL HETHE BICESTER THE GREEN, SIR GEORGES LANE TO OPPOSITE HOLLY COTTAGE ADDERBURY BANBURY THE GREEN, MAIN STREET TO HALLS LANE EAST HANNEY GROVE AND WANTAGE STATION ROAD, EAST SIDE OF BRIDGE TO END OF FOOTWAY LOWER HEYFORD KIDINGTON AND YARNTON OXFORD CLOSE, HATCH WAY ALL ROUND KIRTLINGTON KIDINGTON AND YARNTON WESTBROOK, DENCHWORTH RD ALL AROUND GROVE GROVE AND WANTAGE MARLBOROUGH AVENUE, WISE AVENUE TO OPP PARK AVE KIDLINGTON KIDINGTON AND YARNTON BROAD CLOSE, CHURCH STREET TO CHURCH STREET BARFORD ST MICHAEL BANBURY BEECHCROFT ROAD, BANBURY ROAD TO WOOSTOCK ROAD OXFORD OXFORD CITY EARLY ROAD, N0 37 TO TARRENTS AVE WITNEY WITNEY BARTON LANE, OLD HIGH STREET TO BARTON ROAD OXFORD OXFORD CITY
APPROXIMATE VALUE OF FOOTWAY WORKS £1,350,000
ADVANCED SITE INVESTiGATION, CORING & TESTING FOR 2012-14 PROGRAMME (SI) £90,000
SURFACE DRESSING PRE-PATCHING FOR 2013-14 PROGRAMME £900,000 Carriageways Total: £7.240m
TOTAL BUDGET FOR CARRIAGEWAY WORKS, NOT INCL CORING & PREPATCHING £6,250,000
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE £1,400,000
STREET LIGHTING £500,000
DRAINAGE £1,100,000
TOTAL £11,590,000 CC8 Annex 11b Appendix 1 Provisional Oxfordshire County Council Drainage Schemes for 2011/12
Estimated Location Description of Works Cost / £ Ambrosden, Merton Road Repair damaged drainage & Further Investigation 25,000 Bampton, Fox Close Survey and lateral repair 10,000 Bladon (c/f ) Part 1 Culvert replacement 50,000 Bucknell, Bicester Road Replace 20m of pipe & fit grille near pond 15,000 Chadlin gton Brook End New hi ghwa y drain 35,000 Chal grove, Hi gh Street Continuation of culvert repairs 100,000 Clanfield, Black Bourton Bends (c/f ) Kerb draina ge 20,000 Clifton, B4031, Main Street, Home Repair 10m of culvert Farm 10,000 Denchworth, Circourt Road Replacement culverts 15,000 Didcot, A4130 Power Station RAB and Condition investigation and outfall refurbishment 10,000 Basil Hill Road Appleton with Eaton, Bablock Hythe New 225mm dia drain from no.19 to ditch with 2no. 30,000 Road gullies Enstone, Clin g Clan g Lane New hi ghwa y drain 30,000 Gorin g Heath, Cra ys Pond Outfall works 5,000 Haile y, Dell y End / Poffle y End Improve existin g s ystems 40,000 Hailey, Poffley End, Hatfield Pitts Lane Upsize 100mm system to 225mm 30,000 Hanwell Improve existin g s ystems. Replace part culver t 60,000 Hethe, Off Main Street Replace root damaged drainage 10,000 Hinton Waldrist, Church Street (c/f ) Replace piped ditch 30,000 Kennin gton Outfall improvement works 10,000 Kin gston Blount / Aston Rowant (c/f ) Pipe repair and replacement 15,000 Kin gston Lisle, Fawler Hill (c/f ) Replace pipewor k 20,000 Lower He yford (c/f ) New outfall 30,000 Oxford, Banbur y Road (c/f 08/09 ) ACO kerbin g flood relie f 50,000 Oxford, Campbell Road Draina ge improvements 10,000 Oxford, 491 - 493 London Road Flood prevention of properties 10,000 Oxford, Meadow Lane New s ystem throu gh school outfall 30,000 Oxford, Stockle ys Road Draina ge improvements 20,000 Ramsden, High Street, near War Replace damaged pipe 45,000 Memorial Risin ghurst (c/f 08/09 ) Borehole repai r 20,000 Rousham, crossroads Kerb draina ge and new outfall 30,000 Sutton Courtena y, 8 Abin gdon Road New s ystem 5,000 Sutton Courtena y, Hi gh Stree t Improve existin g s ystem 25,000 Sutton Courtena y, Mill Lane Draina ge Improvements 25,000 Tackle y (c/f ) Replace stone drain 35,000 Tiddin gton Hi ghwa y draina ge improvements 35,000 Witney, South Lawn / Holford Road Connect two draina ge s ystems 10,000 Wroxton, Main Street (Phase 2 ) Replace stone drain 50,000 Countywide Investigations for schemes 50,000 Countywide Flood & Water Management Act works 50,000 Countywide Tamp Inventory Project 100,000 Total Cost 2011/12 1,200,000 c/f = carried forward from previous year (or earlier if shown)
SCHEMES MAY BE ADDED, SUBSTITUTED OR B/F IF OVERALL PROGRAMMES DELIVERED FOR LESS THAN TOTAL BUDGET, OR IF PRIORITIES CHANGE
SCHEMES WILL BE C/F TO FOLLOWING YEAR IF IN-YEAR BUDGET IS INSUFFICIENT (UNLESS HIGHER PRIORITY SCHEMES ARE SUBSEQUENTLY IDENTIFIED)
Page 271 CC8 Annex 11b Appendix 1 Provisional Oxfordshire County Council Drainage Schemes for 2012/13
Estimated Location Description of Works Cost / £ Ardley, B430 Station Road Crossroads New soakaway 25,000 Abin gdon, Nash Drive Improvements to draina ge outfalls 15,000 Appleton, Badswell Lane (c/f 09/10 ) New s ystem 30,000 Bampton, Weald Stree t Draina ge Improvement 30,000 Banbury, near The Cross Prevent of footwa y near crossin g 15,000 Bladon Part 2 Culvert Part Replacement 60,000 Bladon, A4095 Grove Lane Repair/replace dama ged draina ge 30,000 Bladon, Heath Lane Repair dama ged draina ge 10,000 Botley, Junction of Cumnor Hill and Connection (NOT plastic) from existing highway 10,000 Cumnor Rise Road chamber to existin g TW chambe r Buscot, A417, Snowswick Lane Repair 450mm dia pipe, broken under road 20,000 junction Chadlin gton (c/f ) Replace and upsize culvert. Improve s ystem 20,000 Curbrid ge, Well Lane - Main Road Culvert and gullies 30,000 Curbrid ge (c/f 08/09 ) Culvert 30,000 Curbridge, Range Road Flow control device on culvert on Ran ge Road 5,000 Gorin g, Sprin gfield Road (c/f 08/09 ) New s ystem 30,000 Headin gton, Old Road (c/f ) New s ystem 100,000 Henley, Kings Road / Ravenscroft (c/f New system 70,000 08/09 ) Kennin gton Outfall improvement works 10,000 Kidlin gton, Garden Cit y Replace existin g hi ghwa y drains 70,000 Kingham, Daylesford Road/Kingham Replace pipe across road 10,000 Hill Road Lyneham, Sarsden Turn Provide gully & pipe to adjacent ditch (30m pipe req'd) 12,000 Milcombe, btwn Heath Close and The Replace section of pipe 15,000 Green (c/f ) Mixbur y Provide new s ystem 25,000 Oxford, Campbell Road Draina ge improvements 10,000 Oxford, Ferr y Hinkse y Road (c/f ) Draina ge improvements 20,000 Oxford, Headin gton Quarr y (c/f ) New outfall pumpin g station / risin g main 70,000 Oxford, Stockle ys Road Draina ge improvements 20,000 Oxford, 169 - 173 Woodstock Road Channel Draina ge 10,000 Salford, Lower End New hi ghwa y drain 60,000 Sparsholt, West Street (c/f 08/09 ) Gull y and pipewor k 15,000 Sutton Courtena y, Harwell Road New hi ghwa y drain 20,000 Sutton Courtena y, Milton Road Improve existin g s ystem 20,000 Wanta ge, Ickleton Road Improve existin g s ystem 30,000 Woodstock, Brook Hill / Green Lane New gullies and 20m piped outfall to ditch 20,000 Countywide Investigations for schemes 50,000 Countywide Flood & Water Management Act works 50,000 Countywide TAMP Inventory Project 33,000 Total Cost 2012/13 1,100,000 c/f = carried forward from previous year (or earlier if shown)
SCHEMES MAY BE ADDED, SUBSTITUTED OR B/F IF OVERALL PROGRAMMES DELIVERED FOR LESS THAN TOTAL BUDGET, OR IF PRIORITIES CHANGE
SCHEMES WILL BE C/F TO FOLLOWING YEAR IF IN-YEAR BUDGET IS INSUFFICIENT (UNLESS HIGHER PRIORITY SCHEMES ARE SUBSEQUENTLY IDENTIFIED)
Page 272 CC8 Annex 11b Appendix 1 Provisional Bridge Maintenance Programme 2011/12 to 2015/16
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Total £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Bridgeguard 3 Railtrack Ass (Oxfordshire) 10 10 10 10 10 50 Bridges Inspection/Assessment (Oxfordshire) 150 150 150 150 150 750 Newbridge Maintenance & Strengthening (Ph2) 100 40 40 40 40 260 Scour re pairs (Oxfordshire ) 120 90 60 0 0 270 Shillingford, Shillingford Bridge Refurbishment and Signalisation + Stone wk repairs 15 0 0 0 0 15 Bridges Non Pr Rds Str (Oxfordshire) Other 100 150 300 300 300 1,150 Clifton Hampden 200 0 0 0 0 200 Bampton 0 150 0 0 0 150 Henley 0 400 0 0 0 400 Didcot West Curve 30 120 0 0 0 150 Page 273 Didcot Power Station Sidings 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spiceball & Bluebird bridge joint repairs 0 0 0 0 0 0 Structural 725 1,110 560 500 500 3,395 Risk of Vehicle Incursion onto the railway (studies) 20 20 200 200 0 440 Goring Vehicle Incursion 0 0 0 160 0 160 Steventon Vehicle Incursion 0 0 100 0 0 100 Shrivenham Station vehicle incursion (No.0799) 110 0 0 0 0 110 Didcot, Fulscot Bridge vehicle incursion (No.0905) 0 120 50 0 0 170 New vehicle incursion schemes 0 0 0 0 120 120 Vehicle Incursion Progamme 130 140 350 360 120 1,100 Horton, Mackays Bridge 0 0 0 5 160 165 B4100, Souldern, Ockley Bridge (No. 448) 150 0 0 0 0 150 Culver Repairs 2008-2010 (Oxfordshire) 100 150 150 150 150 700 Bridges Strengthening 250 150 150 155 310 1,015 Bridges Structural Maintenance Total 1,105 1,400 1,060 1,015 930 5,510
Note: Previous years not included in the Total spend. This Programme is subject to change. Any major changes will be reported back to the Cabinet and maintained within the approved funding envelope. This page is intentionally left blank
Page 274
Annex 12
Capital Programme
Page 275 2010/11 - 2015/16
February 2011
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 276 CC8 Annex 12
CAPITAL PROGRAMME: 2010 / 11 TO 2015 / 16 - Council 15th February 2011
Capital Investment Programme CAPITAL Current Firm Programme Provisional Programme INVESTMENT Year TOTAL Programme 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
Children, Young People & Families 1 - OCC 56,198 34,643 34,862 53,380 34,837 16,552 180 230,652
Children, Young People & Families 2 - 11,897 6,930 3,910 1,910 1,910 1,910 0 28,467 Schools & Partners
Social & Community Services 6,728 10,521 8,787 1,999 1,183 1,800 0 31,018
Environment & Economy 1 - Transport 19,938 19,261 28,344 17,523 16,938 13,070 0 115,074
Environment & Economy 2 - Other Property 5,254 5,756 4,518 3,242 1,083 615 0 20,468
Page 277 Development Programmes
Oxfordshire Customer Services 855 766 0 0 0 0 0 1,621
Chief Executive's Office 10 90 25 0 0 0 0 125
TOTAL ESTIMATED CAPITAL PROGRAMME 100,880 77,967 80,446 78,054 55,951 33,947 180 427,425 EXPENDITURE
Earmarked Reserves 146 63 13,174 9,469 10,003 15,943 2,298 51,096
TOTAL ESTIMATED CAPITAL PROGRAMME 101,026 78,030 93,620 87,523 65,954 49,890 2,478 478,521
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROGRAMME 108,304 77,644 82,026 79,388 68,379 45,344 2,478 463,563 RESOURCES
In-Year Shortfall (-) /Surplus (+) 7,278 -386 -11,594 -8,135 2,425 -4,546 0 -14,958
Cumulative Shortfall (-) / Surplus (+) 15,630 22,908 22,522 10,928 2,793 5,218 672 672 672
Page 1 CC8 Annex 12
CAPITAL SOURCES OF FUNDING 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 RESOURCES TOTAL £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s SCE(R) Formulaic Capital Allocations - 26,056 0 0 0 0 0 0 26,056 Credit Approval SCE(C) Formulaic Capital Allocations - 9,807 43,533 36,987 35,499 38,368 36,533 0 200,727 Grant SCE(R) Supplementary Credit Approval 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SCE(C) Supplementary Grant Approval 1,289 2,936 446 0 0 0 0 4,671
Devolved Formula Capital- Grant 9,000 5,410 3,910 1,910 1,910 1,910 0 24,050
Prudential Borrowing 5,031 9,789 10,787 5,061 4,223 4,887 180 39,958
Page 278 Grants 37,292 8,728 3,189 6,000 0 0 0 55,209
Developer Contributions 5,368 2,988 19,064 28,499 19,803 1,750 0 77,472
District Council Contributions 219 812 0 0 0 0 0 1,031
Other External Funding Contributions 1,757 163 0 226 0 0 0 2,146
Revenue Contributions 2,950 354 1,419 263 283 264 23 5,556
Schools Contributions 1,234 580 30 0 0 0 0 1,844
Use of Capital Receipts 1,023 2,737 12,194 1,930 1,367 2,425 2,275 23,951
Use of Capital Reserves 0 0 5,594 8,135 0 2,121 0 15,850
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROGRAMME 101,026 78,030 93,620 87,523 65,954 49,890 2,478 478,521 RESOURCES UTILISED
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROGRAMME 108,304 77,644 82,026 79,388 68,379 45,344 2,478 463,563 RESOURCES AVAILABLE
Usable Capital Receipts C/Fwd 1,721 7,112 6,363 0 0 2,425 0 0 0
Capital Reserve C/Fwd 13,909 15,796 16,159 10,928 2,793 2,793 672 672 672
Page 2 CC8 Annex 12
CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE CAPITAL PROGRAMME - Council 15th February 2011
Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
Primary Capital Programme Charlton-on-Otmoor - Repl of Temporary n/a - scheme was 413 610 37 0 0 0 0 0 1,060 647 37 Classrooms (ED701 ) committed
Thame, Barley Hill - Repl of Temporary n/a - scheme was 524 740 11 0 0 0 0 0 1,275 751 11 Classrooms (ED703 ) committed
n/a - scheme was Harwell - 2 classroom ext (ED711) 147 443 25 0 0 0 0 0 615 468 25 committed
Launton - Hall, classrooms and Pre- n/a - scheme was 111 931 160 0 0 0 0 0 1,202 1,091 160 School Accommodation (ED695 ) committed Page 279 Tackley - 2 classroom ext & Pre-School n/a - scheme was 191 809 40 0 0 0 0 0 1,040 849 40 Accommodation (ED734 ) committed
Cropredy - Modernisation & Extension Released July 2010 - 10 346 0 0 0 0 0 0 356 346 0 (ED710 ) PCP grant funded
Oxford, Wood Farm - replacement of n/a - scheme was 477 3,500 4,000 3,000 773 0 0 0 11,750 11,273 7,773 existin g buildin gs (ED749 ) committed
To be removed from the Primary School Review (funding 000000000 0 0 programme as there is no allocation) future PCP funding.
Revised scheme now Banbury, The Grange - 6 classroom proposed (see below). block to replace temporary classrooms 102 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 127 25 0 The remaining amount is (ED739). required to cover the abortive cost.
Released from the Banbury, The Grange - 6 classroom Moratorium Nov 10. block to replace temporary classrooms 0 25 800 825 0 0 0 0 1,650 1,650 1,625 £400k released back to (New Scheme) capital programme & £50k to SAI.
Page 3 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s Scheme proposed to be Great Milton - replacement of temporary removed. The remaining 540 0 0 0 0 0 045 40 0 classroom amount is required to cover the abortive cost.
Proposed to remain on hold (see appendix C). Hornton - Provision of new hall & 525 0 0 0 0 0 030 25 0 The remaining amount is replacement of unsuitable classroom required to cover the abortive cost.
Primary Capital Programme Total 1,985 7,494 5,073 3,825 773 0 0 0 19,150 17,165 9,671
Page 280 Secondary Capital Programme
Woodstock, Marlborough - New Science n/a - scheme was block & Replacement of Horsa & 1,663 1,502 338 200 0 0 0 0 3,703 2,040 538 committed Tem porar y Buildin gs (ED692 )
Chipping Norton - New Science block n/a - scheme was 204 2,200 850 206 0 0 0 0 3,460 3,256 1,056 (ED708 ) committed
Burford Community College - 8 n/a - scheme was Classroom block and drama studio to 158 1,375 517 100 0 0 0 0 2,150 1,992 617 committed replace temporary classrooms (ED714)
Wantage, Fitzwaryn - Phase 2 Released from the (Modernisation & new Post 16 142 550 1,500 1,008 0 0 0 0 3,200 3,058 2,508 Moratorium July 10. accommodation )(ED715 )
Didcot, St Birinus - New Food 5 295 0 0 0 0 0 0 300 295 0 n/a - grant funded Technolo gy facilit y (ED738 )
Oxford, Iffley Mead - New Food 49 236 15 0 0 0 0 0 300 251 15 n/a - grant funded Technolo gy facilit y (ED737 )
Scheme proposed to be Faringdon Community College - Phase released (conditional 3; Basic Need provision and released subject to 0 25 200 1,200 75 0 0 0 1,500 1,500 1,475 replacement of temporary classrooms confirmation of the basic (conditional approval) need scheme and removal of temps).
Page 4 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
Reallocated to other school programmes and schemes and the Secondary Modernisation Programme 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 4 0 remaining budget provision transferred under annual programmes.
Bloxham, Warriner (Design & Technology & Extension) Project 940 0 0 0 0 0 049 40 0 n/a - developer funded Develo pment onl y
Oxford, Northern House - 6 classroom Block to replace Horsa & temporary Released from the 0 350 1,160 90 0 0 0 0 1,600 1,600 1,250 classrooms and provide food technology Moratorium Nov 10.
Page 281 facilit y (ED746 )
£200k provision for Temporary Classroom released from the Thame, Lord Williams - Basic need Moratorium Nov 10. provision for replacement of temporary 000000000 0 0 £700k returned back to buildings beyond economic repair capital programme. (Autismn Resource Base) Transfer of developer funding to Thame Skills Centre project.
Abingdon, Kingfisher - Internal Scheme proposed to be alterations for basic need provision for 41 25 164 25 0 0 0 0 255 214 189 released nurser y accommodation
Oxford, Iffley Mead - Basic Need Scheme proposed to be 1 0 149 0 0 0 0 0 150 149 149 (tem porar y classroom ) released
Secondary Capital Programme Total 2,279 6,602 4,893 2,829 75 0 0 0 16,678 14,399 7,797
Page 5 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
Academy Programm e
n/a - scheme was Oxford Academy (ED678) 15,667 16,133 1,867 0 0 0 0 0 33,667 18,000 1,867 committed
New inclusion to the programme following the confirmation of £8m grant awarded. Inlcudes £250k Oxford Spires Academy 0 0 250 2,000 6,000 0 0 0 8,250 8,250 8,250 corporate funding to support project development (reallocated from secondary schools Page 282 modernoisation sum)
Academy Total 15,667 16,133 2,117 2,000 6,000 0 0 0 41,917 26,250 10,117
Provision of School Places (Basic Need)
Witney, Henry Box - New Music block n/a - scheme was 801 657 10 0 0 0 0 0 1,468 667 10 (ED699 ) committed
Carterton Community College - n/a - scheme was Enlargement of Hall/dining Room 32 460 38 0 0 0 0 0 530 498 38 committed (ED719 )
Oxford, St Nicholas - 2 classroom ext & n/a - scheme was 41 709 35 0 0 0 0 0 785 744 35 ext to hall (ED720 ) committed
Bicester, Cooper - New 6th Form Centre Released from the 162 2,300 1,450 488 0 0 0 0 4,400 4,238 1,938 (ED747 ) Moratorium July 10.
Oxford, New Marston - Phase 1; n/a - scheme was 0 730 101 0 0 0 0 0 831 831 101 (Foundation Sta ge & KS1 )(ED753 ) committed
Witney, Madley Brook - 3 Classroom Released July 2010 - 0 100 775 0 0 0 0 0 875 875 775 extension PCP grant funded
Temporary Classrooms - New units for n/a - current year was 0 510 0 0 0 0 0 0 510 510 0 Basic Need committed
Page 6 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
Thame, Lord Willaims's - Repl of 2 Released from the 0 199 0 0 0 0 0 0 199 199 0 Tem porar y Classrooms (ED712 ) Moratorium Nov 10.
SS Philip & James - Security/accoustic Released Nov 2010. 030 0 0 0 0 0 030 30 0 Fencin g (ED766 ) S106 funded.
Scheme proposed to be SS Philip & James 000000000 0 0 removed
Revised scheme now proposed (see below). Bayards Hill; replacement of existing The remaining amount is buildings and additonal space to meet 78 125 0 0 0 0 0 0 203 125 0 required to cover the basic need abortive cost on the old scheme. Page 283
Bayards (New Scheme) - replacement of Scheme proposed to be existing buildings and additonal space 0 0 150 700 4,500 1,250 0 0 6,600 6,600 6,600 released to meet basic need
Basic need scheme proposed to be released. Peppard- Replacement of Temporary 4 25 100 0 0 0 0 0 129 125 100 Funding for larger Classroom scheme remaining on hold (see appendix C)
Basic need scheme proposed to be released. John Watson - Reprovision of 0 25 225 25 0 0 0 0 275 275 250 Funding for larger Temporary Classrooms scheme remaining on hold (see appendix C)
Existing Demographic Pupil Provision n/a - Formulaic Ring- 0 0 3,200 4,500 4,050 3,900 3,000 0 18,650 18,650 18,650 (Basic Needs Programme) fenced Allocation
Bloxham - additional classroom & 0 14 360 28 0 0 0 0 402 402 388 ancillary facilities for 2FE (ED762)
Page 7 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s Oxford, St Andrew's - Foundation Stage 044 0 0 0 0 0 044 44 0 (ED763 )
Henley, Trinity - Improvements to 035 0 0 0 0 0 035 35 0 Entrance & Admin (ED765 )
Provision of School Places Total 1,118 5,963 6,444 5,741 8,550 5,150 3,000 0 35,966 34,848 28,885
Growth Portfolio - New Schools Note: This section of the programme shows available funding and not the full scheme cost
South Oxfordshire Didcot, Great Western Park - Primary 1 0 0 590 5,500 414 0 0 0 6,504 6,504 6,504 n/a - developer funded (14 classroom ) Page 284 Didcot, Great Western Park - Primary 2 000000000 0 0 n/a - developer funded (14 classroom )
Didcot, Great Western Park - Secondary 0 0 0 1,100 4,700 10,438 0 0 16,238 16,238 16,238 n/a - developer funded (Phase 1 )
Didcot, Lad yg rove - 7 classroom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n/a - developer funded
Cherwell Bodicote, Bankside - 10 classroom 0 0 50 400 4,038 0 0 0 4,488 4,488 4,488 n/a - developer funded
Bicester, Gavra y Drive - 7 classroom 109 0 25 191 3,458 0 0 0 3,783 3,674 3,674 n/a - developer funded
Bicester - Secondary P1 (incl existing 0 0 0 750 3,500 6,053 0 0 10,303 10,303 10,303 n/a - developer funded schools )
Bicester - Secondary P2 (including 000000000 0 0 n/a - developer funded existin g schools )
Bicester, South West - 14 classroom 0 0 60 530 5,020 0 0 0 5,610 5,610 5,610 n/a - developer funded
Upper He yford - New Primar y School 0 0 50 400 4,248 0 0 0 4,698 4,698 4,698 n/a - developer funded
Vale of White Horse Wantage / Grove - Secondary (option c) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n/a - developer funded
Growth Portfolio Total 109 0 775 8,871 25,378 16,491 0 0 51,624 51,515 51,515
Page 8 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
Children's & Family Centres
Flexibilit y of Childcare 08/09 - 10/11 1,065 2,316 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,381 2,316 0 n/a - grant funded
Scheme withdrawn. Grant reduction. The Didcot, Lydalls - Integrated Daycare 19 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 36 0 remaining amount is (ED727) required to cover the abortive cost.
Scheme withdrawn. Grant reduction. The Cumnor Pre-School - Replacement 023 0 0 0 0 0 023 23 0 remaining amount is Building (ED730) required to cover the abortive cost. Page 285 Sonning Common Pre-School - 0 445 44 0 0 0 0 0 489 489 44 n/a - grant funded Re placement Buildin g (ED728 )
Berinsfield Pre-School - Replacement 0 412 25 0 0 0 0 0 437 437 25 n/a - grant funded Buildin g (ED729 )
North Kidlington Pre-School - 0 397 40 0 0 0 0 0 437 437 40 n/a - grant funded Re placement Buildin g (ED732 )
Millbrook Pre-School - Replacement 0 373 20 0 0 0 0 0 393 393 20 n/a - grant funded Buildin g (ED733 )
Rainbow Pre-School (Glory Farm) - 0 520 51 0 0 0 0 0 571 571 51 n/a - grant funded Re placement Buildin g (ED731 )
Children Centres Programme 08/09 - 217 199 47 0 0 0 0 0 463 246 47 n/a - grant funded 10/11 Phase 3
North East Abingdon - Children's Centre 269 141 30 0 0 0 0 0 440 171 30 n/a - grant funded (ED698 )
Bloxham - Children's Centre (ED713 ) 73 379 0 0 0 0 0 0 452 379 0 n/a - grant funded
Chalgrove - Children's Centre (P1 & P2) 220 316 0 0 0 0 0 0 536 316 0 n/a - grant funded (ED716 )
Bampton - Children's Centre (ED721 ) 40 575 50 0 0 0 0 0 665 625 50 n/a - grant funded
Page 9 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
Eynsham - Children's Centre (ED722 ) 48 570 30 0 0 0 0 0 648 600 30 n/a - grant funded
Ambrosden, Five Acres - Children's 4 436 20 0 0 0 0 0 460 456 20 n/a - grant funded Centre (ED726 )
N&W Witney - Children's Centre (ED757) 0 460 150 0 0 0 0 0 610 610 150 n/a - grant funded
Sonning Common, - Children's Centre 0 542 150 0 0 0 0 0 692 692 150 n/a - grant funded (Chiltern Edge School) (ED755)
Southmoor, John Blandy - Children's 31 626 231 0 0 0 0 0 888 857 231 n/a - grant funded Page 286 Centre & Pre-School (ED724 )
Thame - Children's Centre (ED725 ) 0 273 40 0 0 0 0 0 313 313 40 n/a - grant funded
Children's & Family Centres Total 1,986 9,039 928 0 0 0 0 0 11,953 9,967 928
Improvements to Young People's Centres
Scheme withdrawn. The Wallingford Young People's & Children remaining amount is 131 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 155 24 0 Centres (ED700) required to cover the abortive cost.
Part grant funded. Chill Out / Youth Capital Fund 1,008 253 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,261 253 0 Released from the Moratorium Nov 10.
Witney Young People's Centre (Phase 2) Released from the 3 50 800 267 0 0 0 0 1,120 1,117 1,067 (ED709 ) Moratorium Nov 10.
Kidlington Young People's Centre n/a - scheme was 101 148 14 0 0 0 0 0 263 162 14 (ED717 ) committed
Banbur y New Futures Centre (ED735 ) 113 1,400 1,070 417 0 0 0 0 3,000 2,887 1,487 n/a - grant funded
Didcot Young People's Centre (ED748) 0 400 251 16 0 0 0 0 667 667 267 n/a - grant funded
Page 10 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s Abingdon Young People's Centre Released from the 5 250 145 0 0 0 0 0 400 395 145 (ED754 ) Moratorium July 10.
Chipping Norton; New Young People's & Released from the 8 500 452 40 0 0 0 0 1,000 992 492 Adult Learning Centre (ED736) Moratorium July 10.
Youn g People's Centres Total 1,369 3,025 2,732 740 0 0 0 0 7,866 6,497 3,472
ICT
Harnessin g Technolo gy Gran t 2,492 700 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,192 700 0 n/a - grant funded
ICT Total 2,492 700 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,192 700 0
Page 287 Annual Programmes
Future years 2011/12+ Schools Access Initiative (ED759) 1,522 842 1,142 1,142 1,142 1,142 1,142 0 8,074 6,552 5,710 proposed to be released.
Cumnor, Matthew Arnold - Accessibility 0 230 199 0 0 0 0 0 429 429 199 n/a - grant funded Im provements (ED752 )
Health & Safety - CYP&F 611 200 250 280 325 350 375 0 2,391 1,780 1,580 Proposed to be released
Health & Safety - Corporate 636 300 400 400 400 400 400 0 2,936 2,300 2,000 Proposed to be released
Future years 2011/12+ proposed to be released. Temporary Classrooms - Relocation & 1,086 200 360 360 360 360 360 0 3,086 2,000 1,800 Budget for basic need for Removal 10/11 shown under School Places.
Schools Accommodation Intervention & New programme 0 0 150 150 150 200 200 0 850 850 850 Su pp ort Pro gramme proposed to be released
Page 11 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s Reducing Out of County Provision for New programme 0 0 250 700 50 0 0 0 1,000 1,000 1,000 SEN Pu plis proposed to be released
New programme proposed to be released - future years are subject School Structural Maintenance 0 0 7,654 7,654 7,654 7,654 7,654 0 38,270 38,270 38,270 to confirmation of the level of capital maintenance grant
Proposed to be released Secondary Schools Modernisation 0 0 0 0 1,000 1,000 1,331 0 3,331 3,331 3,331 but not yet allocated to Programme specific schemes Page 288 New entry - it is subject to Capital Maintenance - Surplus from 5 yr confirmation of the level 0 0 0 0 1,433 2,000 2,000 0 5,433 5,433 5,433 allocation of capital maintenance grant
Annual Programme Total 3,855 1,772 10,405 10,686 12,514 13,106 13,462 0 65,800 61,945 60,173
Other Schemes & Programmes
Thornbury House Children's Home - n/a - scheme was 253 1,075 250 50 0 0 0 0 1,628 1,375 300 Re pl of Buildin g (ED702 ) committed
n/a - scheme was Minor Works 253 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 292 39 0 committed
Released from the Loans to Foster/Adoptive Parents 180 90 90 90 90 90 90 180 900 720 630 Moratorium July 10. (Prudentially Funded) Prudentially Funded
14-19 Rural Areas 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 50 0 n/a - grant funded
14-19 Rural Areas - West Oxfordshire 0 500 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 500 0 n/a - grant funded Skills Centre (ED756 )
Page 12 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s n/a - grant & developer 14-19 Rural Areas - Thame Skills Centre 0 200 550 25 0 0 0 0 775 775 575 funded
14 -19 Diploma 300 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 375 75 0 n/a - grant funded
14 -19 Diploma Abingdon - Fitzharry's 35 540 15 0 0 0 0 0 590 555 15 n/a - grant funded 6th Form Centre (ED740 )
Pla y Pathfinder (ED718 ) 1,246 862 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,108 862 0 n/a - grant funded
Short Breaks (Aimin g Hi gh) 251 746 0 0 0 0 0 0 997 746 0 n/a - grant funded
Woodland Outdoor Education Centre n/a - scheme was 351 54 0 0 0 0 0 0 405 54 0 (ED645 ) committed
2010/11 is the final year
Page 289 of this programme, remaining allocation is Small Projects 1,047 312 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,359 312 0 transferred to support School Accomodation Intervention & Support Programme
Other Schemes & Programmes Total 4,983 4,543 905 165 90 90 90 180 11,046 6,063 1,520
Retentions & Oxford City Schools Reorganisation
Retentions 737 758 371 5 0 0 0 0 1,871 1,134 376 n/a - completed schemes
Retentions & OSCR Total 0 758 371 5 0 0 0 0 1,134 1,134 376 n/a - completed schemes
Page 13 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
Schools Capital
Devolved Formula Capital 9,875 9,000 5,410 3,910 1,910 1,910 1,910 0 33,925 24,050 15,050
Harnessing Technology Grant- Schools 2,025 1,276 1,234 0 0 0 0 0 4,535 2,510 1,234 Allocation
Specialist Colle ge 6 344 0 0 0 0 0 0 350 344 0 n/a - schools local funding Kitchen & Dinnin g improvements 72 318 128 0 0 0 0 0 518 446 128
14-19 Diploma 442 909 158 0 0 0 0 0 1,509 1,067 158
Page 290 14-19 Rural 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 50 0
School Local Capital Programme Total 12,420 11,897 6,930 3,910 1,910 1,910 1,910 0 40,887 28,467 16,570
Capital Adjustments & Funding
Capital Revenue Switches 604 169 0 0 0 0 0 0 773 169 0 n/a - linked to revenue
Capital Ad justments & Fundin g Total 604 169 0 0 0 0 0 0 773 169 0
CYP&F CAPITAL PROGRAMME 48,867 68,095 41,573 38,772 55,290 36,747 18,462 180 307,986 259,119 191,024 EXPENDITURE TOTA L
CYP&F OCC ADJUSTED CAPITAL 36,447 56,198 34,643 34,862 53,380 34,837 16,552 180 267,099 230,652 174,454 PROGRAMME EXPENDITURE TOTA L
Page 14 CC8 Annex 12
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY SAFETY CAPITAL PROGRAMME - Council 15th Februar y 201 1
Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAMM E
Libraries Banbury Library & Mill Art Centre 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 30 0 Proposed to remain on hold (see appendix C). The remaining amount is required to cover the possible abortive cost.
Bicester Library 16 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 20 0 Proposed to remain on hold (see appendix C). The remaining amount is required to cover the Page 291 possible abortive cost.
Headington Library 11 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 15 0 Scheme proposed to be removed. The remaining amount is required to cover the possible abortive cost.
Thame Librar y (CS5 ) 1,194 358 10 0 0 0 0 0 1,562 368 10 n/a - committed
Watlin gton Librar y (CS6 ) 434 316 10 0 0 0 0 0 760 326 10 n/a - committed
Introduction of RFID (Radio frequency 0 750 395 115 0 0 0 0 1,260 1,260 510 Released July 2010 - identification) self service in Libraries Prudentially Funded (CS9 )
Count y Herita ge & Art s Abingdon Town Council (Contributions- 0 100 100 100 0 0 0 0 300 300 200 Released July 2010 Conditional A pp roval )
Museums Resource Programme (CS7) 119 494 22 0 0 0 0 0 635 516 22 n/a - committed
Develo pment Pro ject - SOFO 15 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 30 15 15 n/a - committed
Cogges Manor Farm Museum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scheme proposed to be removed.
Page 15 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s Oxfordshire Records Office (CS8) 6 448 16 0 0 0 0 0 470 464 16 Released July 2010 - Prudentially Funded
COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAMME 1,795 2,531 568 215 0 0 0 0 5,109 3,314 783 TOTA L
COMMUNITY SAFETY PROGRAMM E
Fire & Rescue Service
Critical Works - HQ shower facilities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scheme proposed to be removed.
Bicester Fire Station Upgrade 29 10 295 101 0 0 0 0 435 406 396 Scheme proposed to be released. Page 292
Thame Fire Station 000000000 0 0 Proposed to remain on hold (see appendix C).
Fire Equipment 0 1,000 100 0 0 0 0 1,100 1,100 1,100 New Inclusion proposed to be released
Retentions (completed schemes) 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 0 n/a - completed schemes
Gyp sy & Travellers Site s
Redbridge Hollow Phase 2 (combined 0 50 1,000 643 0 0 0 0 1,693 1,693 1,643 Grant funded. £400k OCC scheme) funding released Nov 2010, but £1m grant now available. Scope of works to be confirmed.
Safer & Stron ger Communities
Safer & Stron ger Communities Grant 402 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 503 101 0 n/a - grant funded
COMMUNITY SAFETY PROGRAMME 433 168 2,295 844 0 0 0 0 3,740 3,307 3,139 TOTA L
Page 16 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
SOCIAL CARE FOR ADULTS PROGRAMM E
Mental Health Mental Health Pro jects 354 0 177 0 0 0 0 0 531 177 177 n/a - externally funded
Residential HOP's Bicester (Forward Funding) SS88 1,543 148 90 0 0 0 0 0 1,781 238 90 n/a - committed
HOPs Phase 1- New Builds 0 0 4,659 4,894 0 0 0 0 9,553 9,553 9,553 n/a - committed
Deficit Fundin g A greement (SS98 ) 0 1,216 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,216 1,216 0 n/a - committed
Extra Care Housin g - Banbur y 675 675 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,350 675 0 n/a - grant funded
ECH- Adaptations to Existing Properties 28 455 425 500 392 0 0 0 1,800 1,772 1,317 Released July 2010 - Page 293 Prudentially Funded
ECH- New Schemes 0 0 200 800 800 685 1,500 0 3,985 3,985 3,985 Released July 2010 - Prudentially Funded
Learning Disabilities - Supported Living 227 50 175 175 175 198 0 0 1,000 773 723 Released July 2010 - Pro gramme (SS93 ) Prudentially Funded
Da y Centres Abingdon, Resources Centre (SS95 & 788 466 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,254 466 0 n/a - committed SS96 )
Banbur y Da y Centre (SS97 ) 4 30 550 66 0 0 0 0 650 646 616 Released August 2010
Deferred Interest Loans (CSDP) 0 120 450 350 300 300 300 0 1,820 1,820 1,700 Inclusion of future years' allocations as part of the S&RP process originally to be prudentially funded. Removal of prudential borrowing now proposed.
Health & Well Being projects (PRG) 0 165 46 0 0 0 0 0 211 211 46 n/a - grant funded (SS103 )
SOCIAL CARE FOR ADULTS 3,619 3,325 6,772 6,785 1,667 1,183 1,800 0 25,151 21,532 18,207 PROGRAMME TOTA L
Page 17 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s STRATEGY AND TRANSFORMATION PROGRAMM E
IT- Su pp ortin g Peo ple 81 0 48 0 0 0 0 0 129 48 48 n/a - committed
Time to Chan ge 2,089 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 2,131 42 42 n/a - committed
Adult Social Care IT Infrastructure 85 200 178 0 0 0 0 0 463 378 178 n/a - grant funded
New Adult Services System 103 122 500 943 332 0 0 0 2,000 1,897 1,775 Released July 2010 - Prudentially Funded
Mobile Workin g Pro ject 48 5 47 0 0 0 0 0 100 52 47 n/a - committed
Transformin g Adult Social Care (ICT ) 0 166 0 0 0 0 0 0 166 166 0 n/a - grant funded Page 294 STRATEGY& TRANSFORMATION 2,406 493 815 943 332 0 0 0 4,989 2,583 2,090 PROGRAMME TOTA L
RETENTIONS & MINOR WORKS 0 211 71 0 0 0 0 0 282 282 71 n/a - completed schemes
S&CS CAPITAL PROGRAMME 8,253 6,728 10,521 8,787 1,999 1,183 1,800 0 39,271 31,018 24,290 EXPENDITURE TOTA L
Page 18 CC8 Annex 12
ENVIRONMENT & ECONOMY - HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORT CAPITAL PROGRAMME - Council 15th February 2011
Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
NETWORK DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMM E Chipping Norton AQMA 111 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 2 0 Scheme proposed to be removed. The remaining amount is required to cover the possible abortive cost.
Wallin gford AQM A 26 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 30 0 Released July 2010
Thornhill Park & Ride Extensions 385 29 85 0 0 0 0 0 499 114 85 Scheme proposed to be (p ro ject develo pment ) released
Page 295 Eynsham, Bitterell Footway 0 8 73 0 0 0 0 0 81 81 73 n/a - developer funded Im provements
Kennington Roundabout 0 0 250 2,250 0 0 0 0 2,500 2,500 2,500 New inclusion proposed to be released
Heyford Hill Roundabout 0 0 25 475 0 0 0 0 500 500 500 New inclusion proposed to be released
Hinksey Hill Interchange 0 0 10 240 0 0 0 0 250 250 250 New inclusion proposed to be released
Other Network Development Schemes -20 0 0 0 0 0 0 -20 -20 0 n/a - completed schemes
NETWORK DEVELOPMENT 522 49 443 2,965 0 0 0 0 3,979 3,457 3,408 PROGRAMME TOTA L
ACCESS TO OXFORD PROGRAMM E DfT Major projects funding no longer available. Oxford Rail Station (project 000000000 0 0 Scheme proposed to be develo pment ) removed. The remaining amount is required to Access to Oxford Remaining Programme 0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 200 0 cover the possible Develo pment abortive cost. ACCESS TO OXFORD PROGRAMME 0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 200 0 TOTA L
Page 19 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
ROAD SAFETY PROGRAMM E
Speed Limit Review 25 100 138 0 0 0 0 0 263 238 138 Released Nov 2010
Child Safety Audit measures (Abingdon) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scheme proposed to be removed
Low Cost Measures 60 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 20 0 Released July 2010 (£80k removed to meet in year grant reductions)
Other Road Safety Schemes 28 12 0 0 0 0 0 40 40 12 n/a - small developer funded & completed schemes Page 296
B480 Cowley Rd MPR Supplementry 400000004 0 0 Removed July 2010 to Measures meet in year grant reductions
ROAD SAFETY PROGRAMME TOTAL 89 148 150 0 0 0 0 0 387 298 150
OXFORD TRANSPORT STRATEGY PROGRAMM E
London Rd Corridor - Phase 3 458 1,636 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,094 1,636 0 n/a - scheme was committed
Horspath Driftway/The Slade Pedestrian 1 25 154 0 0 0 0 0 180 179 154 n/a - developer funded & C yclin g Im provements
Fairfax Rd/Purcell Rd C ycle Link 6 17 162 0 0 0 0 0 185 179 162 n/a - developer funded
Highfield Area Traffic Management & Old 16 7 182 0 0 0 0 0 205 189 182 n/a - developer funded Rd/Windmill Rd C ycle Lane
Canal Towpath Improvement - Isis Lock 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 0 n/a - developer funded to Walton Well Road
Other OTS schemes 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 41 0 n/a - small developer funded & completed schemes
Page 20 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s Controlled Parking Zones 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Removed July 2010 to meet in year grant reductions
OXFORD TRANSPORT STRATEGY 481 1,826 498 0 0 0 0 0 2,805 2,324 498 PROGRAMME TOTA L
TRANSFORM OXFORD PROGRAMM E
Transform Oxford Future Programme 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 Proposed to be removed. £224k transferred to Frideswide (£219k s106 removed)
Frideswide Square (project development) 98 85 281 0 0 0 0 0 464 366 281 Scheme proposed to be released
Queens Street 1,060 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,094 34 0 n/a - scheme was Page 297 complete
St Ebbes Public Realm Improvements 000000000 0 0 Scheme proposed to be (project development) removed. West End Partnertship funding no longer available.
TRANSFORM OXFORD PROGRAMME 1,167 119 281 0 0 0 0 0 1,567 400 281 TOTA L
TOWNS PROGRAMM E
ABINGDON Abingdon Town Centre 3,028 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,088 60 0 Released July 2010 (£120k removed to meet in year grant reductions)
Abingdon- Marcham Rd Ph 2 240 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 295 55 0 n/a - scheme was complete
Abin gdon Town Pro gramme Total 3,268 115 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,383 115 0
BANBUR Y Hanwell Fields Mineral Railwa y 0 13 137 0 0 0 0 0 150 150 137 n/a - developer funded
Banbur y: Hi gham Wa y Access Roa d 0 28 118 0 0 0 0 0 146 146 118 n/a - developer funded
Page 21 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s Other Banbury ITS Schemes 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 n/a - small developer funded & completed schemes
Banbur y Town Pro gramme Total 0 44 255 0 0 0 0 0 299 299 255
BICESTE R Bicester Market Square 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proposed to remain on hold (see appendix C)
Bicester Roman Road 6 265 0 0 0 0 0 0 271 265 0 n/a - developer funded
Ra pid schemes - ECO Town 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 25 0 n/a - developer funded
Bicester Town Pro gramme Total 6 290 0 0 0 0 0 0 296 290 0 Page 298 HENLE Y
Other Henley ITS Schemes 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 0 n/a - small developer funded & completed schemes
Henle y Town Pro gramme Total 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 0
WITNE Y Co gg es Link Road 2,387 661 1,393 8,085 3,904 3,131 0 0 19,561 17,174 16,513 Released July 2010
A40 Downs Road Junction (project 87 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 137 50 50 n/a - developer funded develo pment )
Woodgreen/West End Pedestrian Cycle 25 0 0 48 0 0 0 0 73 48 48 Released July 2010 Route
Other Witney ITS Schemes 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 25 0 n/a - small developer funded & completed schemes
Witne y Town Pro gramme Total 2,499 686 1,443 8,133 3,904 3,131 0 0 19,796 17,297 16,611
CARTERTO N Other Carterton ITS Schemes 0 63 0 0 0 0 0 63 63 63 n/a - small developer funded & completed schemes
Carterton Towns Pro gramme 0 0 63 0 0 0 0 0 63 63 63
Page 22 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s WANTAGE/GROV E Limborough Road Pedestrian Crossing 1 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 45 44 44 n/a - developer funded
Wanta ge/Grove Pro gramme Total 1 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 45 44 44
OTHER TOWN S
Chipping Norton, Oxford Road Crossing 0 92 38 0 0 0 0 0 130 130 38 n/a - developer funded Im provements
Other Towns Other Schemes 4 45 20 0 0 0 0 69 69 65 n/a - small developer funded & completed schemes
Localities Initiatives 00000000 0 0 Removed July 2010 to meet in year grant Page 299 reductions
Others Towns Pro gramme Total 0 96 83 20 0 0 0 0 199 199 103
TOWNS PROGRAMME TOTAL 5,774 1,237 1,888 8,153 3,904 3,131 0 0 24,087 18,313 17,076
PUBLIC TRANSPORT PROGRAMM E
Premium Routes Upgrade 446 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 454 8 0 Scheme proposed to be removed. The remaining amount is required to cover the possible abortive cost.
Premium Routes Upgrade (developer 1 24 30 0 0 0 0 0 55 54 30 n/a - developer funded funded schemes )
Public Transport Information Project 956 128 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,084 128 0 Released July 2010 (£150k removed to meet in year grant reductions)
Iffley Rd/Donnington Bridge Junction 215 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 217 2 0 n/a - scheme was complete
Rail Station Development 124 134 0 0 0 0 0 0 258 134 0 Released Sept 2010 - was committed
Page 23 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s Didcot Station Forecourt 1,378 529 1,321 2,661 214 587 0 0 6,690 5,312 4,783 Released July 2010. Corporate allocation proposed to be increase by £960k (subject to confirmation of available S106 funding for the scheme)
Smarter Choices (BWTS) 0 85 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 85 0 Released July 2010 (£250k removed to meet in year grant reductions). Further £100k removed as no longer required.
Page 300 PUBLIC TRANSPORT PROGRAMME 3,120 910 1,351 2,661 214 587 0 0 8,843 5,723 4,813 TOTA L
LTP1 Schemes 55 141 0 0 0 0 0 0 196 141 0 n/a - committed
Salaries 545 635 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,180 635 0 n/a - linked to revenue
Preperation Pool 000000000 0 0 Now merged with Future Programme below
Integrated Transport Future Programme- 0 0 964 965 965 900 900 0 4,694 4,694 4,694 Proposed to be released. LTP3 Will be allocated to schemes through LTP3. Proposed allocation detailed in Appendix D.
OTHER INTEGRATED TRANSPORT 600 776 964 965 965 900 900 0 6,070 5,470 4,694 TOTA L
INTEGRATED TRANSPORT 11,753 5,265 5,575 14,744 5,083 4,618 900 0 47,938 36,185 30,920 STRAGEGY TOTAL
Page 24 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
STRUCTURAL MAINTENANCE PROGRAMM E Carriageway Schemes (non-principal 0 3,942 3,439 3,340 3,580 3,605 3,590 0 21,496 21,496 17,554 roads )
Footwa y Schemes 0 1,365 1,696 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,300 0 8,411 8,411 7,046 Current year Surface Treatments 0 3,350 3,800 3,900 3,850 3,900 3,900 0 22,700 22,700 19,350 released July 2010. Future years Structural Patchin g 055 0 0 0 0 0 055 55 0 allocation proposed to be released Street Li ghtin g Column Re placement 0 520 500 500 500 500 500 0 3,020 3,020 2,500
Draina ge 0 750 1,200 1,100 1,100 950 950 0 6,050 6,050 5,300
Brid ges 26 2,304 1,105 1,400 1,060 1,015 930 0 7,840 7,814 5,510
Page 301 Other HQ items 153 0 0 0 0 0 0 153 153 0 n/a - linked to revenue
STRUCTURAL MAINTENANCE ANNUAL 26 12,439 11,740 11,590 11,440 11,320 11,170 0 69,725 69,699 57,260 PROGRAMMES TOTA L
Brid ges - Ma jor Schemes Thames Towpath 1,555 347 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,902 347 0 n/a - scheme was committed
A415 Newbridge River Thames Crossing 672 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 719 47 0 Scheme proposed to be (project development) removed. The remaining amount is required to cover the possible abortive cost.
Wolvercote, Wolvercote Railway (Goose 203 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 243 40 0 Scheme proposed to be Green) Bridge Replacement removed. The remaining amount is required to cover the possible abortive cost.
Detrunked & Principal Roads - Major Schemes A40 (Headin gton - M40 ) 79 1,162 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,241 1,162 0 Released July 2010
Oxford High Street Phase 3 2,183 440 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,623 440 0 n/a - scheme was committed
Page 25 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s A422 Ruscote Avenue, Banbury 113 5 606 0 0 0 0 0 724 611 606 Scheme proposed to be released
A4158 Oxford Iffley Road 8 178 1,340 1,010 0 0 0 0 2,536 2,528 2,350 Scheme proposed to be released
Principal Roads 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 15 0 Now split out to Iffley Road & Ruscote Avenue.
STRUCTURAL MAINTENANCE MAJOR 4,813 2,234 1,946 1,010 0 0 0 0 10,003 5,190 2,956 SCHEMES TOTA L
STRUCTURAL MAINTENANCE 4,839 14,673 13,686 12,600 11,440 11,320 11,170 0 79,728 74,889 60,216
Page 302 PROGRAMME TOTAL
Future Transport Infrastructure Schemes 0 0 0 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 0 4,000 4,000 4,000 New Inclusion - additional funding allocation proposed for transport programme is £10m. Of which £6m to Structural Maintenance (see above) and the use of remaining £4m to be confirmed following the approval of LTP3.
HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORT CAPITAL 16,592 19,938 19,261 28,344 17,523 16,938 13,070 0 131,666 115,074 95,136 PROGRAMME EXPENDITURE TOTAL
Note: Please see Appendix B for a list of developer funding held for specific purposes for which schemes are not yet included in the programme.
Page 26 CC8 Annex 12
ENVIRONMENT & ECONOMY CAPITAL PROGRAMME (EXCLUDING TRANSPORT) - Council 15th February 2011
Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
BETTER OFFICES PROGRAMM E
Southern Area Offices 339 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 339 0 0 n/a - project was complete
Storage 235 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 235 0 0 n/a - project was complete
East Oxford Office 1,094 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,094 0 0 n/a - project was complete
County Hall 3,052 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,054 2 0 n/a - project was complete Page 303
Banbury Office 6,280 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,376 96 0 n/a - project was complete
Oxford Options 815 138 0 0 0 0 0 0 953 138 0 n/a - project was complete
Oxford Options Laundry 184 -10 0 0 0 0 0 0 174 -10 0 n/a - project was complete
Youth Offendin g Service 1 149 0 0 0 0 0 0 150 149 0 Released Nov 2010
Trading Standards 218 122 0 0 0 0 0 0 340 122 0 n/a - project was committed
Macclesfield House ICT node 0 366 0 0 0 0 0 0 366 366 0 n/a - project was committed
BOP Ca pital Revenue Switch 1,934 231 120 120 0 0 0 0 2,405 471 240 n/a - linked to revenue
Cricket Road Centre Vacation 0 20 90 87 0 0 0 0 197 197 177
BETTER OFFICES PROGRAMME TOTAL 14,152 1,114 210 207 0 0 0 0 15,683 1,531 417
Page 27 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
CORPORATE PROPERY & PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME S
Redbridge Hollow - Fly Tipped Waste 335 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 365 30 0 n/a - project was complete
Relocation of Countryside Services 6 372 0 0 0 0 0 0 378 372 0 n/a - project was committed
Bampton Community Facility 1 233 699 53 0 0 0 0 986 985 752 Released July 2010 - substantially external funded
Chipping Norton Access Road 283 128 0 0 0 0 0 0 411 128 0 n/a - project was committed Page 304
Charlbury Library (Spendlove Centre) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proposed to be removed. Remaining funds from previous captial receipt (£347k) proposed to be used fo educational purposes.
Asset Strategy Implementation 0 0 1,000 1,165 1,407 0 0 0 3,572 3,572 3,572 New inclusion proposed to Pro gramme be released
CORPORATE PROPERY & 625 763 1,699 1,218 1,407 0 0 0 5,712 5,087 4,324 PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME TOTA L
ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMM E
Energy Conservation (Prudentially 452 20 20 270 272 250 200 0 1,484 1,032 1,012 Released July 2010 - funded ) Prudentially Funded
SALIX Ener gy Pro gramm e 485 354 206 249 239 259 240 0 2,032 1,547 1,193 n/a - grant funded
Hook Norton Primary School - Solar 090 0 0 0 0 0 090 90 0 n/a - grant funded Panels
Carbon Management Fund 229 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 229 0 0 Proposed to be removed and reallocated to Solar Panels Programme below
Page 28 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s Energy Tax Reduction Programme 0 50 215 0 0 0 0 0 265 265 215 Proposed to be released. (Property - non-schools) £200k proposed to be transferred to the Solar Panels Programme below
Energy Tax Reduction Programme 0 83 467 550 0 0 0 0 1,100 1,100 1,017 £75k released Nov 2010. (Street Lighting) Remaining allocation plus £550k additional allocation proposed to be released from moratorium.
Installation of Solar Panels on Non- 0 0 730 0 0 0 0 0 730 730 730 New inclusion proposed to School Buildin gs be released
Page 305 Low Carbon Communities 0 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 75 0 n/a - grant funded
ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT 1,432 672 1,638 1,069 511 509 440 0 6,271 4,839 4,167 PROGRAMM E
ANNUAL PROPERTY PROGRAMME S
Backlog Maintenance Programme 22,892 1,801 0 0 0 0 0 0 24,693 1,801 0 Released July 2010 - Prudentially Funded
Minor Works Pro gramme 0 397 300 300 300 300 175 0 1,772 1,772 1,375 Proposed to be released
Health & Safet y (Non-Schools ) 0 24 24 24 24 24 0 0 120 120 96 n/a - linked to revenue
Contin genc y- Staff Deliver y 050 0 0 0 0 0 050 50 0 n/a - linked to revenue
Other Revenue Switches 0 251 0 0 0 0 0 0 251 251 0 n/a - linked to revenue
ANNUAL PROPERY PROGRAMMES 22,892 2,523 324 324 324 324 175 0 26,886 3,994 1,471 TOTA L
Page 29 CC8 Annex 12 Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMM E
Oakley Wood WRC Redevelopment 786 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 818 32 0 n/a - project was complete
Kidlington WRC 0 100 1,700 1,200 0 0 0 0 3,000 3,000 2,900 Proposed to be released. £200k project development budget released Nov 2010.
Alkerton WRC 0 0 0 500 1,000 250 0 0 1,750 1,750 1,750 New inclusion proposed to be released
Redbridge WRC 5 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 40 0 Proposed to be removed. Page 306 The remaining amount is required to cover the possible abortive cost.
Dean Pit WRC 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 0 Proposed to be removed. The remaining amount is required to cover the possible abortive cost.
Waste Infrastructure Development 000000000 0 0 Proposed to be removed Pro gramme (Phase 2 )
Oxford Waste Partnership PRG 385 0 185 0 0 0 0 0 570 185 185 n/a - grant funded Allocation
WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME 1,176 182 1,885 1,700 1,000 250 0 0 6,193 5,017 4,835 TOTA L
ENVIRONMENT & ECONOMY (EXCLUDING TRANSPORT) CAPITAL 40,277 5,254 5,756 4,518 3,242 1,083 615 0 60,745 20,468 15,214 PROGRAMME EXPENDITURE TOTA L
Page 30 CC8 Annex 12
OXFORDSHIRE CUSTOMER SERVICES CAPITAL PROGRAMME - Council 15th February 2011
Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
Corporate ICT
Capitalised ICT Hardware & Software 3,000 766 766 0 0 0 0 0 4,532 1,532 766 n/a - linked to revenue
Food With Thou ght
Kitchen & Dining Improvements 411 89 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 89 0 n/a - grant funded
OXFORDSHIRE CUSTOMER SERVICES CAPITAL PROGRAMME EXPENDITURE 3,411 855 766 0 0 0 0 0 5,032 1,621 766 TOTAL Page 307
Page 31 CC8 Annex 12
CHIEF EXECUTIVE'S OFFICE CAPITAL PROGRAMME - Council 15th Februar y 201 1
Future Capital Current Capital Previous Firm Programme Provisional Programme Total Investment Total Year Investment Total Years Actual Scheme (excluding Capital Programme Project/ Programme Name (excluding Expenditure Cost previous and Moratorium Status 2010 / 11 2011 / 12 2012 / 13 2013 / 14 2014 / 15 2015 / 16 2016 / 17 previous years) current years ) £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s £'000s
Parnerships
Grants to Voluntary & Community 0 10 90 25 0 0 0 0 125 125 115 n/a - grant funded Grou ps
CHIEF EXECUTIVE'S OFFICE CAPITAL 0 10 90 25 0 0 0 0 125 125 115 PROGRAMME EXPENDITURE TOTA L Page 308
Page 32 CC8 Annex 12
App endix A Capital Programme 2010/11 - 2015/16 Grant bids and allocations not yet included in the Capital Programme
Ref. Scheme/Pro gramme Area Status Descri ption Amoun t Year £000
Children, Youn g Peo ple & Families (1) Bicester 1 LSC application 3,000 2010/11 & 2011/12 (2) Performance Reward Grant 3 Individual Service Target Areas 38
Sub-Total CYP&F 3,038
Social & Communit y Services
(3) Fire Service Capital Grant 1 Formula Allocation confirmed 31 Jan 2011. 1,086 2011/12
Sub-Total Community Safety 1,086
Environmental & Econom y (4) Bicester Eco Town 2 Public transport improvements will include 320 TBC a pedestrian-only route from Bicester North station to the town centre with enhanced railway crossing facilities for walkers and cyclists and extended bus routes with the provision of real time travel information. (5) Banbury Connect 2 2 BIG Lottery funding secured by Sustrans for a 150 TBC cycle/pedestrian link over the Oxford Canal to connect the Bankside area of Banbury with Bridge Street. Also £100k developer funding. (British Waterways are carrying out a linked £150k scheme including £50k lottery funding.) (6) Frideswide Square 1 West End Partnership indicative allocation to be 290 2011/12 confirmed
Sub-Total Environmental & 760 Econom y
Total 4,884
Ke y: 1 Grant bids or allocations waiting approval or confirmation from funding authorities 2 Secured new resources waiting programme of work approval 3 Funding to be allocated against viable projects
Page 309 CC8 Annex 12 Appendix B Capital Programme 2010/11 to 2015/16 Transport Developer Contributions - Agreements with restricted use not yet included in the Captial Programme
This appendix shows the available developer funding for specific purposes. When an initial assessment and costing of a scheme has been carried out, if the cost is within the funding available the scheme will be brought into the Capital Programme. If the cost is greater than the available funding and the scheme is to be progressed, approval to allocate additional flexible resources will be sought. Inclusion into the programme will be reported as part of the monthly Financial Monitoring Report to the Cabinet.
Amount of Estimated Area/Location Scheme fundin g Deliver y
Oxford Jack Straws Lane Traffic management/cycle and pedestrian improvement £75,000 2011/12 Woodlands Road/Sandfield Road Scheme to prioritise cycle travel in the vicinity £13,000 2011/12 Junction Sandford village Traffic calming measures in vicinity of Henley Road/Grenoble £55,000 2011/12 Road junction to mitigate the impact of through traffic
Outer East Oxford/Cowley Road * Development of CPZ proposals if necessary £92,000 TBC Rose Hill roundabout Improvements to the ring road junction £60,000 TBC Abingdon Road near Redbridge Park Improvements to landscaping on the verges of the road £7,000 2011/12 & Ride * Henley Avenue - Junction with Improvements to junction £27,000 2011/12 Cornwallis Road Crescent Road - junction with Leafield Traffic management works in the vicinity £7,000 2011/12 Road Godstow Road Traffic management in the vicinity £16,000 2011/12 Oxpens Road - junction with Osney Improvements to the junction £17,000 2011/12 Lane West Banbury Road - junction with Marston Improvements to cycle facilities including introduction of £14,000 2011/12 Ferry Road advanced stop lines Saunders and/or Glanville Road Improvements to the highway £15,000 2011/12 East end of Sunderland Avenue slip Improvements to cycling facilities £3,000 2011/12 road Various locations * Alterations to CPZs and other localised uses £11,000 2011/12 Woodstock Road in vicinity of New signalised junction. £92,000 TBC Elizabeth Jennings Way Junction of A4074 and Grenoble Road New slip road junction. £162,000 TBC
Improvements to Seacourt and Restricted by agreement with the city council when the county £790,000 TBC Peartree Park and Ride sites council took over responsibility for all of Oxford’s park and ride car parks Total Oxford £1,456,000
Banbur y Ermont Way For a cycle route from Ermont Way with the old Daventry £93,465 2012/13 Road and the M40 Ermont Way Restricted to cycling and public transport in Ermont Way £35,218 2012/13 Middleton Road area Restricted to cycling and public transport around the £13,916 2012/13 Middleton Road area Wildmere Road Restricted to public transport facilities in the vicinity of land £5,838 2012/13 NW of M40 junction 11 Hanwell Fields Restricted to public transport in Hanwell Fields £13,465 2012/13 Total Banbury £161,902
Bicester North of Howes Lane Restricted to creating an access and right turn lane to the £142,162 TBC police headquarters Howes Lane, Middleton Stoney Road Restricted to improving, lighting parts of Howes Lane and £227,018 TBC and Bicester Village Middleton Stoney Road, traffic lights at the junction of Middleton Stoney Road and the A421 and creating footpath and cycle links to Bicester Village Bicester Village Restricted to providing cycling/walking links to Bicester £132,103 2011/12 Village. We are currently working on footpath and cycle links from Bicester Village to the town centre, Bicester station and assessing the case/demand for a park & ride off the A41 Oxford Rd
Page 310 CC8 Annex 12 Amount of Estimated Area/Location Scheme fundin g Deliver y Sherwood Close, Launton Restricted to traffic management measures in the vicinity of £60,852 2011/12 Sherwood Close, Launton Total Bicester £562,135
Didcot Edmunds Court * Parking controls £2,297 2011/12 The A4130 in the vicinity of Manor Restricted towards providing local highway infrastructure. £117,606 TBC Bridge abd/or the A4493 Foxhall road and Station Road Milton Road * TRO to reduce speed £455 2011/12 Great Western Park * TRO £2,024 TBC Didcot Northern Perimeter Road Restricted to the third and final stage of the road. £775,570 2011/12 A4130 For cycle infrastructure from Basil Hill Rd junction with the £16,220 2012/13 A4130 and Station Road. Public transport * Restricted to the provision of public transport £209,075 TBC Road/rail crossings Restricted to improvements to the rail crossing road capacity. £120,095 2011/12
Total Didcot £1,243,342
Wantage/Grove A338 at Grove For the provision of a toucan crossing and two bus shelters £15,217 2012/13
Grove Street, Wantage For the provision and improvement of highway infrastructure £132,446 2012/13 including traffic calming/improvement works in Grove Street
Grove Street/Limborough Road For the provision of a bus shelter near former bus depot £1,204 2011/12 The Portway Restricted to the provision of a pedestrian crossing £9,451 2011/12 Rail station For the re-opening of the Grove rail station £6,993 2016 + Grove rail station For the construction of a link road between the former Coal £1,581 2016 + Yard and the proposed Grove rail station Wantage Relief Road For the construction of the Wantage Relief Road £4,449 2016 + Public transport sevices * Restricted to Public transport services in Wantage £2,197 2011/12 Total Wantage/Grove £173,538
SVUK -Rural Clearwater Hampers, Ludbridge Mill, Restricted to the provision of highway safety improvements £9,630 2012/13 East Hendred Harwell Science and Innovation Restricted to the provision of infrastructure in this vicinity £179,321 TBC Campus Harwell village Restricted to the repayment of SCE a bus stop/shelter £5,417 TBC Sutton Courtenay Traffic calming in the village £16,671 2012/13 Church Road, Cholsey Restricted to highway infrastructure improvements in this £11,065 2012/13 vicinity Honey Lane, Cholsey Restricted to public transport infrastructure in this vicinity £5,742 2011/12 Total SVUK -Rural £227,846
Witney Newlands * Double yellow lines and TRO £2,564 2011/12 Bridge Street Mill Area Restricted to public transport infrastructure, which may be £13,211 2011/12 used for real time information and bus shelters in the Bridge St Mill Area. Witan Way/Bridge Street Restricted to a pedestrian crossing either in Witan Way or £105,610 2011/12 Bridge Street. Witan Way Restricted to a controlled crossing or other pedestrian £12,287 2011/12 crossing facilities on Witan Way in the vicinity of Bishops Farm Mill. Witan Way/Bridge Street Mill Restricted to the construction of a mini roundabout at the £11,012 2011/12 junction of Witan Way and the Bridge Street Mill site access.
Madley Park Restricted to the provision of a pedestrian/cycleway to link £6,851 TBC Madley Park to Newland Total Witney £151,535 Total £3,976,298
Page 311 CC8 Annex 12
Capital Programme 2010/11 to 2015/16 Appendix C Schemes Remainin g On Hold
These schemes were placed on hold under the Capital Programme Review 2010/11. They have been deferred beyond the 5 year programme planning period and will continue to remain on hold. However, they will be considered for entry into the programme as part of the future Service and Resource Planning rounds and if further funding becomes available.
Pro ject Flexible Total Specific Priority Ref Directorate Project/ Programme Name Funding project cost Funding Category Required Available £000 £000 £000 1 S&CS Bicester Library - new library and offices as 854 0 854 5 part of town centre redevelopment 2 E&E - Bicester Market square (developer 1,000 1,000 0 5 Transport contribution funded scheme) 3 CYP&F Peppard School - MAJOR SCHEME 496 40 456 6
4 CYP&F John Watson - Post 16 block - MAJOR 1,250 0 1,250 6 SCHEME 5 S&CS Banbury Library and Mill Art Centre 5,785 110 5,675 6
6 S&CS Thame Fire Station - relocation to new site 2,300 0 2,300 6
7 CYP&F Halls & Kitchens Programme- Horton Hall 745 0 745 6
TOTAL 12,430 1,150 11,280
Priorit y Cate gories: Priority 1 Statutory Requirements & Infrastructure Deficit Priority 2 Substantially Externally Funded Priority 3 Revenue Savings & Service Transformation Priority 4 Portfolio Rationalisation Priority 5 Economic development & housing growth Priority 6 Cross-cutting, joint working, income generation
Page 312 CC8 Annex 13
Service & Resource Planning 2011/12 - 2015/16 Prudential Indicators for Capital
Introduction
1. This paper sets out the capital Prudential Indicators that it is recommended that the Council should adopt as part of its budget setting in February 2011. The Council also has to set further indicators in relation to Treasury Management and these are included for approval in the Treasury Management Strategy at Annex 5. The indicators have been developed by CIPFA 1.
2. Having simplified the capital finance system and given authorities more freedom in determining their capital programmes, there is a system of self regulation introduced through the Prudential Guidelines. The recommended indicators are set out below:
3. In considering its programme for capital investment, the Council is required within the Prudential Code to have regard to:
• Affordability, e.g. implications for Council Tax • Prudence and sustainability, e.g. implications for external borrowing • Value for money, e.g. option appraisal • Stewardship of assets, e.g. asset management planning • Service objectives, e.g. strategic planning for the authority • Practicality, e.g. achievability of the forward plan
Capital Expenditure
4. The Council is required to make reasonable estimates of the total of capital expenditure that it plans to incur during 2011/12 and the following two financial years. The Council must also approve the actual expenditure for 2009/10 and revised expenditure for 2010/11.
5. It is proposed that the capital expenditure will be £78.0m for 2011/12, £93.6m for 2012/13 and £87.5m for 2013/14. Actual expenditure for 2009/10 was £100.8m and estimated expenditure for 2010/11 is £101.0m. This programme will be funded as follows:
1 Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy
Page 313 CC8 Annex 13
Estimates Actual 2009 /10 2010 /11 2011 /12 2012 /1 3 201 3/14 £m £m £m £m £m SCE(R) Supported 29.7 26.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Borrowing Prudential Borrowing 8.7 5.0 9.8 10.8 5.1 Grants and Contributions 56.5 66.0 65.1 63.6 72.1 Capital Receipts 0.0 1.0 2.7 12.2 1.9 Revenue 5.9 2.9 0.4 1.4 0.3 Reserves 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.6 8.1
10 0.8 10 1.0 78.0 93.6 87.5
6. The indicators have been based on the January 2011 capital programme set out in Annex 12.
7. The capital expenditure figures for beyond 2011/12 will be able to be revised in twelve months’ time.
The Ratio of Financing Costs to the Net Revenue Stream
8. Estimates of the ratio of financing costs to the net revenue stream for the current and future years, and the actual figures for 2009/10 are shown below.
Year Actual/ Financing Net Revenue Ratio Estimate Cost Stream 2009/10 Actual 34,903 408,175 8.55% 2010/11 Estimate 35,915 435,526 8.25% 2011/12 Estimate 33,452 407,483 8.21% 2012/13 Estimate 33,960 401,456 8.46% 2013/14 Estimate 30,667 404,121 7.59%
9. Financing costs include interest payable on borrowing, interest and investment income and the amount required for the minimum revenue provision. The estimates of financing costs are set out in the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) at Annex 1.
10. The net revenue stream is the amount to be met from government grants and local taxpayers, the estimates for which are also set out in the MTFP.
The Capital Financing Requirement
11. Estimates of the end of year Capital Financing Requirement for the Authority for the current and future years and the actual Capital Financing Requirement at 31 March 2010 that are recommended for approval are:
Page 314 CC8 Annex 13
Year Actual/Estimate £m 2009/10 Actual 451.121 2010/11 Estimate 464.592 2011/12 Estimate 456.090 2012/13 Estimate 448.885 2013/14 Estimate 436.748
12. The Capital Financing Requirement measures the authority’s underlying need to borrow for a capital purpose. In accordance with best professional practice the County Council does not associate borrowing with particular items or types of expenditure. The authority has an integrated Treasury Management Strategy and has adopted the CIPFA Code of Practice for Treasury Management in the Public Services. The Council has, at any point in time, a number of cashflows both positive and negative, and manages its treasury position in terms of its borrowings and investments in accordance with its approved treasury management strategy and practices. In day-to-day cash management, no distinction can be made between revenue cash and capital cash. External borrowing arises as a consequence of all the financial transactions of the authority and not simply those arising from capital spending. In contrast, the capital financing requirement reflects the authority’s underlying need to borrow for a capital purpose.
13. CIPFA’s Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities includes the following as a key indicator of prudence:
“In order to ensure that over the medium term net borrowing will only be for a capital purpose, the local authority should ensure that net external borrowing does not, except in the short term, exceed the total of capital financing requirement in the preceding year plus the estimates of any additional capital financing requirement for the current and next two financial years”.
14. The Assistant Chief Executive & Chief Finance Officer reports that the authority had no difficulty meeting this requirement in 2009/10, nor are any difficulties envisaged for the current or future years. This view takes into account current commitments, existing plans, and the proposals in the budget report.
The Incremental Impact of Capital Investment Decisions
15. The estimate of the incremental impact of capital investment decisions proposed in this budget report, over and above capital investment decisions that have previously been taken by the Council are, for the Band D Council Tax:
Year Actual/Estimate £ 2011/12 Estimate 27.04 2012/13 Estimate 8.12 2013/14 Estimate -25.29
Page 315 CC8 Annex 13
16. From the introduction of the Prudential Indicators in 2004/05 up to the end of 2005/06 these figures reflect the costs of unsupported borrowing for capital investment through the Public Service Agreement and Prudential Borrowing. For 2006/07 onwards the figures reflect the increase in the Council’s debt charges arising from supported borrowing and prudential borrowing. Although supported borrowing costs are reflected in the grant support from government, as the Council is on the grant floor, the increased costs of borrowing do not increase the amount of grant receivable. The increased costs of borrowing therefore fall on the Council Tax.
Page 316 CC8 Annex 14
COUNCIL – 15 FEBRUARY 2011 BUSINESS STRATEGY & SERVICE AND RESOURCE PLANNING 2011/12 – 2015/16 Cross Cutting Community Impact Assessment – First Assessment December 2010 Introduction and approach to budget setting 1. Oxfordshire County Council is facing a very significant reduction in Government funding over the next 4 years. 2. The Council’s budget proposals were published on 10th December 2010 in papers going to Scrutiny Committees. Comments from Scrutiny Committees were fed back to Cabinet for consideration on 25 January 2011. The final budget will be set by the Council on 15 February 2011. 3. In proposing the budget the Council’s Cabinet have had to make tough choices. These have been based on principles to prioritise business efficiency and productivity and to streamline back office functions in order to protect vital frontline services. However the scale of budget reduction will inevitably impact significantly across a number of service areas. As far as possible the Cabinet is proposing to protect provision of children’s social care, the fire service and preventative activity in social care. By necessity budgets for other services therefore face proposals for more significant cuts. 4. As stated in HM Treasury’s assessment of the equalities impact of the 2010 spending review, reducing spending will not necessarily mean increased inequalities if the same services can be provided more efficiently, or if resources are better targeted at those who need them most 1. However the council is conscious that the proposed budget includes some very significant changes and that these may have an impact on communities and particular groups defined in equalities legislation. This report provides an indicative qualitative assessment of these possible implications and sets out the work underway to mitigate the potential effects. 5. It should be noted that the report focuses on proposed budget changes and possible service impacts for 2011/12. There are other proposals in the budget for 2012/13 and beyond, some of which are not yet fully developed. These areas require further consultation and assessment of potential impacts and this work will be done in the months ahead. For 2011/12 the most significant service and organisational changes that the proposed budget reductions will impact on are: • Youth services • Libraries • An existing and ongoing programme to transform adult social care through provision of personal budgets. The programme includes a review of the services directly provided by the Council (e.g. home support) as well as a review of many services contracted by the Council as there will be fewer
1 http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/spend_sr2010_equalities.htm
Page 317 CC8 Annex 14
contracts as a result of personal budgets. It is now proposed that there should be less funding to deliver this overall programme of change. • Staffing levels The Council’s Assessment Process 6 Under equality legislation local authorities are required to consider the impact of budget and service changes in relation to: • Age (people of different age groups) • Disability (e.g. physical or sensory impairments, long-term illnesses and conditions, hidden impairments such as a heart condition, frailty, learning disabilities or mental health problems) • Gender (men/women) and Gender Reassignment • Ethnicity (including Black, Asian, Minority Ethnic groups , Gypsies & Travellers) • Religion/belief (different faiths, including people with no religion or belief) • Sexual orientation • Marriage/civil partnerships • Pregnancy & Maternity In addition to the issues above we have also considered the impact of changes on particular communities (e.g. urban, rural, deprived).
7. The assessment process the Council has undertaken involves: a. A high-level Council wide assessment of the broad impacts on the groups and interests defined above. This paper provides this initial assessment. b. An individual service-level assessment of the potential impact on vulnerable groups for each proposal, where a significant change to the service is proposed. This is available on-line here . c. The Council-wide assessment was sent to Cabinet on 21 st December 2010 for consideration alongside the budget report. A final version has now been sent to Council. d. Proposals may change as a consequence of the political process or consultation with service users and residents. We will therefore revise assessments as required once formal decisions on individual service changes are taken.
Early Assessment of possible implications of proposals Communities 8. Four of our districts are classified as rural, and almost one-third of our population (28%) lives in settlements of fewer than 10,000 people. Nearly half of the population (49%) live in the market towns with more than 10,000
Page 318 CC8 Annex 14
people. The largest settlement is Oxford with a population of close to 150,000 (23% of the county population). 9. Oxfordshire has generally low overall levels of deprivation. However there are ten areas in Oxford City and two in Banbury which fall within the 20% most deprived areas in the country. It should be noted that deprivation extends beyond these specific areas, but may be hidden within the overall affluence of an area potentially making the impact on individuals even greater. 10. Possible impacts of the proposals on different communities: • A number of proposals may affect service provision and access to services from rural areas. These include: o Proposals to deliver youth services through the new early intervention service which is mainly concentrated in the seven market town/city hubs. o Proposals to withdraw funding for 13 rural libraries in areas where the population is below 10,000. o As part of the adult social care transformation programme there are proposals to concentrate the building based health and wellbeing resource centres in the seven market town/ city areas as part of a new day opportunities service • The proposed changes to library services within Oxford City and rural areas are likely to impact mostly on older people, parents with children and adults who are less mobile (e.g. older people, people without their own transport, disabled people). Good transport links are available within Oxford City and should ensure that most residents are still able to access libraries and youth facilities. 11. Mitigation • We hold and actively use data and other evidence to ensure that the council, as far as is possible, is aware of and able to serve the needs of particular communities and groups in Oxfordshire. For example our strong Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 2 is a critical tool, being used across adults and children’s services to identify groups where particular needs are not being met and who are experiencing poor outcomes. We also have a Needs Analysis focusing on children and young people that supports the council’s Children and Young People's Plan. We will use these tools as a guide to support individual service level impact assessments and ensure that decisions that are being taken, as far as possible, protect services for those most in need. • The Council intends to provide pump priming funding to support ‘community self help’ options and we will seek to work with voluntary and community sector partners to stimulate community run library and youth provision in cases where funding ceases. • We intend to design the proposed new early intervention service to ensure that the hubs provide services covering all localities for families with
2 http://www.oxfordshirepct.nhs.uk/your-health/jsna.aspx
Page 319 CC8 Annex 14
multiple problems. Initial locality mapping shows that there is scope to make better use of existing resources and deliver better outcomes for young people and families. • We will seek to ensure that library services are accessible in Oxford and rural areas via proposals to introduce an eBook and eAudio loan service; extend the home library services provided by volunteers and targeted at older people and others who are unable to leave their homes; and provide support for people who would like to be more confident on public transport. • The proposed day opportunities development would be supported by mobile health and wellbeing services that would specifically be targeted at older people in rural areas, alongside community based options that people can bid for in their local community. Wherever they live, people will be encouraged to use their personal budget in their local community to meet their needs. • We will be prepared to make available existing Council buildings for community use where suitable sustainable and financially viable proposals are put forward. However the Council has costs and liabilities for these buildings and will need to reduce this financial burden as part of its budget reduction strategy. A combination of building and community solutions like the home library service will make this more affordable. • Particularly in rural areas we recognise that access to services can be a problem for some groups, notably older people who do not drive and people with disabilities. The Council subsidises rural bus services in many areas although some limited changes may impact in 2011/12. However more broadly we will continue to promote and support community transport provision. Existing accessible community transport is extensive in Oxfordshire but there is scope for further development and we will be working to generate improvement in Oxford, market towns and in rural areas • We are planning 14 locality reviews to understand the impact of proposed changes, options for self help and opportunities for rationalisation of buildings. • We are developing a framework to enable the ‘Big Society’ to flourish in Oxfordshire. We know that we have a healthy voluntary and community sector in the county and that there are many individuals and organisations who will want to take an active role in their communities. We will work with them to limit the impact of any service changes and ensure that individuals and communities are able to help themselves.
Age and disability 12. 18% of the population is over pension age (males 65 years, females aged 60 years) and this is expected to increase to over 20% by 2031. Numbers of the very elderly (85 years plus) are projected to more than double by 2031. At the time of the 2001 Census 13% of residents reported having a limiting long-term illness, health problem or disability which limited their daily activities or work.
Page 320 CC8 Annex 14
13. As well as those issues identified in the ‘Communities’ section above, possible impacts of the proposals on older people and those with a disability include: • Older people and those with disabilities are more likely to be users of social care than the rest of the population. Proposals for changes to the payment regime for aspects of adult social care to may lead to increased costs for those in receipt of social care. 14. Mitigation • The Council’s approach to social care is moving towards self directed support. This means that individuals will take responsibility for their own care and will be able to arrange the provision of services most beneficial to them. As the commissioner of services in future the council will play a role in clustering suppliers and managing the costs of services.
Gender 15. Possible differential impacts of the proposals on men and women: • Women use some public services more than men. For example there are more women in old age than men and therefore women are more likely to need social care. • The proposals for changes to adult social care funding assume a greater dependence upon informal carers to continue caring. We know that two thirds of carers are women (carers survey 2009). • Over 80% of the Council’s workforce are women (rises as high as 96% in some services such as Early Years). Services that are most likely to see high reductions in staffing numbers as a result of the budget proposals are those with very high levels of female employees (e.g. the youth service, libraries, home support and early years). Job losses may therefore affect women in greater numbers. The scale of the savings required will make job losses necessary and the only alternative to staff redundancies will be to transfer cuts in services to customers. 16. Mitigation • As far as possible we are proposing to protect our spending on adult social care, moving towards self-directed support as set out above. • Spending on carers has been protected in the proposals in recognition of their contribution • We will carefully monitor the impact of changes to the workforce as a result of the budget proposals, to ensure employment policies are applied fairly and to minimise any disproportionate impact on any particular groups. The Council annually publishes a review of its progress in promoting equality of opportunity within the workforce.
Page 321 CC8 Annex 14
Black, Asian, Minority Ethnic groups 17. Black, and minority ethnic groups or those of other white backgrounds account for 13% of the county's population (varying from 7% in West Oxfordshire to 27% in Oxford City). 18. As well as those issues identified in the discussion above, possible impacts of the proposals on different minority groups include: • Many minority ethnic groups will be only occasional users of universal services but there are some groups with specific needs such as refugees, recent migrants and victims of racial harassment. A possible risk to this group is around proposals to alter the school improvement offer and changes to the way schools receive funding for specialist support to speakers of other languages, travellers and others, which in future they will receive directly. • People from minority ethnic groups are more likely than average to be in households on low incomes. 19. Mitigation • Schools will continue to receive funding to commission services directly thus mitigating the impact of the proposed changes. However there may be some impact on schools with low numbers of ethnic minority young people who therefore struggle to achieve economies of scale. • We will use our Joint Strategic Needs Assessment and other evidence to ensure that as far as possible we protect service provision for those most in need. • The wider provision of personal budgets will provide greater choice in the way all people who use adult social care services are able to meet their individual needs.
20. At this stage we have not identified any particular impacts of our proposals on the groups below, beyond those issues discussed above. • Religion/belief (different faiths, including people with no religion or belief) • Sexual orientation • Marriage/civil partnerships • Pregnancy & Maternity
STEPHEN CAPALDI Assistant Chief Executive
Background papers: Nil Contact Maggie Scott, Corporate Policy Manager, Tel: 01865 816081
December 2010
Page 322