Public Document Pack Audit Committee Agenda

Date: Monday, 30 September 2019 Time: 2.00 pm Venue: Committee Room 9, First Floor - City Hall, College Green, Bristol, BS1 5TR

Distribution:

Councillors: Mark Brain, Nicola Bowden-Jones, Chris Jackson, Olly Mead, Liz Radford, Harriet Clough, Clive Stevens, Peter Abraham, Adebola Adebayo and Simon Cookson

Copies to: Mike Jackson (Executive Director of Resources and Head of Paid Service), Denise Murray (Director - Finance & Section 151 Officer), Nancy Rollason (Service Manager Legal), Melanie Henchy- McCarthy, Alison Mullis, Chris Holme (Interim Service Manager - Corporate Finance), Tony Whitlock and Lucy Fleming (Head of Democratic Engagement)

Issued by: Allison Taylor, Democratic Services City Hall, PO Box 3167, Bristol BS3 9FS Tel: 0117 92 22237 E-mail: [email protected] Date: Friday, 20 September 2019 Audit Committee – Agenda Agenda

1. Welcome, Introductions and Safety Information (Pages 5 - 6) 2. Declarations of Interest To note any declarations of interest from the Councillors. They are asked to indicate the relevant agenda item, the nature of the interest and in particular whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest.

Any declarations of interest made at the meeting which is not on the register of interests should be notified to the Monitoring Officer for inclusion.

3. Minutes of Previous Meeting To agree the minutes of the previous meeting as a correct record. (Pages 7 - 13)

4. Action sheet (Pages 14 - 15) 5. Public Forum Up to 30 minutes is allowed for this item.

Any member of the public or Councillor may participate in Public Forum. The detailed arrangements for so doing are set out in the Public Information Sheet at the back of this agenda. Public Forum items should be emailed to [email protected] and please note that the following deadlines will apply in relation to this meeting:-

Questions - Written questions must be received 3 clear working days prior to the meeting. For this meeting, this means that your question(s) must be received in this office at the latest by 5 pm on 24 September 2019.

Petitions and Statements - Petitions and statements must be received on the working day prior to the meeting. For this meeting this means that your submission must be received in this office at the latest by 12.00 noon on 27 September 2019.

6. Work Programme To note the work programme. (Pages 16 - 17) Audit Committee – Agenda

7. Member Officer Protocol (Pages 18 - 29) 8. Administrative Changes to the Constitution. (Pages 30 - 34) 9. Annual Report of Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman Decisions (Pages 35 - 85) 10. Grant Thornton 2018/19 Audit Report - ISA 260 report to follow (Pages 86 - 88) 11. Final Statement of Accounts for 2018/19 and Final AGS for 2018/19 - Statement of Accounts and AGS 2018/19 to Follow (Pages 89 - 93) 12. Treasury Management Annual Report (Pages 94 - 112) 13. Internal Audit Activity Report for Period 1st April 2019 to 31st August 2019 (Pages 113 - 134) 14. Corporate Risk Management Arrangements and the Q1 2019/20 Corporate Risk Report Update (Pages 135 - 169) 15. Asbestos Management Update (Pages 170 - 181) 16. Exclusion of Press and Public That under s.100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item(s) of business on the grounds that it (they) involve(s) the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph(s) 3 (respectively) of Part 1 of schedule 12A of the Act.

17. Internal Audit Assurance Summary - IT Transformation Programme (ITTP) (Pages 182 - 187) Audit Committee – Agenda Agenda Item 1

www.bristol.gov.uk Public Information Sheet

Inspection of Papers - Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985

You can find papers for all our meetings on our website at www.bristol.gov.uk.

You can also inspect papers at the City Hall Reception, College Green, Bristol, BS1 5TR.

Other formats and languages and assistance For those with hearing impairment Other o check with and You can get committee papers in other formats (e.g. large print, audio tape, braille etc) or in community languages by contacting the Democratic Services Officer. Please give as much notice as possible. We cannot guarantee re-formatting or translation of papers before the date of a particular meeting.

Committee rooms are fitted with induction loops to assist people with hearing impairment. If you require any assistance with this please speak to the Democratic Services Officer.

Public Forum

Members of the public may make a written statement ask a question or present a petition to most meetings. Your statement or question will be sent to the Committee and be available in the meeting room one hour before the meeting. Please submit it to [email protected] or Democratic Services Section, City Hall, College Green, Bristol BS1 5UY. The following requirements apply:

 The statement is received no later than 12.00 noon on the working day before the meeting and is about a matter which is the responsibility of the committee concerned.  The question is received no later than 5pm three clear working days before the meeting.

Any statement submitted should be no longer than one side of A4 paper. If the statement is longer than this, then for reasons of cost, only the first sheet will be copied and made available at the meeting. For copyright reasons, we are unable to reproduce or publish newspaper or magazine articles that may be attached to statements.

By participating in public forum business, we will assume that you have consented to your name and the details of your submission being recorded and circulated to the committee. This information will also be made available at the meeting to which it relates and placed in the official minute book as a public record (available from Democratic Services).

Page 5 www.bristol.gov.uk

We will try to remove personal information such as contact details. However, because of time constraints we cannot guarantee this, and you may therefore wish to consider if your statement contains information that you would prefer not to be in the public domain. Public Forum statements will not be posted on the council’s website. Other committee papers may be placed on the council’s website and information in them may be searchable on the internet.

Process during the meeting:

 Public Forum is normally one of the first items on the agenda, although statements and petitions that relate to specific items on the agenda may be taken just before the item concerned.  There will be no debate on statements or petitions.  The Chair will call each submission in turn. When you are invited to speak, please make sure that your presentation focuses on the key issues that you would like Members to consider. This will have the greatest impact.  Your time allocation may have to be strictly limited if there are a lot of submissions. This may be as short as one minute.  If there are a large number of submissions on one matter a representative may be requested to speak on the groups behalf.  If you do not attend or speak at the meeting at which your public forum submission is being taken your statement will be noted by Members.

For further information about procedure rules please refer to our Constitution https://www.bristol.gov.uk/how-council-decisions-are-made/constitution

Webcasting/ Recording of meetings

Members of the public attending meetings or taking part in Public forum are advised that all Full Council and Cabinet meetings and some other committee meetings are now filmed for live or subsequent broadcast via the council's webcasting pages. The whole of the meeting is filmed (except where there are confidential or exempt items) and the footage will be available for two years. If you ask a question or make a representation, then you are likely to be filmed and will be deemed to have given your consent to this. If you do not wish to be filmed you need to make yourself known to the webcasting staff. However, the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014 now means that persons attending meetings may take photographs, film and audio record the proceedings and report on the meeting (Oral commentary is not permitted during the meeting as it would be disruptive). Members of the public should therefore be aware that they may be filmed by others attending and that is not within the council’s control.

Page 6 Agenda Item 3 [email protected]

Bristol City Council Minutes of the Audit Committee

29 July 2019 at 2pm

Members Present:- Councillors – Brain (Chair), Stevens (Vice-Chair), Clough, Jackson, Mead, Gollop (Substitute for Councillor Radford.)

Independent Members – Simon Cookson and Adebola Adebayo.

Jackson Murray – Grant Thornton – External Auditors.

Officers in Attendance:-

Denise Murray – Director Finance and Section 151 Officer, Simba Muzarurwi – Chief Internal Auditor, Alison Mullis/Melanie Henchy-McCarthy - Deputy Chief Internal Auditors, Michael Pilcher – Corporate Finance, Jan Cadby – Risk and Insurance Manager, Tim O’Gara – Service Director – Legal and Democratic Services, Nancy Rollason – Head of Legal Services, Allison Taylor – Democratic Services

1. Welcome, introductions, apologies and safety information

These were done. Apologies received from Councillor Radford with Councillor Gollop attending as substitute. The Committee noted that Councillor Bowden-Jones was not in attendance.

2. Declarations of Interest

None declared.

3. Minutes of the last meeting.

The minutes of the last meeting were agreed as a correct record and it was therefore:-

Resolved – That the minutes of 28 May 2019 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

4. Action Sheet.

The following was noted:- 1. That the request at the last meeting for the Glossary to precede the Statement of Accounts had been omitted from the Action Sheet. It would therefore be included in the Actions for this meeting; 2. Action 9 – One more response had been received after the survey was recirculated; 3. The training programme had been revised and additional training would be provided by CIPFA;

Page 7 www.bristol.gov.uk [email protected]

4. A quarterly review risk report had been built in to the Work Programme to align the committees programme with the requirements of the risk management policy

5. Public Forum

It was agreed that Public Forum items be heard preceding the item on the agenda they referred to.

6. Work Programme

The Work Programme was noted.

The Chair agreed to depart from the order of agenda and consider Item 14 at this point.

7. Updating the Constitution – Timetable for review.

The Committee heard a statement from Councillor Alexander, Chair of DC A Committee.

The Committee agreed to note Recommendations 1 and 3 and agreed Recommendation 2.

Discussion took place on the Chairs of DC Committee’s proposed amendment to the Constitution regarding a ‘cooling off’ period in relation to DC Committees’ decisions that are contrary to the officer recommendation but without sound planning reasons. The Committee agreed that it was not the best forum to comment on the proposal. It was moved and seconded that the proposed amendment to the Constitution be referred to a cross party group of DC A & B Committee members for consideration and on being put to the vote it was:-

Resolved (Unanimously) -

1. That the work undertaken to date and the timetable setting out the priority areas of the Constitution to be reviewed this year be noted.

2. That the Committee recommends to Full Council that the Audit Committee Terms of Reference be amended to state that Party Group Leaders are not eligible to sit on the Audit Committee.

3. That the Health Scrutiny Sub-committee Terms of Reference approved by the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board on 17th July 2019 and referred to Full Council for adoption be noted.

4. That the proposal from the Chairs of the Development Control Committees to amend the Committee Procedure Rules to include a ‘cooling off period’ where the Committee was minded to decide a matter otherwise than in accordance with officer recommendations be referred to Development Control Committee members for consideration.

8. External Audit Progress Report.

The Committee heard a statement from Councillor Clive Stevens and noted the statement submitted by Councillor Jerome Thomas.

Page 8 www.bristol.gov.uk [email protected]

The representative from Grant Thornton made the following points by way of introduction:-

1. This was a report comparing progress against the audit plan for delivering the External Audit opinion on the finance statements and value for money assessment in the 2018/19 financial year; 2. As previously reported, an extended timetable for completion of the 2018/19 audit had been agreed and this would now take place at the Audit Committee on 30 September 2019; 3. Since this report was completed work had continued to progress and the Group and Companies’ audits were now finalised; 4. Bristol Energy had carried out an internal valuation. This was reviewed and it was concluded that their methodology was acceptable; 5. The implications of the McCloud/Sergeant ruling regarding pensions were being assessed by a BCC actuary. Once received the audit report would be updated to reflect the additional liability.

The following points arose from discussion:-

1. Computer software was used to review journal entries and this was a risk based approach due to the vast quantity (300,000 last year). The risk was that money could be moved fraudulently; 2. Councillor Gollop expressed concern regarding the journals and that systems should be in place so that the journal was approved by someone else other than the originator. GT replied that it was for management to decide the level of risk and to balance the day to day financial risk with the policy; 3. Councillor Stevens asked whether GT had seen any guidance on whether pension funds should be disinvesting from fossil fuel investments. GT agreed to report back on this matter; 4. It was noted that BDO had not issued their opinion in September 2018 so GT were not able to review the file until BDO had completed their statutory responsibility. Councillor Gollop observed that BDO could have been more co-operative as the accounts were practically complete.

Resolved – That the Audit Progress report be noted.

9. Annual Governance Statement Tracker (AGS).

The Director – Finance introduced the report and the following points were noted:-

1. The report was tracking the AGS 17/18 action plan and the 16/17 outstanding actions; 2. Since the previous report to Committee in January 2019 all outstanding actions relating to the Bundred review have been implemented; 3. Progress on the 2017/18 AGS tracker showed that two had been transferred to the LGA Peer review action plan to avoid duplication. Eight of the remaining eleven had been implemented and three required a programmed approach and were not therefore finalised.

The following points arose from discussion:-

1. Councillor Stevens congratulated officers on work done to date and in particular on the Business Plans but observed that there was still work to be done regarding openness and transparency in relation to Items 4 and 8 of the Bundred Actions. The Chair responded that BCC was more transparent than ever before and there was a commitment from senior officers in this regard. The Director – Finance added that improvements were continuous and constructive comments were welcomed; 2. Councillor Mead observed that financial reporting was much improved and access to information was far easier;

Page 9 www.bristol.gov.uk [email protected]

3. Simon Cookson proposed that a further Internal Audit of the Bundred implemented recommendations might be undertaken in order to be assured that they were working whilst recognising things would take time to embed. He suggested that twenty actions be reviewed at the end of the year and this was agreed. Following further discussion, it was determined that the Internal Audit plans covered many of the relevant areas referred to in the Bundred tracker and where this is the case, Internal Audit should highlight that in their reports.

Resolved – That the progress made to date against the AGS action plan for 2017/18 be noted.

10. Final Annual Governance Statement 2018/19.

The Deputy Chief Internal Auditor made the following points by way of introduction:-

1. The draft AGS was presented to the Audit Committee in May and has been amended with broadly minor changes and to reflect some comments from GT; 2. The Committee was asked to agree the AGS for 2018/19 as a fair reflection of the internal control and governance environment during 2018/19.

The following points arose from discussion:-

1. The Statement appeared to focus on Cabinet arrangements and did not reflect wider member involvement in decision making. It was agreed to review this; 2. Councillor Stevens observed that BCC secondary schools appeared to be performing better than Academies and asked whether BCC had any statutory powers to require Academies to improve. It was agreed that Education colleagues would be consulted and report back on this matter; 3. Councillor Stevens referred to page 49 and the sentence ….’strategic leadership team (SLT) accountable to members….’ and suggested that this should be developed more as he believed SLT to be mostly accountable to the Mayor. In response, he was informed that it was the role of SLT to serve all members; 4. Councillor Gollop referred to the importance of officers to assist members with training and scrutiny and felt that the training sessions were currently unstructured and without good notice. He added that there had now been improvements on the Forward Plan but there was still insufficient description. He asked the Committee to continue to raise the management of the Forward Plan; 5. It was noted that a limited assurance opinion from Internal Audit had been issued for the third year running and a detailed review had been undertaken by SLT to obtain greater clarity as to the root cause of the issue. Many of the causes identified are already addressed by corporate action plans eg the Organisational Improvement Plan. It was agreed to share some of the Action Plans with the Committee; 6. The effectiveness of the Whistleblowing policy was reviewed and an employee survey had informed that review and a number of measures were being considered to improve arrangements. It was agreed to re-circulate a recent email which set out the current position of the equalities and inclusion work programme; 7. Reference was made to Page 65 and the meaning of the paragraph on Bristol Energy’s ‘inflight project’. It was agreed that this be rewritten to provide greater clarity for the reader.

Page 10 www.bristol.gov.uk [email protected]

Resolved – That the final Annual Governance Statement be agreed as a fair reflection of the internal control and governance environment during 2018/19 and to date subject to the amendments agreed at Audit Committee on 29 July 2019.

11. Interim Audit Activity Report for period 1 April 2019 to 30 June 2019.

The Deputy Chief Internal Auditor summarised the key points of the report and the following comments arose:-

1. The Chair, noting that the Committee would not meet until 30 September, requested that members be kept up to date on the recruitment of staff within IA; 2. Reference was made to page 80 and the new Model for Education and Skills. It was reported that IA did not have the required expertise in this area to add value; 3. Reference was made to page 82 – the revised audit opinion categories. Councillor Gollop was surprised at the use of the term ‘in control’ which he believed was never justified; IA agreed to review the opinions again. 4. Councillor Gollop referred to page 84 and stated that the narrative did not explain why risk and assurance were assessed differently and this should be clear for the reader; 5. Reference was made to page 87 – Schemes of Delegation. A Limited Assurance opinion had been given in this instance rather than no assurance. This was to reflect that arrangements had been in place but had not been updated following restructure. .

Resolved – That the accumulative work of the Internal audit team during the period 1 April to 30 June 2019 be noted.

12. Corporate Risk Management Arrangements and the Q4 2018/19 Corporate Risk Report Update.

The Council’s Risk Manager introduced the report and the following points arose from discussion:-

1. Councillor Stevens referred to a response he had received from the Mayor’s Office regarding the increased risk involved in housing provision. He did not believe that Risk Management was being given sufficient importance based on this response. The Risk Manager replied that she had met with the housing team to provide some training on Risk Management. She would take this point back to them; 2. Councillor Stevens referred to Councillor Thomas’s statement regarding Arena Island and suggested that the value for money and legal advice might need reassessment with regard to risk and was informed that the value of the risk was global and not a legal risk. The original Cabinet report was about the principles and now the detail was being considered; 3. Consideration was currently being given to key actions to support the air quality risk; 4. Reference was made to Page 129 – and whether consideration should be given to adding aspects of whistleblowing in order to give more legitimacy. It was noted that the document aimed to embed Risk Management and the detail, including the capacity to deliver, would be fleshed out later; 5. Councillor Gollop expressed concern regarding the issues over the consistency and accuracy of legal advice in relation to 2 Call In Sub-Committees recently held and the risk associated with making a decision based on flawed advice. He also reported that in his view the legal advice to Cabinet and back benchers was inconsistent and was an ongoing governance concern. It was agreed to report back to the Head of Legal Services on this matter for response in the Action Sheet. The Director – Finance

Page 11 www.bristol.gov.uk [email protected] observed that this seemed to be a case of version control and that Legal Services should liaise with the Risk Management Manager.

At this point Councillor Jackson left.

Resolved – That the progress made on the Council’s Risk Management arrangements and the Q4 2018/19 Corporate Risk report update be noted as a source of assurance that risk management was in place and developing.

13. Updated Draft Statement of Accounts 2018/19.

The Committee was informed that there had been no material changes but some points of clarification in the narrative. No objections had been raised after consultation. The Committee was asked to note the revised statement of accounts prior to its publication on the Council’s website on 31 July 2019.

The following points arose from discussion:-

1. Councillor Stevens referred to Page 208 – observing that useable reserves had increased again and Page 215 – the increased return on property had been reasonable; 2. It was noted that it at the last meeting it was agreed to place the Glossary at the front of the accounts for ease of use for the reader. This would be actioned for future Statements of Accounts; 3. Councillor Gollop noted that Bristol Energy Company’s accounts did not reflect balances paid by customers and asked for assurance that this would be reflected in BCC’s accounts. The Director – Finance replied that this could be reflected in BCC’s accounts along with a supplementary note and an adjustment would be made for transparency; 4. Councillor Gollop referred to the 1.5m deficit in accounts which had been written off for eight schools that had become academies and asked where this could be found in the Statement of Accounts and the contingent liability on deficit balances of every other school. The Director – Finance reported that the number of schools in deficit was often reported and some were lengthy and historical deficits and the Dedicated School Grant meant that there was a statutory obligation to meet that cost and therefore a provision had been made for it from the general fund; 5. The Chair thanked the Finance team for the detailed work undertaken and the substantial improvements made in reporting in the last few years.

Resolved – That the updated, draft and unaudited Statement of Accounts for 2018/19 be noted.

14. Audit and Assurance arrangements for Council trading companies 2018/19.

The Director of Commercialisation reported that in the future the arrangements would be reported by one Audit Committee considering both Bristol Energy Ltd and Bristol Waste Company under Bristol Holding Company.

The following points arose from discussion:-

1. Councillor Gollop declared that he sat on the Shareholder Group as an observer but was not involved in the detail of audit and governance. He observed that as Goram Homes was an embryonic start up business and it was important to have controls and systems in place to avoid it going adrift;

Page 12 www.bristol.gov.uk [email protected]

2. It was reported that the companies were keen to understand how best to develop a cohesive set of policies that BCC were happy with. The Chair noted that BCC policies were of a good standard and hoped that it would be possible to harmonise the companies’ policies with BCC’s; 3. It was important to strike the right balance between the companies delivering their objectives whilst adhering to sound policies and procedures.

Resolved – That the Annual Review and letters of Assurance from the Chairs of the Audit Committees for Bristol Energy Ltd and Bristol Waste Company Ltd be noted.

Meeting ended 5pm.

Chair

Page 13 www.bristol.gov.uk Audit Committee Action Sheet – actions from meeting held on 29 July 2019.

Action Item/report Action Responsible Action taken / number officer(s) progress

1 Action Sheet Statement of Accounts - Glossary to come before Michael Pilcher Completed for revised the Accounts. Statement of Accounts.

2 Audit Progress Report Avon Pension Fund – have external auditors had Grant Thornton Cllr Stevens seen any guidance on whether pension funds responded to should be disinvesting from fossil fuel investments. Page 14 Page

3 AGS 2018/19 Does a LA have powers to bring about Denise Murray to Paper from Richard improvements to Academies consult Hanks circulated to Education the Committee on 27 August 4 AGS 2018/19 To share some of the Action Plans with the Denise Murray Organisational Committee Improvement Plan and LGA Peer Review circulated 20 Agenda Item 4 September 2019. 5 AGS 2018/19 To recirculate email regarding equalities and Allison Taylor Actioned 30 July inclusion work programme

6 AGS 2018/19 Page 65 – paragraph regarding Bristol Energy – to Alison Mullis Wording was amend for clearer understanding. amended for Final AGS. Action Item/report Action Responsible Action taken / number officer(s) progress

7 Interim Audit Activity Report To inform the Committee on progress in Melanie Henchy- Actioned. Members of recruitment within IA McCarthy the Committee emailed 16/09/2019

8 Corporate Risk Management Concern expressed regarding the consistency and Allison Taylor to This was reported. Arrangements accuracy of legal advice in relation to 2 call In sub report back to C’ttees recently held and the risk associated with Nancy making a decision based on the flawed advice Rollason/Lucy Fleming

9 Updating of Constitution To refer the matter of the amendment of the CPR Nancy Rollason To be discussed at DC Page 15 Page regarding DC Committee decision making to DC Leads meeting on 30 members for consideration and the outcome be Sept considered at FC

9 Updating of Constitution That the Audit Committee Terms of Reference be Lucy Fleming Reported and agreed amended to state that Party Group Leaders are not at FC on 10 Sept eligible to sit on the Audit Committee. AUDIT COMMITTEE WORK PROGRAMME 2019/20

Meeting Date Report Author Report Details Routine Work ToR Ref Officer Providing Report Comments: Programme/ Other? Tuesday 28th May 2019 Proposed Training: Statement of Accounts Training Finance to facilitate To provide committee member with an overview of Public Sector accounts and the key areas to examine. 2:00 PM External Audit: Update Report Routine 1.8/1.9 External Audit Lead

Internal Audit: Draft Annual Governance Statement 2018/19 Routine 2.5/4.4 Deputy Chief Internal Auditor Annual Fraud Report Routine 2.4/2.10 Deputy Chief Internal Auditor Audit Committee Annual Report to Full Council (Draft) Routine 5.1 Deputy Chief Internal Auditor Internal Audit Annual Report 2018/19 Routine 1.6 Deputy Chief Internal Auditor

Finance: Draft Statement of Accounts 2018/19 Routine 3.1 Executive Director Resources / Director Finance Legal:

Monday 29th July 2019 Training Statement of Accounts - from the External Auditor's Prospective Grant Thornton Training arranged for Thursday 25th July at 5pm. Room 1P07

2:00 PM External Audit: Update Report Routine 1.8/1.9 External Audit Lead

Internal Audit: Annual Governance Statement 2018/19 Update Routine 3.1 Head of Paid Service/S151 Officer Page 16 Page Internal Audit Activity Report, including revised Audit Opinions (1) Routine 1.5/1.7/2.1 Deputy Chief Internal Auditor

Risk & Insurance Corporate Risk Report (Q4) Routine 4.1/4.3 Risk & Insurance Manager

Finance Statement of Accounts 2018/19 Routine 3.1 Director of Finance Companies Assurance (Letters to Audit Committee) AGS Tracker

Legal For Information: Constituional Update Ad hoc 2.1 Director of Legal and Democratic Services

Monday, 30th Training: Treasury Management Training External Consultant Training to be provided outside of the meeting day September 2019 Finance: Treasury Management - Annual Report 2018/19 Routine 3.3 Director of Finance 2:00 PM External Audit: Final Statement of Accounts and Annual Governance Statement for 2018/19 ISA260 Report Routine 1.8/1.9 External Audit Lead

Risk Management: Review of a Specific Corporate Risk - Asbestos Management Routine 4.1/4.3 Risk Owner/Risk Manager

Corporate Risk Report (Q1) Routine 4.1/4.3 Risk & Insurance Manager

Customer Relations Ombudsman Report Routine Customer Relations Manager Agenda Item 6

Internal Audit: Internal Audit Activity Report (2) Routine 1.5/1.7/2.1 Chief Internal Auditor

Monday, 25th Planned Training: Role of the Audit Committee. Date and time of training to be confirmed Training CIPFA Training to be provided outside of the meeting day November 2019 External Audit: Update Report Routine 1.8/1.10 External Audit Lead 2.00 PM Risk Management: Review of a Specific Corporate Risk - Infrastructure Risk Routine 4.1/4.3 Risk Manager / Risk Owner

Internal Audit: Internal Audit Half-Year Activity Report (3) Routine 1.5/1.7/2.1 Chief Internal Auditor Meeting Date Report Author Report Details Routine Work ToR Ref Officer Providing Report Comments: Programme/ Other? Internal Audit - Half-Year Investigation Update Report and Anti-Fraud and Anti- Routine 2.4./2.10 Chief Internal Auditor Corruption Policy Internal Audit Quality Assurance and Improvement Plan Routine 1.6 Chief Internal Auditor Internal Audit Charter & Strategy Refresh Routine 1.1 Chief Internal Auditor Audit Committee Half Year Report to Full Council (Draft) New 5.1 Chief Internal Auditor

Finance: Treasury Management Half-Year Report Routine 3.3 Director - Finance

Monday, 20th Janaury Training to be provided outside of the meeting day 2020 External Audit: External Audit Update Report Routine 1.8/1.9 External Audit Lead 2:00 PM Internal Audit: Annual Whistleblowing Review Routine 2.4 Chief Internal Auditor Annual Review of the effectiveness of the system of Internal Audit Routine 1.13 Director - Finance

Risk Management: Corporate Risk Report (Q2) and Policy Routine 4.1/4.3 Risk and Insurance Manager

Monday, 23rd March Proposed Training: Audit Committee Effectiveness Workshop Chief Internal Audit/Head of Internal Audit To take the opportunity to look back over the year and 2020 determine what went well and identify areas for improvement. 2:00 PM Risk Management: Review of a Specific Corporate Risk Routine 4.1/4.3 Risk Owner/Risk Manager

Page 17 Page Corporate Risk Report (Q3) and Policy Routine 4.1/4.3 Risk and Insurance Manager

External Audit: Audit Update Routine 1.8/1.10 External Audit Lead Grants Audit Report Routine 1.8/1.10 External Audit Lead

Internal Audit: Draft Annual Plan 2020/21 Routine 1.2 Chief Internal Auditor Internal Audit Development Plan Update Routine 1.6 Chief Internal Auditor Internal Audit Activity Report (5) Routine 1.5/1.7/2.1 Chief Internal Auditor

Legal: Review of Committee Terms of Reference Routine Director: Legal& Democratic Services Corporate: Inspection Agency reports Routine 1.12 Head of Corporate Finance Agenda Item 7

Audit Committee 30th September 2019

Report of: Service Director Legal & Democratic Services (Monitoring Officer)

Title: Review of the Member Officer Protocol

Ward: Citywide

Officer presenting report: Tim O’Gara, Service Director Legal & Democratic Services (Monitoring Officer)

Recommendation;

That the Committee approve the revised Member Officer Protocol.

Summary

In September 2018 the LGA Peer Review recommended that the effectiveness of the Member Officer Protocol should be reviewed. Officers have produced the attached amended Protocol in conjunction with the Values and Ethics Sub Committee of the Audit Committee.

Page 18 1. Policy

Not applicable.

2. Consultation

Internal The Mayor and Party Group Leaders The Values and Ethics Sub Committee of the Audit Committee

External Not applicable.

3. Context

In September 2018 the LGA peer review report commented:

“BCC should review its governance arrangements to ensure they are more effective in enabling good decision making. Specifically addressing: a. forward plan arrangements to make them more transparent and open, ensuring information is shared in good time and used responsibly by all b. structure, focus and impact of its Scrutiny arrangements c. the effectiveness of the application of its member and officer protocol

Between members and officers, for the most part we saw and heard about respectful relationships. However, this was not universally so and in some areas we heard examples where the opposite was true. BCC has this year sought to direct attention to reviewing its protocol and using the opportunity of the development of the new values and behaviours to undertake development with the senior officers within the council. The council has a Member Development Steering Group which has prioritised the need for similar training for Members. The peer team would endorse this as an effective way of ensuring the councils values are shared, owned and understood across the political as well as officer side of the council.”

The Council’s Action plan in response specifies that the Monitoring officer will Review the Member Officer Protocol as part of the update to the Constitution.

Members are asked to approve the revised protocol, before it is taken to Full Council for adoption (provisional date 12th November 19).

4. Other Options Considered

None necessary.

5. Risk Assessment

Not applicable. Page 19 6. Legal and Resource Implications

As set out in the report.

7. Financial:

(a) Revenue Not applicable.

(b) Capital Not applicable.

Land/Property Not applicable.

Human Resources Not applicable.

Appendices: Appendix A – Member Officer Protocol September 2019

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT 1985 Background Papers: LGA Corporate Peer Challenge 2018

Page 20 Draft Protocol on Member/Officer Relations

1. An effective working relationship between elected Members of the Council (’Members’) and Council staff (‘Officers’) is critical to the successful operation of Council business. Excellent working relationships are required to deliver best value services to local citizens and to maintain confidence in local government in Bristol. This protocol is designed to help Members and Officers to perform effectively by giving guidance on their respective roles and their relationship with each other.

Respective roles

2. Members and Officers are public servants. They are indispensable to each other, but their responsibilities are distinct. All Members (including the Directly Elected Mayor) are responsible to the electorate and serve only so long as their term of office lasts. Officers are responsible to the Council as a corporate body and not to any single Member. Their job is to give advice to all Members (including the Mayor) and to the authority, and to carry out the authority's work under the direction and control of the Council, its Executive and relevant Committees. Officers are accountable to the Head of Paid Service.

The role of Political Assistants and the advisor to the Mayor are covered under specific legislation.1

3. Respect between Members and Officers, both personally and for their different roles, is crucial to the successful operation of the Council's business.

Members’ roles

4. Members generally have six main areas of responsibility:

(a) Determining Council Policy, Budget and Strategy; (b) Making decisions within overall Council policy (for example on planning applications, or on the establishment or closure of a school); (c) Monitoring and reviewing performance; (d) Representing Bristol and the Local Authority; (e) Community Leadership; (f) Acting as advocates on behalf of constituents;

It is not the role of Members to involve themselves in the day-to-day management of the Council's services.

1 S.9 Local Government and Housing Act 1989

Reg.3(7) The Local Authorities (Elected Mayor and Mayor’s Assistant) (England) Regulations 2002 reg.3(1)(c) of The Local Government OfficersPage (Political 21 Restrictions) Regulations 1990 5. The Mayor, Members of the Executive and Committee Chairs and Vice Chairs have additional powers or responsibilities. As a result, their relationships with Officers may differ from and have additional complexity compared to those of Members without those responsibilities. However, such Members must still respect that Officers have a duty to be impartial and therefore must not ask them to undertake work of a political nature.

6. All Members and the Mayor have the same rights and duties in their relationships with Officers.

Officers’ Roles

7. The role of Officers is to give advice and information to Members to inform their decision making and to implement the policies and decisions of the Council. In giving their advice, it is the responsibility of the Officer to present their professional views and recommendations. Members must not pressurise an Officer to make a recommendation contrary to their professional view or seek to persuade an Officer to withdraw a report.

8. In discharging their role as an Officer of the authority, staff must act in a politically neutral way.

9. Certain officers2 hold statutory posts, which confer legal responsibilities over and above their obligations to the authority and its Members. Members must respect these obligations and must not obstruct them in the discharge of these responsibilities. Certain Officers hold politically restricted posts. Additional guidance can be found at Appendix A.

Expectations

10. Members can expect from Officers:

(a) Commitment to the Council as a whole and not only to a part of it, or to any political group; (b) Respect and courtesy; (c) The highest standards of integrity; (d) A working partnership; (e) An understanding of and support for respective roles, workloads and pressures; (f) Timely responses to enquiries and complaints i.e. within the corporate standard of 7 working days; (g) Professional advice, not influenced by political views or preference, which does not compromise the political neutrality of Officers; (h) Regular up-to-date information that is appropriate and relevant to their needs, having regard to any individual responsibilities that they have; (i) Awareness of and sensitivity to the political environment; Page 22 2 Head of Paid Service, Monitoring Officer, Chief Finance Officer, Director of Adult Social Services, Director of Children’s Services, Director of Public Health and Statutory Scrutiny Officer. (j) Training and development in order to carry out their role effectively; (k) Appropriate confidentiality; (l) Support for the role of Members as the local representatives of the authority; (m) Compliance with the Employees’ Code of Conduct.

Officers can expect from Members:

(a) Respect and courtesy; (b) The highest standards of integrity, including maintaining confidentiality where required; (c) A working partnership; (d) An understanding of and support for individual Officers’ roles, workloads and pressures; (e) Political leadership; (f) Not to be subject to bullying or to be put under pressure, taking into consideration the seniority of roles and potential vulnerability of Officers in junior roles; (g) That Members will not use their position or relationships with Officers to seek to advance their personal interests, or those of others, or to influence decisions improperly; (h) Compliance with the Members’ Code of Conduct; (i) Participation in any mandatory training sessions e.g. before sitting on Selection or Regulatory Committees.

Close Personal Relationships

11. Both Members and Officers must maintain public confidence in the separation of their roles. Close personal relationships between Members and Officers can cause confusion and get in the way of the proper discharge of the authority's functions. Additional guidance can be found at Appendix A.

Political Groups

12. The operation of political groups is an integral feature of local government. They have an important part to play in the development of policy and the political management of the authority. It is in the interest of the authority to support the effective operation of political groups.

13. The impartiality of Officers should not be compromised through their support of political groups. Officers may assist party groups if requested to do so, but must at all times maintain political neutrality. All Officers must, in their dealings with political groups and individual Members, treat them in a fair and even-handed manner. All groups must be informed of party briefings and offered an identical session.

14. Officers may not engage in political discussion when attending party group meetings. Information will be providedPage on 23 the issue being considered and appropriate questions answered. Officers must withdraw after any briefing and questions, and before political discussion commences. Officers should not support political groups by writing political reports.

Party group meetings do not make decisions on behalf of the Council. Where Officers provide information and advice to a party group meeting in relation to Council business, this is not a substitute for providing all necessary information and advice to the relevant Committee or Sub-Committee of the Council when the matter in question is considered.

15. Special care needs to be taken if Officers are providing information and advice to a party group meeting which includes people who are neither Members nor Officers of the Council, as they are not bound by the Council Code of Conduct. Officers must be cautious about attending and/or giving advice to such meetings and seek guidance from the Head of Paid service or the Monitoring Officer if they have any concerns about doing so.

16. Officers must respect the confidentiality of any party group discussions at which they are present and in particular they must not relay the content of any discussion to another party group.

17. The Council can only provide support services (e.g. stationery, typing, printing, photocopying, transport etc.) to Members to assist them in discharging their role as Members of the Council. Council resources should not be used in connection with party political or campaigning activity or for private purposes, including the use of ICT and social media as set out in the Member Code of Conduct.

Reports to Council, Executive or Committee

18. Under the Constitution adopted by the Council to comply with the Local Government Act 2000, decisions may be made by the directly Elected Mayor or Members of the Executive to whom the Mayor has delegated decision-making power. In other cases, they may also be taken by the Full Council or committees or sub-committees. The Council's Constitution provides that Member decisions may only be taken on the basis of a written report containing all relevant considerations. Reports to the Mayor, Executive (whether collectively or otherwise) or to a committee or sub-committee should be written by the Executive Director or another officer authorised by them. Additional guidance can be found at Appendix A.

Access to Information

19. Members have a right to view Council documents (including both exempt and confidential material) in accordance with the statutory framework. Members may also be entitled to access information which is reasonably necessary to enable them to exercise their duties as a Member of the Council. Members with a particular role may have an additionalPage (and 24 in some cases statutory) right to access information, for example:

(a) Executive Members - matters relating to their portfolio; (b) Scrutiny Members - matters relating to their terms of reference and committee business; (c) Ward Members - matters with particular implications for the ward (i.e. significantly more than for the general city).

20. All Members are also entitled to be briefed on the same basis and within the same constraints as set out above.

21. Access to information is also limited where: (a) The information is primarily needed for a non-Council purpose; (b) There is a conflict of interest; (c) There is an over-riding individual right of confidentiality (for example, in a children’s or employment matter).

22. The Proper Officer will make final decisions on Member access to information.

23. Members may have access to exempt information in reports. Exempt information is defined in our Constitution in the Access to Information Procedure rules APR10.3.

24. The presumption is that all information in formal reports should be open to the public but, where this is not possible, the public will be made aware of the nature of any information that is being discussed in exempt session.

25. The process for deciding on whether information in a report is exempt and the relevant Member access is as follows:

(a) Report authors must ensure that as much information as possible is open by using exempt appendices and/or redactions; (b) Where an Officer considers that information may be exempt, the Proper Officer will decide based on the rules set out above; (c) If the Proper Officer is satisfied that there is information that may need to be discussed in exempt session, they will consult with the Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board or relevant Scrutiny Commission before making a final decision; (d) Members of the relevant Scrutiny Commission will be given access to the exempt information in the report once the papers are published. In some instances the Proper Officer may decide that this will be by managed access (i.e. viewing of hard copy documents), but this will only be in exceptional circumstances.

26. Apart from information in reports, confidential material may be shared with Members if requested (except where there is an overriding Council interest e.g. protecting its legal and financial position) and natural justice requires disclosure (for example, giving an individual the chance to respond to allegations). All requests for access to confidentialPage information 25 will be considered by the Proper Officer. 27. Executive Members, individually and collectively, are entitled to regular confidential briefings on matters relevant to their portfolios and in support of the policies they are developing, prior to the formulation of formal proposals. Informal briefings cannot be a substitute for providing all necessary advice in the formal decision-making process. Officers must ensure that their objective professional advice is robustly presented in the formal report.

28. Scrutiny Chairs are entitled to regular and confidential briefings on matters relating to Scrutiny business (as a group, or individually).

29. Any unauthorised disclosure of Council documents will be treated as a breach of the Code of Conduct for Members (and Officers) and may also expose the Member to the risk of legal action from a third party.

Publicity

30. The Council has a duty to publicise its services and activity and to explain its objectives and policies to citizens in an accessible manner.

31. The Government has issued a code of Recommended Practice on Local Authority Publicity which deals with the conventions that apply to publicity. It requires that all local authorities shall have regard to its provisions in reaching decisions relating to publicity.

32. Particular care should be taken in relation to any publicity in the run-up to an election. Prior to each pre-election period, specific guidance is provided by the Monitoring Officer to all Members and Officers on the necessary precautions required in relation to publicity.

33. The Code does not apply to press releases and publicity that Members may arrange and distribute in their individual political capacity. Members should refer to the Member Code of Conduct, which sets out the requirements related to publicity and communications. Members should neither use Council resources for party political purposes, nor ask officers to do so.

Scrutiny Function

34. Scrutiny Members determine their programme for scrutinising the implementation of decisions and recommending policy changes to the executive. Reports commissioned and evidence requested will avoid:

(a) Duplicating work which is being contemplated or already being undertaken in support of developing executive policies; (b) Incurring unreasonable costs and use of Officer time.

35. Overview and Scrutiny bodies have statutory powers to scrutinise decisions the executive is planning to take, thosePage it plans 26 to implement, and those that have already been taken/implemented. Creating a strong organisational culture that supports scrutiny work that can add value by, for example, improving policy- making and the efficient delivery of public services.

36. Effective Overview and Scrutiny should: (a) Provide constructive ‘critical friend’ challenge; (b) Amplify the voices and concerns of the public; (c) Be led by independent people who take responsibility for their role; (d) Drive improvement in public services.

37. A Scrutiny Commission does not have the power to require a department to prepare reports for it, but the obligation upon Officers is to make all reasonable efforts to support Scrutiny and requests for information will only be refused in exceptional circumstances. The Head of Paid Service will have the final decision on whether a report will be provided to Scrutiny.

38. Where the Executive and a Scrutiny Commission are considering the same service area, the Executive Member, relevant Scrutiny Commission Chair and Head of Paid Service should agree a joint programme of work and the order in which reports should be consulted upon and presented.

Further advice on the application of this Protocol can be obtained from the Monitoring Officer. This Protocol will be reviewed annually by the Values and Ethics Sub Committee of the Audit Committee and guidance on its application will be provided as appropriate.

Updated 17th September 2019

Page 27 APPENDIX A

Additional Guidance Notes

1. Executive Decisions

1.1 Executive Members introduce reports at Cabinet. Officer advice should be obtained, if possible, before the meeting on any alternative recommendation to be moved in order to ensure that relevant operational, financial and legal factors are taken into account.

1.2 The principle of unified advice requires that financial and legal and other implications of a decision are obtained and made clear in the report. The Article 14 principles of decision making must be taken into account when preparing the report.

1.3 Executive Members determine the timetable for developing their policies, including: (a) The point at which confidential ideas become formal proposals for publication; (b) Who to consult and to what deadline; (c) The timing of executive reports.

1.4 Deferring a report is an executive decision and responsibility (within legal constraints). The Chief Financial Officer and/or the Monitoring Officer may require a report to be withdrawn.

2. Councillor Involvement in Casework and Staff Issues

2.1 A Member pursuing a ward matter on behalf of a family member or friend should declare the relationship and consider whether to ask another Member to represent.

2.2 Members should not provide a reference in relation to staffing matters within the Council (other than in exceptional circumstances). They should avoid involvement in staff lobbying outside of formal procedures.

2.3 Officers may raise issues with their local Councillor as citizens. They should not lobby a Councillor inappropriately on personal employment or budgetary matters in accordance with the Code of Conduct for Employees.

2.4 Councillors should refuse to respond to inappropriate lobbying from Officers and inform the Head of Paid Service who can direct the individual to the appropriate channels.

2.5 Senior Officers should ensure their staff are aware of these requirements and ways that their views can be put forward. Page 28 3. Politically Restricted Posts

3.1. The Local Government and Housing Act 1989 introduced a regime aimed at ensuring that key local authority employees are politically impartial. The Act designates certain posts as ‘politically restricted’ and those who hold such positions are disqualified from holding office as a Member of Parliament or Member of a local authority.

3.2 The following posts are politically restricted:

a) The Head of Paid service; b) The Monitoring Officer and the Chief Financial Officer; c) The Chief Officers and Deputy Chief Officers; d) The Political Assistants and the advisor to the Mayor; e) Any other posts that conduct the following activities:  Giving advice on a regular basis to the authority themselves, to any committee or sub-committee of the authority or to any joint committee on which the authority are represented or to the executive of the authority, to any committee of that executive, or to any member of that executive who is also a member of the authority;  Speaking on behalf of the authority on a regular basis to journalists or broadcasters.

It is possible for Officers to apply to be removed from the list and details can be obtained from the Monitoring Officer.

Page 29 Agenda Item 8

Report for Audit Committee

Audit Committee 30th September 2019

Report of: Service Director Legal & Democratic Services (Monitoring Officer)

Title: Administrative Changes to the Constitution.

Ward: Citywide

Officer presenting report: Tim O’Gara, Service Director Legal & Democratic Services (Monitoring Officer)

Recommendation

That the Audit Committee note the administrative amendments to the Constitution as set out in the report, which address inconsistencies and improve formatting.

Summary

Responsibility for reviewing the Council’s Constitution was delegated to the Audit Committee in December 2018. The report sets out a number of administrative amendments to the Constitution which have been made by the Monitoring Officer under delegated powers.

Page 30 Report for Audit Committee

Policy

1. The Audit Committee is a key component of the Council’s governance framework. Its function is to provide an independent and high level resource to support good governance and effective public financial management.

2. The purpose of an Audit Committee is to provide those charged with governance with independent assurance on the adequacy of the risk management framework, the internal control environment and the integrity of the financial reporting and annual governance processes.

Consultation

Internal The Mayor and Party Group Leaders.

External Not applicable

Context

Administrative changes

The Constitution is kept under review by the Monitoring Officer to ensure that inaccuracies and formatting issues are rectified.

Below lists those actioned to date:

Document Name Actions Taken Part 2 Articles of the  Added footer to say August 2019. constitution  Deleted Local Transport Plan as a decision for Full Council as now the sole responsibility of the WECA Mayor. Also deleted Transport Act 2000 and renumbered the footnotes 7 and 8. Updated 7th August 2019.  A8.03(b)(iii) – deleted ‘service’ from ‘service directors’  A13.01 Management Structure – post updated from ‘Executive Director Adults, Children and Education’ to ‘Executive Director People’  Deleted error - said “please check” within doc.

Part 3 Responsibilities and  Part 3.2b TOR of Committees - Changed remit of Communities Functions including TOR Scrutiny Commission to reflect that agreed at OSM.  Part 3.2b TOR of Committees PROWG - Changed Communities directorate to Growth and Regeneration Directorate.  Part 3.2 removal of dead link.  Part 3.2c - Licensing Functions and PSP Functions - Changed Communities directorate to Growth and Regeneration Directorate. Page 31 Report for Audit Committee

Document Name Actions Taken  Local Choice Functions - Changed Communities directorate to Growth and Regeneration Directorate.  Part 3.6b - Proper Officer Functions - Changed Communities directorate to Growth and Regeneration Directorate.  Changed footer to August 2019.

Part 4.1(a) Council procedure  Footer – Changed date of changes to April 2019 rules  CPR2.1(v) – wording removed “** Suggested additional wording - Answers to questions will be given verbally, with a written reply provided to all questions within 10 working days of the meeting.” This information is in CPR10.8  CPR1.1 – there are two ‘x’s – list reformatted.  Formatted index into a table format  Unbolded text within CPR10.4  “Council debates on petitions” is listed in the index under CPR10.9 which is Member presentation of petitions. Changed to CPR10.1(f)  CPR1.1 Numbering corrected from (x) onwards  CPR2.1 Numbering corrected from (viii) onwards  CPR 9.4 Replaced bullet points with numbering for ease of reference  CPR 10.1 Amended numbering for consistency and replaced bullet points with lettering for ease of reference  CPR 10.8 Amended numbered reference to CPR 10.3  CPR13.6 Tidied formatting  CPR13.10 Tidied formatting  CPR15 Tidied formatting  CPR17 Tidied formatting  CPR12 (m) – timings say 3.5hrs. Amended to be consistent with CPR1.2(2).

Part 4.1(b) Access to  Formatted index into a table. information procedure rules  Changed footer to April 2019  Deleted unnecessary page breaks  APR14.1 – Period of the Forward Plan. Deleted paragraph referring to four months’ notice and publication on the first working day. Practice is monthly 28 days’ notice with other items up until the end of the municipal year (although that detail is not required)  APR14.2 – added ‘n’ to make ‘an executive function’.  APR18.2 – taken out ‘the signature of the executive Member’ changed to ‘reference to the name of the executive member’  Formatting into new table format template.  APR4 –added (1) and (2) to the paragraphs.  APR6 – changed from abc to i,ii,iii Page 32 Report for Audit Committee

Document Name Actions Taken  APR8.1 – changed from abc to i,ii,iii  APR10.3 – assimilated ‘categories of exempt information’ into the paragraph so that no longer a link to another stand alone document *  APR13 – changed from abc to i, ii, iii  APR14.2 – changed from abc to i, ii, iii  APR17.1 – changed from abc to i, ii, iii  APR18.2 – changed from abc to i, ii, iii  APR20.1 – changed from – (dashes) to i, ii, iii  APR21.1 – second strata changed to I, II, III

Part 4.1(b.1) Categories of  Assimilated the appendix into APR rules and removed (see Exempt Information above) (*)

Other Options Considered

None necessary

Risk Assessment

None necessary

Legal and Resource Implications

Legal Local authorities are under a statutory obligation to keep their Constitutions up-to-date (s.9P Local Government Act 2000). Under the Council’s Constitution, this duty is discharged by the Monitoring Officer (Article 16.01).

Legal advice provided by Nancy Rollason, Head of Legal Services

Financial (a) Revenue Not applicable

(b) Capital Not applicable

Land/Property Not applicable

Human Resources Not applicable

Appendices: None Page 33 Report for Audit Committee

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT 1985 Background Papers: None

Page 34 Agenda Item 9

Report for Audit Committee

Audit Committee 30th September 2019

Report of: Tim O’Gara, Monitoring Officer

Title: Annual Report of Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman Decisions

Ward: Citywide

Officer Presenting Report: Nancy Rollason Head of Legal Service

Recommendation

That the Audit committee note the report and refer to Full Council for consideration.

Summary

The report summarises the finding made in respect of the Council by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGO) in 2018/19. One public report was made and details were reported to Cabinet on 1st May 2018 and 2nd October 2018:- https://democracy.bristol.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=135&MId=3089&Ver=4 https://democracy.bristol.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=135&MId=3095&Ver=4

The significant issues in the report are: The LGO made one public report and concludes that there were 12 upheld complaints out of a total of 124 cases in 18/19 as compared to 12 complaints upheld out of a total of 129 cases in the previous year. Housing x 1 case Benefits & Tax x 2 cases Planning & Development x 1 case Education & Children’s Services x 2 cases Adult Care Services x 4 cases Environmental Services & Public Protection x 1 case Corporate & Other Services x 1 case

Put last years in brackets Page 35 Any changes made or action taken as a result of the findings are noted in the report at Appendix 1. Report for Audit Committee

Context

1. This report is presented to the Committee to consider for referral to Full Council in line with the duty to report to the Full Council where findings of maladministration or fault have been made by the Ombudsman, summarising the findings made.

2. For this year, the Ombudsman performance data includes lessons learnt with a view to looking at wider improvements that can be achieved. The Ombudsman has now published an interactive map of council performance showing annual performance data for all councils in England, with links to published decision statements, public interest reports, annual letters and information about service improvements that have been agreed by each council. It also highlights those instances where each authority offered a suitable remedy to resolve a complaint before the matter came to the Ombudsman, and the authority’s compliance with the recommendations made to remedy complaints:

https://www.lgo.org.uk/your-councils-performance

st 3. The Ombudsman has sent the Council all findings made in the year ending the 31 March 2019.

4. One public report has been made in respect of the Council in that time. This was reported in detail to Cabinet on the 1st May 2018 and 2nd October (the reports are referenced in the link above).

5. The requirement applies to all Ombudsman complaint decisions, not just those that result in a public report.

6. The LGO has upheld 12 cases in the year to March 2019 compared to 12 the previous year.

7. The Council dealt with 9,148 Stage 1 and Stage 2 complaints in 2018/2019 giving an escalation rate of 1.35% of the total number of cases and 0.13% against the number of upheld cases.

8. The link below taken from the LGSCO website shows that the Council’s upheld rate of 67% is higher than the UK authority average of 55%. However, of the upheld cases the Council has provided satisfactory remedies in 25% of cases compared with the national average of 11%. https://www.lgo.org.uk/your-councils-performance/bristol-city-council/statistics

9. In respect of cases where routine mistakes and service failures have been made, and the Council has agreed to remedy the complaint by implementing the recommendations made following an investigation, the Ombudsman is of the view that the duty to report is satisfactorily discharged if the Monitoring Officer makes a periodic report to the Council summarising the findings on all upheld complaints over a specific period of time.

10. Appendix 1 sets out a summary of the findings made, remedies agreed and lessons learnt still being worked on – suggest that we say to follow.

11. Appendix 2 and 3 sets out comparitor information including by matter and decision respectively

12. The Annual letter from the LGO to the Council is at Appendix 4

13. The Ombudsman has commented:- Unfortunately, there have been other investigations during the year that have not progressed as quickly as they should have. Several of my investigators were delayed by your Council’s failure to respond in a timely way to our requests for information. This is Page 36 Report for Audit Committee

frustrating, particularly for the complainant. I would ask the Council ensures it has robust procedures in place to ensure it responds efficiently and comprehensively to contact from my office.

14. LGO investigators always give a deadline for responses to their investigative enquiries, which is typically 20 working days or, for more urgent cases, a shorter period. Likewise, when they issue Draft Decisions for the Council’s consideration, a deadline of 10 working days is usually given.

15. Complaints Co-ordinators prioritise sending LGSCO correspondence to relevant managers and/or directors for their consideration and always make clear the timescales to be met. They also follow up when responses are not received.

16. This year there has been an increase in cases where services have been slow in responding to LGSCO enquiries and Draft Decisions. It is recognised that officers have significant workloads which may account for this. The Corporate Leadership Board have considered this issue and agreed that Directors will remind all officers in their Directorates of the importance of prioritising LGO casework when. The Complaints Co-ordinators will keep this under review and will report back to the leadership team on progress.

Proposal

That the Committee note the report and refer to Full Council for consideration.

Legal and Resource Implications

Legal

This report is made in compliance with the Council’s duty to report Findings of maladministration or fault to Full Council

Legal advice provided by Nancy Rollason Head of Legal Service

Financial

Appendices:

Appendix 1 – Summary of complaints upheld and lessons learnt Appendix 2 – Comparitor data re subject matter Appendix 3 – Comparitor data re decision Appendix 4 – Annual letter from the LGO

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT 1985 Background Papers:

None

Page 37 Appendix 1

The report summarises the findings made in respect of the Council by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) in 2018/2019. No public reports have been made.

Significant issues in the report are:

The LGSCO has upheld 12 complaints out of a total of 124 cases in 2018/2019 compared with 12 out of 129 in 2017/2018.

The Council dealt with 9,148 Stage 1 and Stage 2 complaints in 2018/2019, which means the escalation rate is 1.35% of the total number of cases, and 0.13% against the upheld number of cases.

The link below taken from the LGSCO website shows that the Council’s upheld rate of 67% is higher than the UK authority average of 55%. However, of the upheld cases the Council has provided satisfactory remedies in 25% of cases compared with the national average of 11%. https://www.lgo.org.uk/your-councils-performance/bristol-city-council/statistics

Summary of upheld cases:-

Housing x 1 case

Benefits & Tax x 2 cases

Planning & Development x 1 case

Education & Children’s Services x 2 cases

Adult Care Services x 4 cases

Environmental Services & Public Protection x 1 case

Corporate & Other Services x 1 case

NOTE:- 2 cases stated as Upheld have not been explained by the LGSCO below

Upheld cases summary

Bristol City Council (18 000 762)

Page 38 Statement Upheld Charging 30-Nov-2018

Summary: There was fault by the Council. It did not give the complainant clear information or advice about how it would charge for her care. This meant the family could not make informed decisions about how to pay for care and were unaware that the Council would backdate an increase in charges. The Council also took too long to deal with her son's complaint about this. The Council has agreed to refund the backdated charges, pay the complainant's son £200 for his time and trouble in pursuing matters, share this decision with relevant staff, and identify the lessons learned to prevent this recurring.

Action points and Learning

Action plan to improve services in relation to Care Home charges 18000762.docx

Bristol City Council (18 007 898)

Statement Upheld Other 16-Nov-2018

Summary: The executors of the late Mr D complained that the Council failed to terminate his council tenancy when he moved to residential care and so charged him both rent and care fees. The Council has acknowledged that it should have done this and that its communications with the executors were lacking. The Council has agreed to pay the additional fees incurred by the estate in corresponding with it on this issue. The Council has also reviewed its processes.

Action points and Learning

Executors complained of failure to terminate tenancy when the Service User moved to residential care and charged him rent and care fees. Paid additional fees incurred by estate and reviewed processes.

Remedy response sent to Ombudsman: “Following this complaint the following steps have been taken to improve the Council’s processes to make sure that deputyship is dealt with in good time, where there is an accruing rent liability.

• Additional resources have been agreed for the Council’s Financial Protection Team to increase the staffing level by two officers. This will increase the supports to front facing staff to progress these cases and ensure a more timely response to cases where people lack capacity in respect to their finances and where there is no one willing, suitable or able to manager their property or affairs. This will give the team capacity to deal with more cases. The post has been recruited to and the post holders will start in the New Year.

• Whilst these posts are being recruited to additional resources have been diverted to increase the number of cases that can be considered at the council Financial Protection Panel. This will ensure increased capacity to consider emergency applications through this fast tracked process.

• A Practice a note has been issues to reminded staff of the need to priorities these cases.

Page 39 • There is an ongoing review by the Financial Protection Team focusing on identifying similar cases to ensure that we are responding in a timely manner and to that we continue to make improvements to the way we resolve these cases. “

Bristol City Council (18 003 104)

Statement Upheld Refuse and recycling 14-Nov-2018

Summary: Mr F complains the Council ignored his reports of littering near his home and delayed dealing with his complaint. The Ombudsman has found fault causing injustice to Mr F. The Council will apologise, make a payment to Mr F and clarify how it will keep the area litter free.

Action points and Learning

To follow

Bristol City Council (18 002 590)

Statement Upheld Other 25-Oct-2018

Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council's response to her reports of noise nuisance and says they were not acknowledged or resolved until after she made a formal complaint. We found there was fault by the Council, as the investigating officer did not contact Mrs X to update her on his investigation and did not offer her access to its Noise App sooner. This put Mrs X to the time and trouble of having to complain and left her to live with the nuisance for longer than she might otherwise have done. The Ombudsman recommended the Council should remedy this by apologising to Mrs X, paying her a financial remedy and revising its policy to prevent this happening in future. It agreed to do so.

Action points and Learning

To follow

Bristol City Council (17 017 860)

Statement Upheld Council tax 31-Jul-2018

Summary: It was fault for the Council to allocate Ms X's payments from a 2014 Liability Order, received through an Attachment of Earnings, to Ms X's older debts, and then to seek recovery of further Council Tax debts using the same Liability Order in 2016. That fault did not result in financial disadvantage to Ms X. However, it was fault that the Council did not tell Ms X of what it intended to do with the Attachment of Earnings payments in 2014, and the 2014 Liability Order in 2016. This caused avoidable injustice to Ms X needing a remedy. It was fault for the Council to recall all of Ms X's debts from the recovery agent in 2018. The Council has acted to remedy the injustice this caused Ms X.

Action points and Learning

Page 40 To follow

Bristol City Council (17 014 187)

Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 27-Jul-2018

Summary: The Council delayed completing an assessment of adult social care needs, and wrongly recorded Miss B's thoughts and wishes. A reassessment overturned the original decision that she was ineligible. This meant over a year delay to receive a support package. Meanwhile, Miss B could not move into a property and remained living in an abusive home environment. The Council should refund Miss B the costs of the property she could not live in, and pay £1500 to acknowledge the impact on her mental health.

Action points and Learning

To follow

Bristol City Council (17 012 184)

Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 19-Jul-2018

Summary: Ms X complained the Council has not properly assessed or reviewed her care needs for three years, and it did not investigate her complaints about abuse by two care agencies. The Council was not at fault in how it responded to Ms X's concerns about the care providers. The Council was at fault as it did not carry out care reviews when it should have, however this did not cause Ms X a significant personal injustice. The Council was also at fault when it gave Ms X incorrect information about when it should carry out reviews, which caused confusion for Ms X. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X, create a plan for reducing its backlog of outstanding care reviews and write to those affected.

Action points and Learning

Failure to properly assess or review care needs for three years and did not investigate the Service Users complaints about abuse by two care agencies. This did not cause significant personal injustice. Gave Service User incorrect information about when it should carry out reviews which caused confusion. This had major implications for adult social care which was found to be in breach of the Care Act by not holding reviews within 12 months.

An action plan was written with targets and timescales for working through the backlog of overdue care reviews by 30 August 2020. A letter was sent to all people with overdue care reviews setting out:

- that their care review was overdue - estimated timescales for their review, should they not contact the Council in the meantime - how they could request a review sooner if they believed their care package did not meet their current needs - how to complain if they believed the delay in reviewing their needs caused them an injustice.”

Page 41 Bristol City Council (18 000 139)

Statement Upheld Other 06-Jul-2018

Summary: Mr B complains about the inadequate amount of compensation the Council has offered to settle his complaint which concerned events at his placement care home. The offer of £700 made by the Council is a reasonable one and we will not pursue the complaint any further.

Action points and Learning

This concerned events at placement care home which left the Service User distressed and angry. Much of complaint upheld before going to LGSCO. Dispute over the amount of financial remedy, the Ombudsman agreed with our offer of £700.

Learning not applicable in this case

Bristol City Council (17 013 579)

Statement Upheld Enforcement 27-Jun-2018

Summary: Mr X complains the Council was wrong to allow a neighbour to present a revised planning application when it found breaches of planning control. The Ombudsman has found there was no fault when the Council invited the revised planning application or when it later approved it. However, it failed to properly update Mr X while it investigated his concerns. This caused him an injustice it should remedy by apologising to him and reminding officers of their responsibilities.

Action points and Learning

To follow

Bristol City Council (17 020 268)

Statement Upheld Other 25-Apr-2018

Summary: The Ombudsman should not investigate Mr J's complaint about difficulty and delay in obtaining small business rate relief, because there is nothing he can add to what the Council has already done.

Action points and Learning

To follow

Page 42 Complaints

Adult Benefits Corporate and Authority Name Social Care and Tax Other Services

Adur District Council 0 1 0 Allerdale Borough Council 0 2 1 Amber Valley Borough Council 0 2 1 Arun District Council 0 2 1 Ashfield District Council 0 5 4 Ashford Borough Council 0 1 3 Aylesbury Vale District Council 0 4 0 Babergh District Council 1 1 1 Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council 7 1 5 Barrow-in-Furness Borough Council 0 1 0 Basildon Borough Council 1 2 1 Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council 0 2 1 Bassetlaw District Council 0 3 2 Bath and North East Somerset Council 6 6 4 Bedford Borough Council 3 5 5 Birmingham City Council 54 75 15 Blaby District Council 0 2 0 Blackburn with Darwen Council 10 4 4 Blackpool Borough Council 5 3 1 Bolsover District Council 0 1 4 Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council 9 4 9 Boston Borough Council 0 4 2 Bournemouth Borough Council 16 3 5 Bracknell Forest Council 5 0 0 Braintree District Council 0 3 1 Breckland District Council 0 3 2 Brentwood Borough Council 0 0 2 Brighton & Hove City Council 14 6 0 Bristol City Council 10 24 4 Broadland District Council 0 4 1 Broads Authority 0 0 1 Bromsgrove District Council 0 5 0 Broxbourne Borough Council 0 2 1 Broxtowe Borough Council 0 1 3 Buckinghamshire County Council 16 0 4 Burnley Borough Council 0 2 1 Bury Metropolitan Borough Council 11 11 0 Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council 12 9 1 Page 43 Cambridge City Council 0 2 2 Cambridgeshire County Council 21 0 3 Cannock Chase District Council 0 4 1 Canterbury City Council 0 6 2 Carlisle City Council 0 0 0 Castle Point Borough Council 0 1 1 Central Bedfordshire Council 3 4 3 Charnwood Borough Council 0 5 3 Chelmsford City Council 0 1 1 Cheltenham Borough Council 0 0 1 Cherwell District Council 0 5 0 Cheshire East Council 13 13 6 Cheshire West & Chester Council 16 4 5 Chesterfield Borough Council 0 3 0 Chichester District Council 0 2 4 Chiltern District Council 0 0 2 Chorley Borough Council 0 0 1 Christchurch Borough Council 0 0 0 City Of Bradford Metropolitan District Council 23 7 8 City of London 0 0 2 City of York Council 8 7 2 Colchester Borough Council 0 0 1 Copeland Borough Council 0 1 2 Corby Borough Council 0 6 0 Cornwall Council 41 17 15 Cotswold District Council 0 0 0 Council of the Isles of Scilly 0 0 1 Coventry City Council 13 15 6 Craven District Council 0 1 1 Crawley Borough Council 0 1 0 Cumbria County Council 14 0 7 Dacorum Borough Council 0 3 1 Darlington Borough Council 12 2 2 Dartford Borough Council 0 0 0 Dartmoor National Park Authority 0 0 0 Daventry District Council 0 5 0 Derby City Council 11 3 1 Derbyshire County Council 35 0 9 Derbyshire Dales District Council 0 0 1 Devon County Council 46 0 1 Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council 11 2 6 Dorset County Council 20 0 2 Dover District Council 0 3 2 Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council 19 4 4 Durham County Council 23 21 9 East Cambridgeshire District Council 0 2 2 East Devon District Council 1 1 2 East Dorset District Council 1 1 1 East Hampshire District Council 0 3 1 Page 44 East Hertfordshire District Council 0 1 1 East Lindsey District Council 0 3 0 East Northamptonshire Council 0 1 0 East Riding of Yorkshire Council 10 9 1 East Staffordshire Borough Council 0 2 4 East Sussex County Council 36 0 2 Eastbourne Borough Council 0 6 4 Eastleigh Borough Council 0 2 2 Eden District Council 0 0 2 Elmbridge Borough Council 0 1 1 Environment Agency 0 0 0 Epping Forest District Council 0 2 4 Epsom & Ewell Borough Council 0 4 1 Erewash Borough Council 0 2 2 Essex County Council 70 0 11 Exeter City Council 1 1 1 Exmoor National Park Authority 0 0 0 Fareham Borough Council 0 0 3 Fenland District Council 0 2 3 Folkestone & Hythe District Council 0 2 2 Forest Heath District Council 0 2 1 Forest of Dean District Council 0 1 1 Fylde Borough Council 0 3 0 Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council 8 2 2 Gedling Borough Council 0 3 1 Gloucester City Council 0 4 1 Gloucestershire County Council 19 0 3 Gosport Borough Council 0 1 0 Gravesham Borough Council 0 2 0 Great Yarmouth Borough Council 0 0 0 Greater London Authority 0 0 1 Guildford Borough Council 0 5 2 Halton Borough Council 5 2 2 Hambleton District Council 0 1 2 Hampshire County Council 34 0 4 Harborough District Council 0 1 0 Harlow District Council 0 1 0 Harrogate Borough Council 0 3 2 Hart District Council 0 1 1 Hartlepool Borough Council 5 4 4 Hastings Borough Council 0 3 1 Havant Borough Council 0 6 4 Herefordshire Council 14 4 7 Hertfordshire County Council 41 0 5 Hertsmere Borough Council 1 4 0 High Peak Borough Council 0 1 1 Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council 0 1 0 Horsham District Council 0 1 4 Huntingdonshire District Council 0 6 3 Page 45 Hyndburn Borough Council 0 3 0 Ipswich Borough Council 0 3 4 Isle of Wight Council 10 4 4 Kent County Council 56 0 11 Kettering Borough Council 0 3 0 King's Lynn & West Norfolk Council 0 3 0 Kingston upon Hull City Council 12 7 11 Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council 16 7 1 Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council 10 1 4 Lake District National Park Authority 0 0 1 Lancashire County Council 58 2 11 Lancaster City Council 0 0 5 Leeds City Council 26 12 16 Leicester City Council 22 16 11 Leicestershire County Council 31 0 3 Lewes District Council 0 4 0 Lichfield District Council 0 0 1 Lincoln City Council 0 2 1 Lincolnshire County Council 30 0 4 Liverpool City Council 29 14 14 London Borough of Barking & Dagenham 14 24 7 London Borough of Barnet 21 27 6 London Borough of Bexley 7 11 1 London Borough Of Brent 26 22 2 London Borough of Bromley 21 23 5 London Borough of Camden 12 7 4 London Borough of Croydon 25 31 5 London Borough of Ealing 10 32 4 London Borough of Enfield 17 14 8 London Borough of Hackney 11 15 16 London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham 11 6 1 London Borough of Haringey 17 35 3 London Borough of Harrow 23 14 2 London Borough of Havering 15 6 1 London Borough of Hillingdon 11 23 10 London Borough of Hounslow 17 22 9 London Borough of Islington 21 14 7 London Borough of Lambeth 21 39 6 London Borough of Lewisham 12 29 4 London Borough of Merton 15 19 1 London Borough of Newham 13 17 14 London Borough of Redbridge 17 13 4 London Borough of Richmond upon Thames 5 7 4 London Borough of Southwark 13 12 3 London Borough of Sutton 5 6 2 London Borough of Tower Hamlets 12 8 13 London Borough of Waltham Forest 22 18 5 London Borough of Wandsworth 18 14 2 Luton Borough Council 11 13 4 Page 46 Maidstone Borough Council 0 10 1 Maldon District Council 0 1 0 Malvern Hills District Council 0 0 0 Manchester City Council 18 31 11 Mansfield District Council 0 2 1 Medway Council 12 12 2 Melton Borough Council 0 0 2 Mendip District Council 0 7 2 Mid Devon District Council 0 2 4 Mid Suffolk District Council 0 0 1 Mid Sussex District Council 0 2 0 Middlesbrough Borough Council 5 6 5 Milton Keynes Council 12 10 4 Mole Valley District Council 0 0 1 New Forest District Council 0 2 4 New Forest National Park Authority 0 0 0 Newark & Sherwood District Council 0 1 1 Newcastle upon Tyne City Council 10 12 7 Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council 0 6 2 Norfolk County Council 60 0 5 North Devon District Council 0 2 2 North Dorset District Council 0 3 1 North East Derbyshire District Council 0 0 1 North East Lincolnshire Council 6 4 4 North Hertfordshire District Council 1 2 1 North Kesteven District Council 0 1 3 North Lincolnshire Council 8 4 1 North Norfolk District Council 0 4 2 North Somerset Council 9 13 3 North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council 11 3 4 North Warwickshire Borough Council 0 0 0 North West Leicestershire District Council 0 2 0 North York Moors National Park Authority 0 0 0 North Yorkshire County Council 36 0 2 Northampton Borough Council 0 4 4 Northamptonshire County Council 24 1 2 Northumberland Council 15 9 4 Northumberland National Park Authority 0 0 0 Norwich City Council 1 10 6 Nottingham City Council 26 11 11 Nottinghamshire County Council 42 0 3 Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough Council 1 6 2 Oadby & Wigston Borough Council 0 3 0 Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council 9 16 7 Oxford City Council 0 4 1 Oxfordshire County Council 21 0 4 Peak District National Park Authority 0 0 0 Pendle Borough Council 0 5 0 Peterborough City Council 2 8 2 Page 47 Plymouth City Council 20 18 9 Poole Borough Council 8 2 7 Portsmouth City Council 9 2 4 Preston City Council 0 11 3 Purbeck District Council 0 1 2 Reading Borough Council 11 12 4 Redcar & Cleveland Council 3 3 2 Redditch Borough Council 0 2 3 Reigate & Banstead Borough Council 0 0 1 Ribble Valley Borough Council 0 0 2 Richmondshire District Council 0 2 0 Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council 9 2 9 Rochford District Council 0 5 3 Rossendale Borough Council 0 4 4 Rother District Council 0 6 4 Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council 3 7 4 Royal Borough of Greenwich 8 24 10 Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea 12 1 3 Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames 1 4 9 Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council 13 2 5 Rugby Borough Council 0 1 0 Runnymede Borough Council 0 1 0 Rushcliffe Borough Council 1 0 2 Rushmoor Borough Council 0 1 0 Rutland County Council 0 0 1 Ryedale District Council 0 0 2 Salford City Council 9 27 8 Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council 15 25 6 Scarborough Borough Council 0 4 3 Sedgemoor District Council 0 3 3 Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council 12 4 5 Selby District Council 0 2 1 Sevenoaks District Council 0 3 2 Sheffield City Council 28 17 9 Shropshire Council 16 7 3 Slough Borough Council 6 10 2 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council 4 3 0 Somerset County Council 32 1 2 South Bucks District Council 0 0 3 South Cambridgeshire District Council 0 1 0 South Derbyshire District Council 0 1 2 South Downs National Park Authority 0 0 0 South Gloucestershire Council 6 3 3 South Hams District Council 0 2 1 South Holland District Council 0 1 2 South Kesteven District Council 0 2 2 South Lakeland District Council 0 0 0 South Norfolk District Council 0 1 0 South Northamptonshire District Council 0 2 0 Page 48 South Oxfordshire District Council 0 1 0 South Ribble Borough Council 0 2 4 South Somerset District Council 0 2 3 South Staffordshire District Council 0 0 2 South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council 11 3 5 Southampton City Council 20 5 0 Southend-on-Sea Borough Council 7 5 7 Spelthorne Borough Council 1 1 0 St Albans City Council 1 2 0 St Edmundsbury Borough Council 0 0 0 St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council 13 5 2 Stafford Borough Council 0 4 4 Staffordshire County Council 34 0 13 Staffordshire Moorlands District Council 0 0 0 Stevenage Borough Council 1 0 1 Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council 15 4 5 Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council 11 7 1 Stoke-on-Trent City Council 15 15 8 Stratford-on-Avon District Council 0 5 0 Stroud District Council 0 1 1 Suffolk Coastal District Council 0 4 2 Suffolk County Council 31 0 3 Sunderland City Council 5 5 8 Surrey County Council 48 0 6 Surrey Heath Borough Council 0 2 2 Swale Borough Council 0 2 0 Swindon Borough Council 7 9 2 Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council 10 13 2 Tamworth Borough Council 0 3 1 Tandridge District Council 1 2 2 Taunton Deane Borough Council 0 1 0 Teignbridge District Council 0 4 8 Telford & Wrekin Council 5 1 2 Tendring District Council 1 2 3 Test Valley Borough Council 0 1 2 Tewkesbury Borough Council 0 2 0 Thanet District Council 0 6 6 Three Rivers District Council 0 5 1 Thurrock Council 5 8 2 Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council 1 4 3 Torbay Council 6 5 3 Torridge District Council 0 6 0 Trafford Council 17 10 3 Transport for London 0 0 6 Tunbridge Wells Borough Council 0 2 1 Uttlesford District Council 0 1 0 Vale of White Horse District Council 0 4 1 Wakefield City Council 14 9 3 Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council 7 7 2 Page 49 Warrington Council 8 6 0 Warwick District Council 0 3 3 Warwickshire County Council 25 1 4 Watford Borough Council 1 10 1 Waveney District Council 0 4 3 Waverley Borough Council 1 3 1 Wealden District Council 0 2 0 Wellingborough Borough Council 0 0 0 Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council 0 5 0 West Berkshire Council 8 2 1 West Devon Borough Council 0 1 0 West Dorset District Council 0 2 0 West Lancashire Borough Council 0 2 0 West Lindsey District Council 0 4 1 West Oxfordshire District Council 0 0 1 West Somerset District Council 0 1 0 West Sussex County Council 49 0 10 Westminster City Council 11 25 7 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council 0 2 0 Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council 10 11 6 Wiltshire Council 23 1 6 Winchester City Council 0 2 0 Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council 32 3 6 Woking Borough Council 0 3 1 Wokingham Borough Council 3 4 2 Wolverhampton City Council 17 8 2 Worcester City Council 0 2 2 Worcestershire County Council 25 0 1 Worthing Borough Council 0 5 0 Wychavon District Council 0 2 1 Wycombe District Council 0 5 2 Wyre Borough Council 1 6 1 Wyre Forest District Council 1 0 1 Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority 0 0 0 Totals 2555 1815 1031

Notes These statistics include all complaints and enquiries that were received from 01 April 2018 to 31 March 2019. Some cases are received and decided in different business years. This means the number of complaints and enquiries For more information on how to interpret our statistics, please visit: http://www.lgo.org.uk/information-centre/rep

Page 50 s and Enquiries Received (by Category) 2018-19

Environmental Education and Services, Public Highways and Planning and Children's Housing Other Protection and Transport Development Services Regulation

0 1 0 6 3 0 0 3 2 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 10 0 0 1 1 1 13 2 0 6 0 2 1 1 0 1 4 4 4 2 0 7 3 1 13 0 0 3 0 5 12 3 11 9 6 0 8 0 0 3 2 1 1 0 0 6 0 8 2 0 0 5 0 3 2 0 0 3 0 1 5 0 10 6 6 4 12 1 13 2 3 2 3 0 72 137 23 83 17 8 0 3 0 1 1 1 15 6 3 1 3 1 4 6 5 2 4 0 0 5 0 3 2 0 13 13 4 4 8 1 0 1 1 2 6 0 10 6 2 4 3 1 12 6 0 0 3 0 0 2 1 3 7 0 0 1 0 1 4 0 0 2 0 6 1 0 10 12 11 16 8 0 16 28 14 21 14 5 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 8 0 0 4 0 2 3 0 0 2 0 3 4 1 23 1 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 17 10 9 3 5 1 18 8 4 0 9 0 Page 51 0 1 1 5 2 0 19 2 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 7 2 3 9 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 7 3 8 7 6 1 0 3 0 6 4 0 0 2 2 5 1 1 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 2 0 5 0 27 11 22 1 27 2 12 12 10 4 11 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 4 1 2 7 1 0 2 1 0 10 0 0 6 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 28 14 14 4 14 3 0 0 0 5 1 0 8 8 10 2 10 2 0 4 0 5 10 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 47 12 10 8 49 5 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 12 15 5 9 1 0 3 0 0 11 0 0 3 0 3 1 0 18 2 8 0 2 0 0 1 0 12 11 1 6 3 1 2 3 2 0 3 0 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 1 4 12 0 34 7 0 6 6 0 58 0 10 1 4 1 0 2 1 3 4 0 42 5 18 0 1 3 19 7 6 5 9 0 37 2 6 0 2 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 17 15 2 14 5 0 26 26 14 5 42 4 0 3 1 0 7 1 0 2 0 4 11 0 0 0 1 2 8 0 0 3 0 2 8 0 Page 52 0 1 1 0 8 0 0 6 6 2 12 1 0 0 0 2 4 0 18 10 9 6 12 0 0 3 1 2 3 0 34 4 11 0 0 0 0 3 1 9 5 0 0 1 0 0 6 0 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 1 2 3 7 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 20 13 1 0 6 3 4 5 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 68 8 37 1 3 0 0 1 1 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 2 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 7 8 0 0 1 0 1 4 0 0 1 0 0 13 0 0 3 0 1 5 0 10 3 6 8 9 1 0 2 1 0 6 1 0 4 2 2 2 0 31 2 9 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 4 0 7 0 0 0 2 0 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 6 13 0 8 5 9 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 60 4 18 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 7 0 0 3 0 8 1 0 0 2 1 2 11 1 0 1 2 1 6 0 5 2 4 1 0 0 0 5 0 2 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 15 5 7 2 15 0 50 4 17 0 3 1 0 3 2 5 4 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 2 6 1 0 3 0 2 7 0 0 2 0 0 6 0 Page 53 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 6 1 0 6 5 4 1 9 0 83 8 17 0 1 3 0 2 3 8 8 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 16 6 3 8 5 0 18 18 7 7 14 1 7 4 0 2 4 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 62 5 21 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 50 24 10 22 24 3 24 9 10 27 8 1 33 1 11 1 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 0 1 6 0 0 4 0 3 1 0 29 1 9 0 4 0 26 22 12 12 7 0 13 18 17 30 3 1 17 42 36 26 25 1 20 8 7 12 4 2 7 13 16 35 10 3 32 9 9 25 12 3 15 10 13 32 6 2 31 31 34 34 19 3 14 27 30 45 20 0 11 7 13 35 12 1 20 5 19 39 11 1 10 4 12 22 6 1 27 13 18 40 11 2 11 17 23 15 10 2 15 3 16 28 9 2 23 10 23 37 25 2 15 19 21 24 9 0 11 2 13 32 4 2 26 22 33 50 9 1 28 10 4 33 6 1 8 36 18 12 7 1 35 24 27 63 6 0 22 19 25 27 18 1 12 7 5 7 8 2 13 5 12 59 8 5 17 23 2 13 3 1 11 9 10 24 6 2 16 25 30 41 7 3 16 5 4 25 4 2 15 7 5 11 8 1 Page 54 0 3 5 9 10 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 0 1 0 1 4 0 35 25 32 10 9 5 0 5 0 3 2 1 16 8 10 5 14 0 0 3 0 1 5 0 0 1 1 1 3 0 0 3 0 3 6 0 0 0 0 1 7 0 0 1 0 0 13 0 7 1 3 0 0 0 16 4 10 13 10 3 0 4 1 2 7 0 0 3 0 7 5 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 17 10 9 2 5 1 0 6 0 2 4 0 65 2 14 0 3 1 0 6 0 2 13 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 8 1 4 1 5 1 0 9 0 2 4 1 0 1 0 1 3 0 8 8 1 4 3 0 0 4 1 0 2 0 10 16 10 3 9 0 14 3 3 12 7 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 5 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 34 1 8 0 0 1 0 11 4 10 2 0 48 9 13 0 0 0 20 4 12 4 22 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 12 4 0 18 16 5 14 1 2 41 3 14 0 0 1 0 2 0 5 2 0 0 3 0 2 2 0 15 11 9 5 5 0 0 1 1 10 0 1 27 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 10 5 0 5 3 0 Page 55 15 18 13 2 7 1 8 3 4 1 7 0 10 3 8 7 2 0 0 1 0 2 8 1 0 0 0 1 4 0 10 8 12 3 2 1 8 5 2 1 4 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 2 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 1 0 1 4 0 16 2 3 0 7 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 6 0 1 3 0 0 9 0 2 12 0 21 8 3 7 2 1 23 16 15 33 6 1 6 4 4 20 4 0 3 14 12 11 7 0 9 4 1 5 4 1 0 2 0 2 4 0 1 0 0 5 4 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 1 6 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 16 12 6 4 5 0 23 9 12 21 1 3 0 6 1 4 5 0 0 2 0 3 13 0 30 5 6 1 11 0 0 1 0 1 10 0 0 1 1 2 1 0 34 25 21 18 10 3 13 4 7 3 36 2 10 5 2 11 7 1 11 8 6 3 10 1 30 1 10 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 10 0 0 4 0 5 8 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 14 8 5 0 16 0 0 5 1 0 8 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 5 0 1 4 1 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 2 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 Page 56 0 1 1 0 9 0 0 3 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 1 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 15 3 5 4 6 0 11 10 8 5 5 1 8 4 7 5 3 1 0 3 3 5 3 0 0 3 3 6 8 0 0 1 0 5 3 0 6 5 2 2 3 0 0 1 1 0 5 0 48 6 29 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 2 0 4 1 1 14 8 7 1 7 1 14 4 5 2 3 1 26 9 6 7 5 2 0 1 2 3 10 0 0 2 1 3 9 0 0 1 9 3 14 0 50 3 22 1 1 0 15 4 9 2 6 1 76 8 25 1 3 1 0 3 2 1 5 0 0 1 2 3 7 1 20 8 5 7 4 0 25 10 8 3 8 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 6 3 0 1 2 2 11 0 0 1 1 2 14 0 13 4 2 0 4 1 0 8 1 1 7 1 0 2 0 0 6 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 10 2 5 12 0 0 3 0 1 6 1 21 2 5 10 7 2 0 1 0 0 5 1 12 11 6 5 8 0 0 5 0 3 11 0 12 20 4 3 8 0 0 71 198 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 10 0 0 1 0 1 6 0 0 2 0 2 8 0 19 11 9 4 15 1 13 10 3 0 10 0 Page 57 12 1 5 2 2 0 0 6 1 3 8 1 25 3 9 0 0 0 0 2 4 5 6 1 0 2 6 3 4 1 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 2 1 2 8 0 0 2 1 5 2 0 0 5 1 6 8 0 11 5 2 2 7 1 0 2 0 1 6 0 0 5 1 1 5 0 0 4 0 1 2 0 0 3 0 1 11 0 0 3 1 1 5 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 32 3 15 0 1 0 11 10 5 37 5 4 0 0 2 1 4 0 8 5 2 8 6 1 28 8 6 11 19 1 0 2 1 2 6 0 29 5 12 1 8 1 0 1 1 2 5 0 10 5 4 1 15 1 17 8 9 9 1 0 0 4 0 1 4 0 33 2 7 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 3 0 0 1 0 1 5 0 0 3 1 4 17 0 0 3 0 1 3 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3196 2005 1880 2024 2190 203

received may not match the number of decisions made. ports/annual-review-reports/interpreting-local-authority-statistics

Page 58 Total

11 11 15 21 19 19 28 26 47 8 20 13 14 55 36 484 8 47 30 15 65 16 50 26 17 11 11 77 136 9 2 15 12 14 58 7 67 61 Page 59 13 53 8 30 1 6 42 21 13 7 12 122 74 7 21 15 10 3 115 8 57 20 5 10 204 4 1 100 16 8 51 29 33 14 2 24 68 118 11 116 65 69 9 80 170 16 21 14 17 Page 60 12 30 7 75 15 87 28 11 8 15 12 42 23 7 198 12 2 8 13 21 9 16 12 49 14 15 66 3 13 10 1 30 36 9 122 10 13 22 12 25 13 14 69 121 19 7 11 17 17 Page 61 8 16 43 179 24 8 68 89 32 6 162 9 187 128 82 6 11 11 77 136 127 201 72 134 139 101 213 182 118 137 73 166 117 95 164 136 106 207 127 117 199 146 57 130 72 95 167 90 75 Page 62 38 6 6 176 14 79 11 15 18 9 16 27 82 15 21 2 6 73 20 150 25 9 3 34 20 9 37 13 73 57 3 11 1 82 35 97 92 0 39 104 104 18 10 77 18 59 2 8 35 Page 63 103 40 45 26 8 63 28 9 9 8 8 48 12 18 33 56 136 54 61 44 9 11 9 10 6 8 87 115 23 24 74 15 10 165 91 54 46 76 15 18 5 4 55 17 9 15 9 9 4 Page 64 12 16 14 4 52 65 47 16 23 9 38 15 131 5 10 62 48 93 21 17 33 111 55 168 15 16 62 82 6 16 17 30 32 24 12 6 41 17 62 15 56 25 77 278 15 9 17 85 52 Page 65 36 25 67 30 23 14 15 10 25 39 10 14 9 20 11 4 110 115 9 57 103 13 97 13 45 71 13 68 16 10 32 15 6 1 16899

Page 66 Complaints and Enqui

Invalid or Referred Back for Closed after Initial Authority Name Advice Given Incomplete Local Resolution Enquiries

Adur District Council 0 2 2 5 Allerdale Borough Council 0 0 3 4 Amber Valley Borough Council 0 1 6 5 Arun District Council 2 2 1 6 Ashfield District Council 1 0 8 5 Ashford Borough Council 3 1 2 11 Aylesbury Vale District Council 0 0 8 14 Babergh District Council 2 1 5 8 Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council 2 0 26 10 Barrow-in-Furness Borough Council 1 0 0 5 Basildon Borough Council 0 3 10 2 Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council 1 0 4 5 Bassetlaw District Council 2 0 2 3 Bath and North East Somerset Council 3 1 24 13 Bedford Borough Council 4 1 8 15 Birmingham City Council 26 31 173 112 Blaby District Council 1 0 1 2 Blackburn with Darwen Council 4 2 20 14 Blackpool Borough Council 2 1 16 5 Bolsover District Council 2 1 2 4 Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council 2 1 27 16 Boston Borough Council 1 0 2 10 Bournemouth Borough Council 5 0 11 18 Bracknell Forest Council 1 0 10 7 Braintree District Council 0 0 6 4 Breckland District Council 0 0 2 8 Brentwood Borough Council 0 2 4 1 Brighton & Hove City Council 2 3 24 21 Bristol City Council 7 8 51 40 Broadland District Council 0 1 0 5 Broads Authority 0 0 0 0 Bromsgrove District Council 0 0 4 5 Broxbourne Borough Council 0 0 8 2 Broxtowe Borough Council 1 2 5 4 Buckinghamshire County Council 3 1 20 22 Burnley Borough Council 2 0 2 2 Page 67 Bury Metropolitan Borough Council 2 0 27 20 Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council 2 1 16 28 Cambridge City Council 1 2 4 3 Cambridgeshire County Council 6 0 22 11 Cannock Chase District Council 0 0 4 4 Canterbury City Council 2 1 8 10 Carlisle City Council 0 0 1 0 Castle Point Borough Council 0 0 4 0 Central Bedfordshire Council 3 1 16 10 Charnwood Borough Council 0 0 10 7 Chelmsford City Council 1 0 5 4 Cheltenham Borough Council 0 1 3 0 Cherwell District Council 0 0 3 4 Cheshire East Council 2 1 35 50 Cheshire West & Chester Council 4 0 30 24 Chesterfield Borough Council 0 1 5 0 Chichester District Council 1 1 3 9 Chiltern District Council 1 0 7 1 Chorley Borough Council 0 0 5 0 Christchurch Borough Council 0 0 1 1 City Of Bradford Metropolitan District Council 12 0 38 26 City of London 0 3 1 2 City of York Council 5 3 8 23 Colchester Borough Council 2 1 4 10 Copeland Borough Council 0 0 0 2 Corby Borough Council 0 1 2 3 Cornwall Council 22 1 52 60 Cotswold District Council 0 0 1 2 Council of the Isles of Scilly 0 0 0 1 Coventry City Council 5 1 41 35 Craven District Council 0 0 6 8 Crawley Borough Council 1 1 0 2 Cumbria County Council 4 0 15 17 Dacorum Borough Council 2 2 8 11 Darlington Borough Council 2 3 8 12 Dartford Borough Council 0 3 3 6 Dartmoor National Park Authority 0 0 0 2 Daventry District Council 1 0 5 6 Derby City Council 6 1 32 11 Derbyshire County Council 6 1 57 26 Derbyshire Dales District Council 0 2 2 3 Devon County Council 11 0 34 31 Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council 2 1 27 21 Dorset County Council 5 0 15 12 Dover District Council 1 1 1 4 Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council 1 5 34 18 Durham County Council 10 1 52 47 East Cambridgeshire District Council 1 0 5 7 East Devon District Council 1 3 3 9 Page 68 East Dorset District Council 0 0 4 7 East Hampshire District Council 0 0 3 6 East Hertfordshire District Council 0 0 1 5 East Lindsey District Council 3 0 9 11 East Northamptonshire Council 0 0 3 3 East Riding of Yorkshire Council 4 3 22 26 East Staffordshire Borough Council 0 0 5 11 East Sussex County Council 8 0 22 18 Eastbourne Borough Council 0 3 8 11 Eastleigh Borough Council 2 0 2 2 Eden District Council 0 0 2 4 Elmbridge Borough Council 0 0 5 4 Environment Agency 0 0 5 0 Epping Forest District Council 0 2 9 15 Epsom & Ewell Borough Council 0 0 13 6 Erewash Borough Council 1 0 4 3 Essex County Council 13 2 53 52 Exeter City Council 2 0 4 2 Exmoor National Park Authority 0 0 0 2 Fareham Borough Council 0 2 2 6 Fenland District Council 2 2 1 5 Folkestone & Hythe District Council 0 1 10 6 Forest Heath District Council 0 0 4 4 Forest of Dean District Council 1 0 4 8 Fylde Borough Council 0 1 4 4 Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council 2 5 13 16 Gedling Borough Council 2 0 4 3 Gloucester City Council 2 0 5 5 Gloucestershire County Council 4 0 19 23 Gosport Borough Council 0 0 2 1 Gravesham Borough Council 0 2 7 2 Great Yarmouth Borough Council 0 2 3 0 Greater London Authority 0 0 1 0 Guildford Borough Council 0 2 9 11 Halton Borough Council 0 0 15 16 Hambleton District Council 0 0 1 6 Hampshire County Council 9 0 42 35 Harborough District Council 0 1 1 5 Harlow District Council 1 2 7 3 Harrogate Borough Council 2 0 4 10 Hart District Council 0 0 6 2 Hartlepool Borough Council 0 1 6 11 Hastings Borough Council 1 0 2 8 Havant Borough Council 0 0 7 3 Herefordshire Council 3 0 14 28 Hertfordshire County Council 5 0 43 39 Hertsmere Borough Council 0 0 3 8 High Peak Borough Council 0 1 2 3 Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council 1 0 2 4 Page 69 Horsham District Council 0 0 5 7 Huntingdonshire District Council 0 0 5 6 Hyndburn Borough Council 0 0 5 2 Ipswich Borough Council 1 3 4 4 Isle of Wight Council 1 0 12 15 Kent County Council 11 2 45 59 Kettering Borough Council 1 1 6 11 King's Lynn & West Norfolk Council 0 0 1 6 Kingston upon Hull City Council 3 1 28 16 Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council 2 4 32 29 Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council 1 0 13 6 Lake District National Park Authority 1 0 1 3 Lancashire County Council 10 0 56 47 Lancaster City Council 1 0 2 3 Leeds City Council 13 10 47 63 Leicester City Council 8 6 41 37 Leicestershire County Council 10 0 27 26 Lewes District Council 1 0 2 2 Lichfield District Council 1 0 0 5 Lincoln City Council 1 3 2 1 Lincolnshire County Council 5 0 28 18 Liverpool City Council 8 0 42 51 London Borough of Barking & Dagenham 3 9 53 40 London Borough of Barnet 6 7 90 45 London Borough of Bexley 7 1 20 18 London Borough Of Brent 7 8 53 37 London Borough of Bromley 7 2 45 38 London Borough of Camden 3 9 40 21 London Borough of Croydon 13 4 78 51 London Borough of Ealing 9 9 73 60 London Borough of Enfield 3 8 63 22 London Borough of Hackney 9 10 46 39 London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham 3 5 17 21 London Borough of Haringey 13 13 45 42 London Borough of Harrow 7 2 34 27 London Borough of Havering 4 5 35 32 London Borough of Hillingdon 2 5 36 68 London Borough of Hounslow 3 5 55 39 London Borough of Islington 10 15 34 23 London Borough of Lambeth 13 18 80 45 London Borough of Lewisham 3 3 63 30 London Borough of Merton 5 1 41 28 London Borough of Newham 11 17 76 67 London Borough of Redbridge 10 4 50 39 London Borough of Richmond upon Thames 3 0 22 17 London Borough of Southwark 12 23 39 24 London Borough of Sutton 4 2 30 16 London Borough of Tower Hamlets 7 4 40 22 London Borough of Waltham Forest 7 4 72 42 Page 70 London Borough of Wandsworth 9 3 32 18 Luton Borough Council 1 3 26 19 Maidstone Borough Council 0 0 9 19 Maldon District Council 0 0 2 3 Malvern Hills District Council 2 0 1 1 Manchester City Council 14 1 50 71 Mansfield District Council 1 2 3 7 Medway Council 1 0 23 26 Melton Borough Council 1 0 2 3 Mendip District Council 0 0 6 5 Mid Devon District Council 1 1 2 10 Mid Suffolk District Council 0 1 3 4 Mid Sussex District Council 0 0 4 6 Middlesbrough Borough Council 0 0 10 9 Milton Keynes Council 5 4 25 25 Mole Valley District Council 0 0 1 10 New Forest District Council 0 2 7 9 New Forest National Park Authority 0 0 0 2 Newark & Sherwood District Council 0 0 0 6 Newcastle upon Tyne City Council 1 1 31 26 Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council 0 0 10 7 Norfolk County Council 9 1 50 29 North Devon District Council 1 2 4 13 North Dorset District Council 1 0 2 4 North East Derbyshire District Council 0 0 1 1 North East Lincolnshire Council 2 0 10 12 North Hertfordshire District Council 1 0 8 3 North Kesteven District Council 0 0 2 4 North Lincolnshire Council 2 0 15 7 North Norfolk District Council 0 0 10 2 North Somerset Council 5 0 24 27 North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council 0 6 18 20 North Warwickshire Borough Council 1 0 1 0 North West Leicestershire District Council 1 2 4 1 North York Moors National Park Authority 0 0 0 0 North Yorkshire County Council 3 2 20 21 Northampton Borough Council 3 3 11 11 Northamptonshire County Council 5 0 39 25 Northumberland Council 5 1 27 31 Northumberland National Park Authority 0 0 0 0 Norwich City Council 2 6 12 14 Nottingham City Council 10 2 27 33 Nottinghamshire County Council 6 3 31 22 Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough Council 0 3 2 5 Oadby & Wigston Borough Council 0 0 3 4 Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council 4 0 38 24 Oxford City Council 2 7 4 5 Oxfordshire County Council 4 1 17 17 Peak District National Park Authority 0 0 0 1 Page 71 Pendle Borough Council 1 0 5 1 Peterborough City Council 2 0 14 10 Plymouth City Council 4 1 46 36 Poole Borough Council 4 0 15 8 Portsmouth City Council 0 2 12 13 Preston City Council 3 0 8 9 Purbeck District Council 0 0 2 1 Reading Borough Council 1 1 22 29 Redcar & Cleveland Council 1 0 10 7 Redditch Borough Council 1 1 3 3 Reigate & Banstead Borough Council 0 0 3 1 Ribble Valley Borough Council 1 0 0 1 Richmondshire District Council 0 0 3 5 Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council 3 0 16 20 Rochford District Council 0 0 6 5 Rossendale Borough Council 1 0 8 7 Rother District Council 1 0 9 13 Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council 3 2 26 15 Royal Borough of Greenwich 2 16 55 36 Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea 4 2 19 14 Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames 2 4 20 28 Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council 3 0 15 11 Rugby Borough Council 0 0 2 5 Runnymede Borough Council 0 0 6 2 Rushcliffe Borough Council 0 0 3 3 Rushmoor Borough Council 0 0 4 4 Rutland County Council 0 0 2 4 Ryedale District Council 0 0 4 2 Salford City Council 2 1 36 33 Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council 8 4 60 26 Scarborough Borough Council 1 0 6 12 Sedgemoor District Council 1 2 12 6 Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council 0 1 31 25 Selby District Council 0 1 5 6 Sevenoaks District Council 1 0 2 3 Sheffield City Council 13 7 51 62 Shropshire Council 5 1 27 22 Slough Borough Council 3 3 27 12 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council 5 0 18 19 Somerset County Council 6 0 25 13 South Bucks District Council 0 0 5 5 South Cambridgeshire District Council 1 0 9 3 South Derbyshire District Council 0 0 0 5 South Downs National Park Authority 0 0 1 2 South Gloucestershire Council 2 1 29 14 South Hams District Council 2 1 4 4 South Holland District Council 0 2 1 6 South Kesteven District Council 0 2 7 4 South Lakeland District Council 0 0 1 3 Page 72 South Norfolk District Council 0 0 5 2 South Northamptonshire District Council 0 0 2 1 South Oxfordshire District Council 0 0 3 4 South Ribble Borough Council 1 0 7 7 South Somerset District Council 0 0 4 9 South Staffordshire District Council 0 0 1 2 South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council 4 3 10 28 Southampton City Council 3 5 27 15 Southend-on-Sea Borough Council 2 0 22 13 Spelthorne Borough Council 2 0 6 7 St Albans City Council 2 3 6 4 St Edmundsbury Borough Council 0 0 3 2 St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council 0 1 15 13 Stafford Borough Council 0 0 3 8 Staffordshire County Council 5 1 34 39 Staffordshire Moorlands District Council 0 0 1 3 Stevenage Borough Council 2 1 3 6 Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council 4 0 20 21 Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council 3 0 15 12 Stoke-on-Trent City Council 5 2 33 38 Stratford-on-Avon District Council 0 0 8 6 Stroud District Council 1 0 5 9 Suffolk Coastal District Council 1 1 4 21 Suffolk County Council 9 0 33 35 Sunderland City Council 3 0 27 14 Surrey County Council 6 1 54 43 Surrey Heath Borough Council 2 0 2 5 Swale Borough Council 1 0 5 5 Swindon Borough Council 2 2 30 14 Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council 5 1 37 21 Tamworth Borough Council 0 0 5 2 Tandridge District Council 3 2 2 7 Taunton Deane Borough Council 0 1 7 4 Teignbridge District Council 0 0 12 9 Telford & Wrekin Council 2 0 12 8 Tendring District Council 1 0 6 13 Test Valley Borough Council 1 0 3 5 Tewkesbury Borough Council 0 0 3 2 Thanet District Council 4 0 14 13 Three Rivers District Council 1 0 8 5 Thurrock Council 8 2 22 13 Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council 2 0 5 5 Torbay Council 1 0 21 13 Torridge District Council 0 0 9 6 Trafford Council 7 1 18 27 Transport for London 9 1 123 112 Tunbridge Wells Borough Council 0 0 4 6 Uttlesford District Council 0 0 2 4 Vale of White Horse District Council 0 0 6 6 Page 73 Wakefield City Council 4 3 28 27 Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council 4 0 14 18 Warrington Council 1 0 9 15 Warwick District Council 1 5 9 7 Warwickshire County Council 7 0 24 20 Watford Borough Council 3 0 9 13 Waveney District Council 2 0 0 19 Waverley Borough Council 2 0 1 9 Wealden District Council 0 2 2 4 Wellingborough Borough Council 0 0 5 2 Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council 1 2 8 6 West Berkshire Council 1 1 5 15 West Devon Borough Council 0 0 3 1 West Dorset District Council 1 0 4 4 West Lancashire Borough Council 0 0 6 4 West Lindsey District Council 0 0 4 7 West Oxfordshire District Council 0 0 5 4 West Somerset District Council 0 0 2 1 West Sussex County Council 4 4 20 38 Westminster City Council 12 6 36 38 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council 0 0 2 4 Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council 2 5 26 14 Wiltshire Council 7 3 20 36 Winchester City Council 0 0 3 3 Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council 6 0 24 40 Woking Borough Council 0 0 3 5 Wokingham Borough Council 1 0 8 12 Wolverhampton City Council 4 4 19 24 Worcester City Council 0 0 3 5 Worcestershire County Council 3 0 30 16 Worthing Borough Council 0 0 3 6 Wychavon District Council 0 0 4 1 Wycombe District Council 0 0 13 9 Wyre Borough Council 1 0 8 4 Wyre Forest District Council 1 0 2 2 Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority 0 0 0 1 Totals 896 538 5702 5150

Notes These statistics include all complaints and enquiries that were decided from 01 April 2018 to 31 March 2019. Some cases are received and decided in different business years. This means the number of complaints and enquiries received may not m For more information on how to interpret our statistics, please visit: http://www.lgo.org.uk/information-centre/reports/annual-review

Page 74

iries Decided (by Outcome) 2018-19

Average uphold Not Upheld Upheld Total Uphold Rate (%) rate (%) of similar authorities

1 0 10 0 43 5 1 13 17 43 3 0 15 0 43 3 6 20 67 43 1 1 16 50 43 1 1 19 50 43 6 6 34 50 43 4 0 20 0 43 5 4 47 44 61 0 1 7 100 43 2 5 22 71 43 0 2 12 100 43 4 1 12 20 43 7 5 53 42 55 3 4 35 57 55 23 77 442 77 61 0 1 5 100 43 6 5 51 45 55 1 4 29 80 55 0 0 9 0 43 5 24 75 83 61 2 1 16 33 43 4 4 42 50 55 6 1 25 14 55 4 3 17 43 43 3 4 17 57 43 2 3 12 60 43 17 20 87 54 55 6 12 124 67 55 4 1 11 20 43 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 14 20 43 2 1 13 33 43 0 1 13 100 43 5 9 60 64 64 1 0 7 0 43 Page 75 10 6 65 38 61 10 9 66 47 61 0 3 13 100 43 5 8 52 62 64 0 0 8 0 43 6 1 28 14 43 0 0 1 0 43 1 0 5 0 43 4 12 46 75 55 4 1 22 20 43 1 0 11 0 43 1 2 7 67 43 3 4 14 57 43 14 14 116 50 55 5 11 74 69 55 2 0 8 0 43 3 3 20 50 43 3 0 12 0 43 4 3 12 43 43 1 0 3 0 55 7 10 93 59 61 0 0 6 0 63 10 11 60 52 55 3 3 23 50 43 0 0 2 0 43 0 1 7 100 43 34 38 207 53 55 0 1 4 100 43 1 0 2 0 55 8 10 100 56 61 0 2 16 100 43 2 2 8 50 43 7 12 55 63 64 6 2 31 25 43 4 11 40 73 55 0 1 13 100 43 1 0 3 0 29 4 1 17 20 43 8 10 68 56 55 7 12 109 63 64 2 3 12 60 43 12 22 110 65 64 10 8 69 44 61 10 24 66 71 64 0 1 8 100 43 4 13 75 76 61 42 11 163 21 55 6 2 21 25 43 2 2 20 50 43 Page 76 2 0 13 0 43 4 4 17 50 43 1 2 9 67 43 8 2 33 20 43 2 1 9 33 43 10 21 86 68 55 1 0 17 0 43 14 28 90 67 64 1 5 28 83 43 1 0 7 0 43 2 1 9 33 43 0 1 10 100 43 1 0 6 0 0 3 6 35 67 43 1 2 22 67 43 0 0 8 0 43 25 48 193 66 64 1 1 10 50 43 0 0 2 0 29 1 0 11 0 43 3 1 14 25 43 2 2 21 50 43 0 2 10 100 43 2 3 18 60 43 3 0 12 0 43 6 6 48 50 61 5 0 14 0 43 2 2 16 50 43 10 11 67 52 64 0 0 3 0 43 1 0 12 0 43 1 3 9 75 43 1 0 2 0 0 4 2 28 33 43 5 4 40 44 55 1 1 9 50 43 4 21 111 84 64 2 1 10 33 43 0 0 13 0 43 2 3 21 60 43 1 1 10 50 43 4 1 23 20 55 2 3 16 60 43 1 2 13 67 43 9 8 62 47 55 7 16 110 70 64 0 5 16 100 43 1 0 7 0 43 0 0 7 0 43 Page 77 1 0 13 0 43 3 1 15 25 43 4 0 11 0 43 1 1 14 50 43 11 5 44 32 55 23 36 176 61 64 2 1 22 33 43 2 3 12 60 43 11 6 65 35 55 11 13 91 54 61 8 5 33 38 61 1 0 6 0 29 19 35 167 65 64 1 0 7 0 43 26 21 180 45 61 16 9 117 36 55 8 8 79 50 64 1 0 6 0 43 1 1 8 50 43 2 1 10 33 43 12 11 74 48 64 8 22 131 73 61 5 11 121 69 63 16 24 188 60 63 10 14 70 58 63 6 23 134 79 63 9 33 134 79 63 27 10 110 27 63 27 38 211 58 63 12 24 187 67 63 7 23 126 77 63 9 21 134 70 63 7 18 71 72 63 16 37 166 70 63 15 22 107 59 63 5 9 90 64 63 25 24 160 49 63 6 19 127 76 63 15 11 108 42 63 14 35 205 71 63 13 18 130 58 63 9 22 106 71 63 8 27 206 77 63 16 20 139 56 63 8 5 55 38 63 14 24 136 63 63 4 9 65 69 63 5 15 93 75 63 11 24 160 69 63 Page 78 9 9 80 50 63 8 11 68 58 55 6 3 37 33 43 2 0 7 0 43 1 3 8 75 43 17 21 174 55 61 1 0 14 0 43 13 13 76 50 55 0 1 7 100 43 2 1 14 33 43 2 1 17 33 43 1 1 10 50 43 2 1 13 33 43 4 3 26 43 55 8 7 74 47 55 4 1 16 20 43 1 1 20 50 43 1 0 3 0 29 2 2 10 50 43 5 9 73 64 61 3 0 20 0 43 20 41 150 67 64 1 5 26 83 43 1 1 9 50 43 1 0 3 0 43 5 1 30 17 55 1 3 16 75 43 0 1 7 100 43 5 5 34 50 55 1 5 18 83 43 9 14 79 61 55 6 6 56 50 61 1 0 3 0 43 1 2 11 67 43 1 1 2 50 29 8 20 74 71 64 2 5 35 71 43 9 18 96 67 64 3 15 82 83 55 0 0 0 0 29 4 5 43 56 43 8 18 98 69 55 17 18 97 51 64 0 1 11 100 43 1 1 9 50 43 4 10 80 71 61 3 1 22 25 43 9 9 57 50 64 0 1 2 100 29 Page 79 0 1 8 100 43 2 9 37 82 55 2 18 107 90 55 3 12 42 80 55 8 8 43 50 55 2 3 25 60 43 1 1 5 50 43 7 9 69 56 55 5 5 28 50 55 1 0 9 0 43 3 1 8 25 43 6 1 9 14 43 2 0 10 0 43 2 9 50 82 61 1 2 14 67 43 1 2 19 67 43 2 5 30 71 43 8 6 60 43 61 4 18 131 82 63 7 5 51 42 63 3 5 62 63 63 5 12 46 71 55 3 1 11 25 43 1 1 10 50 43 3 0 9 0 43 1 0 9 0 43 0 1 7 100 55 2 1 9 33 43 5 7 84 58 61 7 10 115 59 61 2 3 24 60 43 1 0 22 0 43 7 11 75 61 61 1 2 15 67 43 1 3 10 75 43 13 22 168 63 61 13 20 88 61 55 1 5 51 83 55 2 5 49 71 61 10 12 66 55 64 1 5 16 83 43 2 3 18 60 43 1 1 7 50 43 1 0 4 0 29 3 7 56 70 55 2 4 17 67 43 1 2 12 67 43 1 0 14 0 43 1 2 7 67 43 Page 80 4 0 11 0 43 0 0 3 0 43 3 0 10 0 43 0 0 15 0 43 6 0 19 0 43 2 1 6 33 43 7 6 58 46 61 7 17 74 71 55 3 4 44 57 55 2 0 17 0 43 1 4 20 80 43 1 0 6 0 43 6 5 40 45 61 3 1 15 25 43 14 36 129 72 64 2 0 6 0 43 0 0 12 0 43 12 10 67 45 61 8 5 43 38 55 7 15 100 68 55 5 4 23 44 43 5 0 20 0 43 5 0 32 0 43 9 22 108 71 64 5 8 57 62 61 17 26 147 60 64 4 1 14 20 43 1 1 13 50 43 4 7 59 64 55 8 11 83 58 61 1 0 8 0 43 0 0 14 0 43 2 3 17 60 43 1 5 27 83 43 5 2 29 29 55 1 0 21 0 43 3 1 13 25 43 0 1 6 100 43 4 8 43 67 43 2 0 16 0 43 6 7 58 54 55 3 0 15 0 43 5 12 52 71 55 3 0 18 0 43 6 20 79 77 61 10 22 277 69 0 5 0 15 0 43 3 0 9 0 43 0 0 12 0 43 Page 81 8 6 76 43 61 5 6 47 55 61 4 5 34 56 55 1 0 23 0 43 4 13 68 76 64 2 3 30 60 43 3 0 24 0 43 0 1 13 100 43 3 4 15 57 43 0 0 7 0 43 3 2 22 40 43 5 5 32 50 55 2 2 8 50 43 3 0 12 0 43 0 1 11 100 43 4 6 21 60 43 0 1 10 100 43 0 0 3 0 43 17 22 105 56 64 9 9 110 50 63 1 2 9 67 43 4 5 56 56 61 9 10 85 53 55 4 1 11 20 43 7 27 104 79 61 4 1 13 20 43 10 10 41 50 55 10 9 70 47 61 5 2 15 29 43 6 8 63 57 64 2 4 15 67 43 5 0 10 0 43 6 2 30 25 43 0 1 14 100 43 0 0 5 0 43 0 0 1 0 29 1786 2446 16518 58%

match the number of decisions made. w-reports/interpreting-local-authority-statistics

Page 82

24 July 2019

By email

Mike Jackson Executive Director: Resources and Head of Paid Service Bristol City Council

Dear Mr Jackson

Annual Review letter 2019

I write to you with our annual summary of statistics on the complaints made to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman about your authority for the year ending 31 March 2019. The enclosed tables present the number of complaints and enquiries received about your authority, the decisions we made, and your authority’s compliance with recommendations during the period. I hope this information will prove helpful in assessing your authority’s performance in handling complaints.

Complaint statistics

As ever, I would stress that the number of complaints, taken alone, is not necessarily a reliable indicator of an authority’s performance. The volume of complaints should be considered alongside the uphold rate (how often we found fault when we investigated a complaint), and alongside statistics that indicate your authority’s willingness to accept fault and put things right when they go wrong. We also provide a figure for the number of cases where your authority provided a satisfactory remedy before the complaint reached us, and new statistics about your authority’s compliance with recommendations we have made; both of which offer a more comprehensive and insightful view of your authority’s approach to complaint handling.

The new statistics on compliance are the result of a series of changes we have made to how we make and monitor our recommendations to remedy the fault we find. Our recommendations are specific and often include a time-frame for completion, allowing us to follow up with authorities and seek evidence that recommendations have been implemented. These changes mean we can provide these new statistics about your authority’s compliance with our recommendations.

I want to emphasise the statistics in this letter reflect the data we hold and may not necessarily align with the data your authority holds. For example, our numbers include

Page 83 enquiries from people we signpost back to your authority, some of whom may never contact you.

In line with usual practice, we are publishing our annual data for all authorities on our website, alongside our annual review of local government complaints. For the first time, this includes data on authorities’ compliance with our recommendations. This collated data further aids the scrutiny of local services and we encourage you to share learning from the report, which highlights key cases we have investigated during the year.

Last year, we published one public report about your Council. We found the Council had prevented a family from applying for housing and wrongly ended its responsibility for storing their belongings. We also found that many departments across the Council knew what was happening but did not help. From 2015 the Council’s Housing Department refused to talk to the father. This resulted in a family of five, including two disabled children, living for years in one room in bed and breakfast accommodation. The Council also wrongly sent them a bill for £4,749.96 for storing their belongings.

During our investigation the Council began to put things right. Following a recommendation from us it accepted a housing application from the family and the complainant made a successful bid for housing within two months. It also returned his belongings and cancelled the bill. As soon as we issued the report the Council paid the complainant the £9,000 we recommended for time the family were without suitable accommodation and their time, trouble, distress and frustration. It also confirmed it would follow the law when storing homeless applicants’ possessions in future. I welcome the Council’s acceptance of our findings and recommendations and how promptly they were implemented.

Unfortunately, there have been other investigations during the year that have not progressed as quickly as they should have. Several of my investigators were delayed by your Council’s failure to respond in a timely way to our requests for information. This is frustrating, particularly for the complainant. I would ask the Council ensures it has robust procedures in place to ensure it responds efficiently and comprehensively to contact from my office.

New interactive data map

In recent years we have been taking steps to move away from a simplistic focus on complaint volumes and instead focus on the lessons learned and the wider improvements we can achieve through our recommendations to improve services for the many. Our ambition is outlined in our corporate strategy 2018-21 and commits us to publishing the outcomes of our investigations and the occasions our recommendations result in improvements for local services.

The result of this work is the launch of an interactive map of council performance on our website later this month. Your Council’s Performance shows annual performance data for all councils in England, with links to our published decision statements, public interest reports, annual letters and information about service improvements that have been agreed by each council. It also highlights those instances where your authority offered a suitable remedy to resolve a complaint before the matter came to us, and your authority’s compliance with the recommendations we have made to remedy complaints.

Page 84 The intention of this new tool is to place a focus on your authority’s compliance with investigations. It is a useful snapshot of the service improvement recommendations your authority has agreed to. It also highlights the wider outcomes of our investigations to the public, advocacy and advice organisations, and others who have a role in holding local councils to account.

I hope you, and colleagues, find the map a useful addition to the data we publish. We are the first UK public sector ombudsman scheme to provide compliance data in such a way and believe the launch of this innovative work will lead to improved scrutiny of councils as well as providing increased recognition to the improvements councils have agreed to make following our interventions.

Complaint handling training

We have a well-established and successful training programme supporting local authorities and independent care providers to help improve local complaint handling. In 2018-19 we delivered 71 courses, training more than 900 people, including our first ‘open courses’ in Effective Complaint Handling for local authorities. Due to their popularity we are running six more open courses for local authorities in 2019-20, in York, Manchester, Coventry and London. To find out more visit www.lgo.org.uk/training.

Finally, I am conscious of the resource pressures that many authorities are working within, and which are often the context for the problems that we investigate. In response to that situation we have published a significant piece of research this year looking at some of the common issues we are finding as a result of change and budget constraints. Called, Under Pressure, this report provides a contribution to the debate about how local government can navigate the unprecedented changes affecting the sector. I commend this to you, along with our revised guidance on Good Administrative Practice. I hope that together these are a timely reminder of the value of getting the basics right at a time of great change.

Yours sincerely,

Michael King Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman Chair, Commission for Local Administration in England

Page 85 Local Authority Report: Bristol City Council For the Period Ending: 31/03/2019

For further information on how to interpret our statistics, please visit our website

Complaints and enquiries received

Education Corporate Highways Adult Care Benefits and and Environment Planning and and Other and Housing Other Total Services Tax Children’s Services Development Services Transport Services 10 24 4 16 28 14 21 14 5 136

Page 86 Page

Decisions made Detailed Investigations

Referred Closed After Incomplete or Advice back for Initial Not Upheld Upheld Uphold Rate (%) Total Invalid Given Local Enquiries Resolution 7 8 51 40 6 12 67 124

Note: The uphold rate shows how often we found evidence of fault. It is expressed as a percentage of the total number of detailed investigations we completed.

Satisfactory remedy provided by authority

Upheld cases where the authority had provided a satisfactory % of upheld remedy before the complaint reached the Ombudsman cases

3 25

Note: These are the cases in which we decided that, while the authority did get things wrong, it offered a satisfactory way to resolve it before the complaint came to us. Compliance with Ombudsman recommendations

Complaints where compliance Complaints where the Complaints where the Complaints where the authority with the recommended remedy authority complied with authority has not complied with our was recorded during the year* our recommendations on- complied with our recommendations late time recommendations

10 0 0 Number 10 100% - Compliance rate** Notes: * This is the number of complaints where we have recorded a response (or failure to respond) to our recommendation for a remedy during the reporting year. This includes complaints that may have been decided in the preceding year but where the data for compliance falls within the current reporting year. ** The compliance rate is based on the number of complaints where the authority has provided evidence of their compliance with our recommendations to remedy a fault. This includes instances where an authority has accepted and implemented our recommendation but provided late evidence of that.

Page 87 Page

Agenda Item 10

,, Audit Committee 30 September 2019

Report of: Grant Thornton UK LLP

Title: Grant Thornton 2018/19 Audit Report

Ward: City Wide

Officer Presenting Report: Grant Thornton UK LLP

Contact Telephone Number:

Recommendation The Audit Committee note, and comment as appropriate, on Grant Thornton’s 2018/19 Audit Report and the action plan agreed by management.

Summary Attached (to follow) to this report is Grant Thornton’s Audit Report to those charged with governance, which highlights the key issues arising from the audit of the Council's financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2019. This report enables Grant Thornton to discharge their responsibilities in accordance with International Standards of Auditing (ISA) 260. It also reports their conclusion on whether the Council has put in place proper arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources.

Grant Thornton are proposing to issue an unqualified audit opinion both on the Council's financial statements and VFM conclusion subject to satisfactory completion of the outstanding matters included within their report.

A number of recommendations have been made to management. Management responses to these recommendations have been provided as set out in the Action Plan within the report.

Page 88 Policy

None affected by this report. The Audit Commission has statutory responsibility for inspection and assessment at the Council. Grant Thornton are the Council’s appointed external auditors. In carrying out their audit and inspection duties they have to comply with the relevant statutory requirements, namely the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014.

Consultation

1. Internal Grant Thornton have discussed and agreed the findings of the audit with the the Director of Finance and with Senior Finance Officers.

2. External None

Background and Context

1. Grant Thornton is required to form an opinion on the Council’s annual financial statements and to provide a value for money conclusion. This report sets out the outcomes of the audit of the Council's financial statements and the issues arising.

2. Barrie Morris will be attending the Committee in substitute of Jon Roberts, the Council’s Appointed Auditor, and will be pleased to answer Members’ questions.

Other Options Considered

Not applicable

Risk Assessment

None necessary for this report

Public Sector Equality Duties

None necessary for this report

Legal and Resource Implications

Legal

None arising from this report Financial

Page 89 None arising from this report.

Land Not applicable

Personnel Not Applicable

Appendices: Appendix 1: Grant Thornton’s Audit Report 2018/19 (to follow)

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT 1985 Background Papers:

None

Page 90 Agenda Item 12

Audit Committee 30th September 2019

Report of: Service Director: Finance

Title: Treasury Management Annual Report 2018/19

Ward: City Wide

Officer Presenting Report: Denise Murray, Service Director: Finance

Contact Telephone Number: 0117 35 76255

Recommendation The Audit Committee note the Annual Treasury Management Report for 2018/19, as detailed in Appendix A.

Summary The Council is required to produce an annual treasury management review of activities and the actual treasury indicators in accordance with Local Government regulations.

The significant issues in the report are:  The Council has complied with treasury management legislative and regulatory requirements during the period and all transactions were in accordance with the approved Treasury Management Strategy.

 The 2018–2023 Treasury Strategy identified a medium term borrowing requirement of £370m to support the existing and future Capital Programme. The Council’s agreed policy is to defer borrowing while it has significant levels of cash balances (£108m at March 2019), noting if the financial environment changes and borrowing was deemed advantageous the Council may borrow over appropriate maturity periods.

 The Council’s long term debt at 31 March 2019 was £431m with an average annual interest rate of 4.68%. Investments were £108m at the 31 March 2019 with an average annual interest rate of 0.76%.

Page 91 Policy

There are no policy implications as a direct result of this report.

Consultation

1. Internal Strategic & Service Directors, and Deputy Mayor – Finance, Governance & Performance.

2. External Link Asset Services – the Council’s external treasury management advisors

Background and Context

1. The Council’s treasury management activity is underpinned by CIPFA’s Code of Practice on Treasury Management (the Code), which requires local authorities to produce annually Prudential Indicators and a Treasury Management Strategy Statement on the likely financing and investment activity. The Code also requires reports to full Council mid-year and after the year end. The 2018/19 outturn report is set out as Appendix A.

2. The Code also requires the Council to nominate one of its Committees to have responsibility for scrutiny of its treasury management strategy, policy and activity. Council has delegated that responsibility to the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board and Audit Committee. Overall responsibility for treasury management remains with the Council. No treasury management activity is without risk; the effective identification and management of risk are integral to the Council’s treasury management objectives.

3. Treasury management is defined as:

“The management of the local authority’s borrowing, investments and cash flows, its banking, money market and capital market transactions; the effective control of the risks associated with those activities; and the pursuit of optimum performance consistent with those risks”.

Other Options Considered

Not applicable Page 92 Risk Assessment

The principal risks associated with treasury management are:

Risk Mitigation

Loss of investments as a result Limiting the types of investment of failure of counterparties instruments used, setting lending criteria for counterparties, and limiting the extent of exposure to individual counterparties

Increase in the net financing Planning and undertaking borrowing and costs of the authority due to lending in light of assessments of future borrowing at high rates of interest rate movements, and by interest / lending at low rates undertaking most long term borrowing at of interest fixed rates of interest (to reduce the volatility of capital financing costs)

Public Sector Equality Duties

None necessary for this report

Legal and Resource Implications

Legal The Council is under a duty to manage its resources prudently and therefore due consideration must always be given to its borrowing and lending strategy. A wide range of local authority financial activities, including borrowing, lending, financial management, and the approval of types of investment vehicle are governed by legislation and various regulations. The Council is obliged to comply with these. (Legal advice provided by Tim O’Gara - Service Director: Legal and Democratic Services)

Financial (a) Revenues The financing costs arising from planned borrowing are provided for in the revenue budget and medium term financial plan. Any additional operating costs arising from capital investment must be contained within the revenue budget of the Page 93 relevant department.

(b) Capital Not Applicable (Financial advice provided by Jon Clayton – Capital and Investments Manager)

Land Not applicable

Personnel Not Applicable

Appendices: Appendix A – Treasury Management Annual Report 2018/19

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT 1985 Background Papers:

None

Page 94 Appendix A

Treasury Management Annual Report 2018/19

Purpose of the report:

1. Under the CIPFA Code of Practice on Treasury Management (the Code) the Section 151 Officer is required to produce an outturn report on activities in the year to account for how the Strategy set at the start of the year has been implemented. This report meets the requirements of both the Code and the CIPFA Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities (the Prudential Code).

Background

2. The Council’s treasury management activity is underpinned by CIPFA’s Code of Practice on Treasury Management (the Code), which requires local authorities to produce annually Prudential Indicators and a Treasury Management Strategy Statement on the likely financing and investment activity. The Code also requires reports to full Council mid-year and after the year end.

3. The Code also requires the Council to nominate one of its Committees to have responsibility for scrutiny of its treasury management strategy, policy and activity. Council has delegated this responsibility to the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board and Audit Committee. Overall responsibility for treasury management remains with the Council. No treasury management activity is without risk; the effective identification and management of risk are integral to the Council’s treasury management objectives.

4. Treasury management is defined as:

“The management of the local authority’s borrowing, investments and cash flows, its banking, money market and capital market transactions; the effective control of the risks associated with those activities; and the pursuit of optimum performance consistent with those risks.”

The Economy and Interest Rates for 2018/19

5. UK. After weak economic growth of only 0.2% in quarter one of 2018, growth picked up to 0.4% in quarter 2 and to a particularly strong 0.7% in quarter 3, before cooling off to 0.2% in the final quarter. Given all the uncertainties over Brexit, this weak growth in the final quarter was as to be expected. However, some recovery in the rate of growth is expected going forward. The annual growth in Q4 came in at 1.4% year on year confirming that the UK was the third fastest growing country in the G7 in quarter 4.

After the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) raised Bank Rate from 0.5% to 0.75% in August 2018, it is little surprise that they have abstained from any further increases since then. We are unlikely to see any changes in bank rate until the uncertainties over Brexit clear. If there were a disorderly exit, it is possible that Bank Rate would be cut to support growth. Nevertheless, the MPC has been having increasing concerns over the trend in wage inflation which peaked at a new post financial crisis high of 3.5%, (excluding bonuses), in the three months to December

Page 95 before falling only marginally to 3.4% in the three months to January. British employers increased their hiring at the fastest pace in more than three years in the three months to January as the country's labour market defied the broader weakness in the overall economy as Brexit approached. The number of people in work surged by 222,000, helping to push down the unemployment rate to 3.9 percent, its lowest rate since 1975. Correspondingly, the total level of vacancies has risen to new highs.

CPI inflation has been on a falling trend since peaking at 3.1% in November 2017, reaching a new low of 1.8% in January 2019 before rising marginally to 1.9% in February. However, in the February 2019 Bank of England Inflation Report, the latest forecast for inflation over both the two and three year time horizons remained marginally above the MPC’s target of 2%.

The rise in wage inflation and fall in CPI inflation is good news for consumers as their spending power is improving in this scenario as the difference between the two figures is now around 1.5%, i.e. a real terms increase. Given the UK economy is very much services sector driven, an increase in household spending power is likely to feed through into providing some support to the overall rate of economic growth in the coming months.

Brexit. This first half of the year (2019/20) has been a time of upheaval on the political front as Theresa May resigned as Prime Minister to be replaced by Boris Johnson on a platform of the UK leaving the EU on or 31 October, with or without a deal. However, so far, there has been no majority of MPs for any one option to move forward on enabling Brexit to be implemented. At the time of writing, (early September), the political situation in the UK over Brexit is fluid and could change by the day. The vote in the Commons on 3 September looks likely to lead to a delay in the date for Brexit to 31 January 2020, but there is also likelihood that there will be an imminent general election. This could result in a potential loosening of monetary policy and therefore medium to longer dated gilt yields could rise on the expectation of a weak pound and concerns around inflation picking up.

6. USA. President Trump’s easing of fiscal policy in 2018 fuelled a (temporary) boost in consumption in 2018 which generated an upturn in the strong rate of growth; this rose from 2.2%, (annualised rate) in quarter 1 of 2018 to 4.2% in quarter 2, 3.5% in quarter 3 and then back to 2.2% in quarter 4. The annual rate came in at 2.9% for 2018, just below President Trump’s aim for 3% growth. The strong growth in employment numbers has fed through to an upturn in wage inflation which hit 3.4% in February, a decade high point. However, CPI inflation overall fell to 1.5% in February, a two and a half year low, and looks to be likely to stay around this level in 2019, below the Federal Reserve’s target of 2%. The Federal Reserve increased rates by another 0.25% in December to between 2.25% and 2.50%, this being the fourth increase in 2018 and the ninth in the upward swing cycle. However, the Federal Reserve now appears to be edging towards a change of direction and admitting there may be a need to switch to taking action to cut rates over the next two years. Financial markets are now predicting two cuts of 25 bps by the end of 2020.

7. EUROZONE. The European Central Bank (ECB) provided high levels of monetary stimulus in 2016 and 2017 to encourage growth in the Eurozone and that produced strong annual growth in 2017 of 2.3%. However, since then the ECB has been reducing its monetary stimulus measures and growth has been weakening - to 0.4% in quarters 1 and 2 of 2018, and then slowed further to 0.2% in quarters 3 and 4; it is likely to be only 0.1 - 0.2% in quarter 1 of 2019. The annual rate of growth for 2018 was 1.8% but is expected to fall to around half that rate in Page 96 2019. The ECB ended its programme of quantitative easing purchases of debt in December 2018, which means that the central banks in the US, UK and EU have all ended the phase of post financial crisis expansion of liquidity supporting world financial markets by purchases of debt. However, the downturn in growth, together with inflation falling well below its target range prompted the ECB to take new measures to stimulate growth. With its refinancing rate already at 0.0% and the deposit rate at -0.4%, it has probably reached the limit of cutting rates. At its March 2019 meeting it said that it expects to leave interest rates at their present levels “at least through the end of 2019”, but that is of little help to boosting growth in the near term. Consequently, it also announced a third round of “Targeted longer-term refinancing operations” (TLTROs) to encourage bank lending.

8. CHINA. Economic growth has been weakening over successive years, despite repeated rounds of central bank stimulus; medium term risks are increasing. Major progress still needs to be made to eliminate excess industrial capacity and the stock of unsold property, and to address the level of non-performing loans in the banking and credit systems.

9. WORLD GROWTH. Equity markets are currently concerned about the synchronised general weakening of growth in the major economies of the world: they fear there could even be a recession looming up in the US, though this fear is probably overdone.

Treasury position as at 31 March 2019

10. The table below indicates the balance of borrowing and investments at the beginning and end of the year and average borrowing cost and investment returns for each period:

31 March 2018 31 March 2019 £m Average £m Average Rate % Rate % Long Term Debt (fixed rates) - PWLB 311 4.92 311 4.92 Long Term Debt (fixed rates) – LOBOS 100 4.11 70 4.09 Long Term Debt (fixed rates) – Market 20 3.84 50 4.04 Short Term Borrowing - - - - Total borrowing 431 4.68 431 4.68 Investments 64 0.44 108 0.76 Net Borrowing Position 367 323

11. During the year £30m of RBS Lobo's (Lender option, Borrower option) were converted to fixed rate loans when the options in these loans were unilaterally removed.

12. The total borrowing excludes accrued interest of £5m (£5m at 31/3/18) and the outstanding finance on PFI and service contracts of £135m at 31 March 2018 (£140m at 31/3/18).

13. The authority also has long term service investments costing £42m primarily relating to the holdings in Bristol Holdings Company (£29m), Bristol Port Company (£3m) and a property fund to support Homelessness (£10m). Page 97

14. The Net debt has decreased by £44m from £367m to £323m primarily due to;  Funding of the capital programme financed by borrowing +£32m  Net increase of reserves (£30m)  Other changes to working capital / provisions (£46m)

Long Term Borrowing – Strategy and outturn

15. The 2018–2023 Treasury Strategy (approved 20th February 2018) identified a medium term borrowing requirement of £370m to support the existing and future Capital Programme with the debt servicing costs predominately met from revenue savings from capital investment and the economic development fund. The £370m was planned to be borrowed in the following periods, 18/19 - £120m, 19/20 - £120m, 20/21, £80m, 21/22 - £40m and 22/23 - £10m.

16. The Council’s Strategy is also to defer borrowing while it has significant levels of liquid treasury investments, £108m at March 2019 (£64m at March 2018). However the Strategy also considers where the financial environment changes and borrowing is deemed advantageous the Council will seek to borrow over appropriate maturity periods. Deferring borrowing reduces the “net” revenue interest cost of the Authority as well as reducing the Councils exposure to counter party risk for its investments. The Council recognises that utilising investments in lieu of borrowing clearly has a finite duration and that future borrowing will be required to support capital expenditure (see 2018/19 Treasury Management Strategy approved by Council 20th February 2018).

https://democracy.bristol.gov.uk/documents/s19529/Appendix%204%20-%20Treasury%20Management%20Strategy.pdf

17. Borrowing activity in year was in accordance with the Strategy approved at the beginning of the year:

 Borrowing – No borrowing was undertaken as the authority maintained higher levels of investments than originally anticipated for a variety of reasons including the time taken to progress capital schemes where the source of financing is external borrowing.

 Rescheduling – No debt rescheduling activity was undertaken in 2018/19. As set out in the Treasury Mid-Year report the total life cycle cost of rescheduling loans on a discounted cash-flow basis has been reviewed with no loans providing a positive cash-flow benefit to the authority. This would in part be due to the large early repayment penalties that the authority will incur, circa £261m penalty to repay the £311m of PWLB loans early as at 31st March 2019 (the penalty at 31/03/18 was £253m).

Annual Investment Strategy and Outturn

18. Investment returns remained low during 2018/19. The expectation for interest rates within the treasury management strategy for 2018/19 was that Bank Rate would rise Page 98 from 0.50% to 0.75%. At the start of 2018-19, and after UK GDP growth had proved disappointingly weak in the first few months of 2018, the expectation for the timing of this increase was pushed back to August 2018. Investment interest rates were therefore on a gently rising trend in the first half of the year after April, in anticipation that the MPC would raise Bank Rate in August. This duly happened at the MPC meeting on 2 August 2018.

It was not expected that the MPC would raise Bank Rate again during 2018-19 after August in view of the fact that the UK was entering into a time of major uncertainty with Brexit due in March 2019. Value was therefore sought by placing longer term investments after 2 August where cash balances were sufficient to allow this.

19. Security of capital remained the Council’s main investment objective. This was maintained by following the Council’s policy for assessing institutions to which the council might lend. This policy sets out the approach for choosing investment counterparties, and is based on credit ratings provided by the three main credit rating agencies supplemented by additional market data (such as rating outlooks, credit default swaps, bank share prices etc.).

20. Treasury Investments held by the Council - the Council maintained an average balance of £128m (£94m 2017/18) of internally managed funds. The internally managed funds received an average return of 0.76% (0.44% 2017/18). The comparable performance indicator is the average 7-day LIBID rate, which was 0.51%.

Compliance with Treasury Limits and Treasury Related Prudential Indicators

21. The Council can confirm that:

 All treasury related transactions were undertaken by authorised officers and within the limits and parameters approved by the Council;

 All investments were to counterparties on the approved lending list

 The Council operated within the Prudential Indicators within Appendix 1.

Performance Indicators set for 2018/19

22. One of the key requirements in the Code is the formal introduction of performance measurement relating to investments, debt, and capital financing activities. Whilst investment performance criteria have been well developed and universally accepted, debt performance indicators continue to be a more problematic area with the traditional average portfolio rate of interest acting as the main guide. The Council’s performance indicators were set out in the Annual Treasury Management Strategy.

23. The following performance indicators have been set: Page 99  Debt – Average rate movement, noting no borrowing undertaken during the year.  Investments – Internal returns above the 7 day LIBID rate  Average rate for the year 0.76% vs. annual average 7 day LIBID of 0.51%

Consultation and scrutiny input 24. The report has been discussed with the Council's external treasury management advisers and internally with Strategic & Service Directors, and Deputy Mayor – Finance, Governance & Performance.

Risk Assessment

25. The principal risks associated with treasury management are: Risk Mitigation Loss of investments as a result of Limiting the types of investment instruments used, failure of counterparties setting lending criteria for counterparties, and limiting the extent of exposure to individual counterparties Increase in the net financing costs of Planning and undertaking borrowing and lending in the authority due to borrowing at light of assessments of future interest rate high rates of interest / lending at movements, and by undertaking most long term low rates of interest borrowing at fixed rates of interest (to reduce the volatility of capital financing costs)

Public sector equality duties:

26. There are no proposals in this report, which require either a statement as to the relevance of public sector equality duties or an Equalities Impact Assessment.

Environmental checklist / eco impact assessment

27. There are no proposals in this report which have environmental impacts

Legal and Resource Implications

28. Legal- the Council is under a duty to manage its resources prudently and therefore due consideration must always be given to its borrowing and lending strategy. A wide range of local authority financial activities, including borrowing, lending, financial management, and the approval of types of investment vehicle are governed by legislation and various regulations. The Council is obliged to comply with these. Advice provided by Tim O’Gara (Service Director: Legal and Democratic Services)

Financial

Page 100 (a) Revenue

29. The financing costs arising from planned borrowing are provided for in the revenue budget and medium term financial plan. Advice given by Jon Clayton (Capital and Investment Manager) (b) Capital

30. There is no direct capital investment implications contained within this report.

Land

31. There are no direct implications for this report.

Personnel

32. There are no direct implications for this report.

Appendices:

Appendix 1: Treasury Management Annual Report 2018/19

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT 1985

Background Papers:

33. Treasury Management Strategy 2018/19

https://democracy.bristol.gov.uk/documents/s19529/Appendix%204%20-%20Treasury%20Management%20Strategy.pdf

Page 101 Appendix 1

Annual Report on the Treasury Management Service 2018/19 (Incorporating Outturn Prudential Indicators)

Introduction

1. This report summarises:

 The capital activity during the year  What resources the Council applied to pay for this activity;  The impact of this activity on the Council’s underlying indebtedness (the Capital Financing Requirement);  The reporting of the required prudential indicators;  Overall treasury position identifying how the Council has borrowed in relation to this indebtedness, and the impact on investment balances;  A summary of interest rate movements in the year;  The detailed debt activity;  The detailed investment activity;  Local Issues

The Council’s Capital Expenditure and Financing 2018/19

2. The Council undertakes capital expenditure to invest in the acquisition and enhancement of long-term assets. These activities may either be:

 Financed immediately through the application of capital or revenue resources (capital receipts, capital grants, revenue contributions etc.), which has no resultant impact on the Council’s borrowing need; or

 If insufficient financing is available, or a decision is taken not to apply resources, the capital expenditure will give rise to a borrowing need.

Page 102 3. The actual capital expenditure forms one of the required prudential indicators. The table below shows the actual capital expenditure and how this was financed.

2017/18 2018/19 2018/19 2018/19 Actual Original P10 - Final Actual Budget Budget £m £m £m £m Non-HRA capital expenditure 104 197 121 93

HRA capital expenditure 32 47 39 37

Total capital expenditure 136 244 160 130

Resourced by:

Capital receipts 6 16 11

Capital grants 45 79 44

HRA Self Financing 24 25 23

Prudential borrowing 44 111 32

Revenue 17 13 20

Total Resources 136 244 130

The Council’s Overall Borrowing Need

4. The Council’s underlying need to borrow is called the Capital Financing Requirement (CFR). This figure is a gauge of the Council’s debt position. It represents 2018/19 and prior years’ net capital expenditure that has not yet been paid for by revenue or other resources.

5. Part of the Council’s treasury activities is to address this borrowing need, either through borrowing from external bodies, or utilising temporary cash resources within the Council.

6. Reducing the CFR – Whilst under treasury management arrangements actual debt can be borrowed or repaid at any time within the confines of the annual treasury strategy, the Council is required to make an annual revenue charge to reduce the CFR – effectively a repayment of the Non-Housing Revenue Account (HRA) borrowing need. There is no statutory requirement to reduce the HRA CFR.

7. This statutory revenue charge is called the Minimum Revenue Provision - MRP. The total CFR can also be reduced by:

 the application of additional capital resources (such as unapplied capital receipts); or  charging more than the statutory revenue charge (MRP) each year through a Voluntary

Page 103 Revenue Provision (VRP).

8. The Council’s 2018/19 MRP Policy (as required by CLG Guidance) was approved on the 20th February 2018.

9. The Council’s CFR for the year is shown below, and represents a key prudential indicator. Accounting rule changes in previous years has meant that PFI schemes are now included on the balance sheet, which increases the Council’s borrowing need, the CFR. No borrowing is actually required against these schemes as a borrowing facility is included in the contract.

CFR General General HRA HRA Total CFR Fund Fund 31 March 31 March 31 March 31 March 31 March 2018 Actual 2019 Actual 2019 Actual 2018 Actual 2019 Actual £m £m £m £m £m

Opening balance 543 578 245 245 823 Add unfinanced capital 44 32 - - 32 expenditure (as above) Less MRP/VRP (3) (2) - - (2) Less PFI & finance lease (6) (6) - - (6) repayments Closing balance 578 602 245 245 847

Treasury Position at 31 March 2019

10. Whilst the Council’s gauge of its underlying need to borrow is the CFR, Finance can manage the Council’s actual borrowing position by either:

 Borrowing to the CFR; or  Choosing to utilise some temporary internal cash flow funds in lieu of borrowing or  Borrowing for future increases in the CFR (borrowing in advance of need).

Page 104 11. The figures in this report are based on the principal amounts borrowed and invested and so may differ from those in the final accounts by items such as accrued interest.

31 March 2018 31 March 2019 Principal Average Principal Average £m Rate %2 £m Rate %2 Fixed Interest Rate Debt 311 4.92 311 4.92 Variable Interest Rate Debt - - - - Market Debt – LOBO1 100 4.11 70 4.09 Market Debt 20 3.84 50 4.04 PFI / Service Contracts 140 - 135 - Total Debt 571 4.68 566 4.68 Debt administered of behalf of (44) - (43) - Unitary Authorities (Ex Avon Debt) Revised Debt 527 4.68 523 4.68 Capital Financing Requirement 823 847 Over/(Under) borrowing (296) (324) Investment position Investments (Fixed & Call) 64 0.44 108 0.76 Net borrowing position (excl 367 - 323 - leasing arrangements) 1 Lender option Borrower option, 2 reflects the average rate for the year taking account of new loans and repayments.

12. The fixed Interest rate debt is apportioned between the General Fund and HRA as set out in the table below.

Fixed Interest Rate Debt 31 March 2018 31 March 2019 £m £m Principal Average Principal Average £m Rate% £m Rate% General Fund 186 4.68 186 4.68 HRA 245 4.68 245 4.68 Total 431 4.68 431 4.68

13. The maturity structure of the debt portfolio (excluding accrued interest) was as follows:

Approved Approved 31 March 2018 31 March 2019 Min Max Actual % Actual % Limit% Limit% £m £m Under 12 Months 0 20 - - - - 1 to 2 years 0 20 - - 10 2 2 to 5 years 0 40 15 3 5 1 5 to 10 years 0 40 49 11 54 13 10 years and over 25 100 367 86 362 84

Total 431 100 431 100

Page 105

14. The Council hold £70m of LOBOS with maturities averaging 42 years. Inherent within these loan instruments are options (averaging an option every 3.5 years) that could give rise to the debt being repaid early. These loans are regularly reviewed with the current and expected structure of interest rates. The risk of the lenders exercising their options is currently low for the short to medium term. Therefore, the maturity of these loans in above table is based on their maturity date, 10 years and over.

15. The Council will continually review these loans in accordance with economic forecasts and will update the maturity structure of the debt portfolio accordingly and assess the future re- financing risks exposed to the authority and report any changes within future monitoring reports.

16. The authority’s borrowing strategy is to delay borrowing and use its existing resources to support the Capital Programme to reduce its exposure to counterparty risk and the net interest cost of the authority. The authority, as planned, did not undertake further borrowing while the authority maintained higher levels of investments than originally anticipated. This was due to a variety of reasons including the time taken to progress capital schemes where the source of financing was external borrowing.

17. If it had been felt that there was a significant risk of a much sharper RISE in long and short term rates than expected, perhaps arising from an acceleration in bank rate, an increase in world economic activity or a sudden increase in inflation risks, then this course of action would have been re-appraised. Most likely, fixed rate funding would have been drawn whilst interest rates were lower than they were projected to be over the short to medium term.

Prudential Indicators and Compliance Issues

18. Some of the prudential indicators provide either an overview or specific limits on treasury activity. These are shown below:

19. Gross Borrowing and the CFR - In order to ensure that borrowing levels are prudent over the medium term and only for a capital purpose, the Council should ensure that its gross external borrowing does not, except in the short term, exceed the total of the capital financing requirement over the medium term. This essentially means that the Council is not borrowing to support revenue expenditure. The table below highlights the Council’s gross borrowing position against the CFR. The Council has complied with this prudential indicator.

31 March 2018 31 March 2019 Actual Actual £m £m Gross borrowing position 431 431 CFR (excluding PFI) 683 712

20. The Authorised Limit - The Authorised Limit is the “Affordable Borrowing Limit” required by Section 3 of the Local Government Act 2003. Once agreed the authorised limit cannot be breached. The Council does not have the power to borrow above this level. The table below demonstrates that during 2018/19 the Council has maintained gross borrowing within its Page 106 Authorised Limit.

21. The Operational Boundary – The Operational Boundary is the expected borrowing position of the Council during the year. Periods where the actual position is either below or over the Boundary is acceptable subject to the Authorised Limit not being breached.

22. Actual financing costs as a proportion of net revenue stream - This indicator identifies the cost of capital (borrowing and other long term obligation costs net of investment income) against the net revenue stream. TO HERE

2018/19 £m Authorised Limit 960 Operational Boundary 672 Average gross borrowing position (including PFI) 568 Financing costs as a proportion of net revenue stream: General Fund 6.14% HRA 8.71%

Borrowing Rates in 2018/19

23. PWLB borrowing rates - the graph below shows PWLB rates peaked during October, and since then most PWLB rates have been on a general downward trend, though longer term rates did spike upwards again during December, and then reached lows for the year at the end of March.

Page 107

24. Summary of Debt Transactions – No long term borrowing was undertaken during year as mentioned previously within the report.

25. The average rate of interest for the debt portfolio is 4.68%.

Investment Rates in 2018/19

26. Investment interest rates were on a gently rising trend in the first half in anticipation that the MPC would raise Bank Rate. This duly happened at the MPC meeting on 2 August 2018.

27. Investment rates were little changed during August to October but rose sharply after the MPC meeting of 1 November was unexpectedly hawkish about their perception of building inflationary pressures, particularly from rising wages. However, weak GDP growth data after December, plus increasing concerns generated by Brexit, resulted in investment rates falling back again

28. The Council’s investment policy is governed by CLG guidance, which has been implemented in the annual investment strategy approved by the Council on 20th February 2018. This policy sets out the approach for choosing investment counterparties, and is based on credit ratings provided by the three main credit rating agencies supplemented by additional market data (such as rating outlooks, credit default swaps, bank share prices etc.). The investment activity during the year conformed to the approved strategy, and the Council had no liquidity Page 108 difficulties.

Local Issues

29. Ethical Investment Policy- The “Ethical Investment Policy” was approved by Cabinet on 15th December 2011 (updated February 2015). There are no breaches to report.

Regulatory Framework, Risk and Performance

30. The Council’s treasury management activities are regulated by a variety of professional codes and statutes and guidance:

 The Local Government Act 2003 (the Act), which provides the powers to borrow and invest as well as providing controls and limits on this activity;  The Act permits the Secretary of State to set limits either on the Council or nationally on all local authorities restricting the amount of borrowing which may be undertaken (although no restrictions have been made);  Statutory Instrument (SI) 3146 2003, as amended, develops the controls and powers within the Act;  The SI requires the Council to undertake any borrowing activity with regard to the CIPFA Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities;  The SI also requires the Council to operate the overall treasury function with regard to the CIPFA Code of Practice for Treasury Management in the Public Services;  Under the Act the CLG has issued Investment Guidance to structure and regulate the Council’s investment activities.  Under section 238(2) of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 the Secretary of State has taken powers to issue guidance on accounting practices. Guidance on Minimum Revenue Provision was issued under this section on 8th November 2007.

31. The Council has complied with all of the above relevant statutory and regulatory requirements which require the Council to identify and, where possible, quantify the levels of risk associated with its treasury management activities. In particular its adoption and implementation of both the Prudential Code and the Code of Practice for Treasury Management means both that its capital expenditure is prudent, affordable and sustainable, and its treasury practices demonstrate a low risk approach.

32. The Council has ensured that the principles of security, liquidity and yield have been adhered to within the treasury operation. This implies that the safeguarding of the principal investment with a suitable counterparty remains the Council’s highest priority followed by liquidity (i.e. ease of access to the principal amount deposited) and yield (i.e. return) on investment.

Page 109 Agenda Item 13

Report for Audit Committee

Audit Committee 30th September 2019

Report of: Chief Internal Auditor

Title: Internal Audit Activity Report for Period 1st April 2019 to 31st August 2019

Ward: N/A

Officer Presenting Report: Simba Muzarurwi, Chief Internal Auditor

Recommendation

The Audit Committee considers the work of the Internal Audit Team (IA), during the period of 1st April to 31st August 2019, and the results thereof and agrees to the proposed amendments to the 2019/20 Internal Audit Plan and revised assurance opinions.

Summary

This report provides details of the work carried out by Internal Audit during the second quarter of 2019/20 and the results of that work. This is the second planned update provided by Internal Audit during 2019/20.

The significant issues in the report are:

- Key messages from the work completed to date are provided in section 2 of the Activity Report - Proposed changes to the Internal Audit Assurance Plan are provided in section 2 - Proposed revisions to Internal Audit Opinions as provided in section 3, paragraph 3.7 - Appendix A to the Activity Report provides summary details, including key findings and recommendations, for a selection of reports where the level of assurance was concluded at ‘Limited’, to give the Committee the opportunity to explore these areas further, should it wish to do so.

Page 110 Report for Audit Committee

Policy

1. Audit Committee Terms of Reference.

Consultation

2. Internal - None 3. External - None

Context

4. This is the second ‘in year’ Internal Audit (IA) Activity report to the Audit Committee. The Activity reports are designed to provide the Committee with a summary view of the work completed by the Service throughout the year to date and the results of that work. The Activity reports are provided to:

 Provide an overview of the work of Internal Audit to date.

 Present the assurance work completed by the Internal Audit team during the period, together with the conclusions drawn from that work.

 Update the Committee on the Internal Audit recommendations implementation rate.

 Spotlight audit review outcomes, both positive and negative, to management and the Audit Committee for their consideration and action, where appropriate.

 Provide an overview of the work of the Internal Audit Counter-Fraud Team in advance of a fuller report to Committee in November 2019

The Activity Report covering the period 1st April 2019 to 31st August 2019 can be found at Appendix (A).

Proposal

5. The Audit Committee note the report.

Other Options Considered

6. N/A

Risk Assessment

7. The work of Internal Audit minimises the risk of failures in the Council’s internal control, risk management and governance arrangements, reduces fraud and other losses and increases the potential for prevention and detection of such issues. Areas of significant risk are detailed in the report.

Page 111 Report for Audit Committee

Public Sector Equality Duties

8a) Before making a decision, section 149 Equality Act 2010 requires that each decision-maker considers the need to promote equality for persons with the following “protected characteristics”: age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation. Each decision-maker must, therefore, have due regard to the need to:

i) Eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct prohibited under the Equality Act 2010.

ii) Advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and those who do not share it. This involves having due regard, in particular, to the need to --

- remove or minimise disadvantage suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic;

- take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of people who do not share it (in relation to disabled people, this includes, in particular, steps to take account of disabled persons' disabilities);

- encourage persons who share a protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low.

iii) Foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and those who do not share it. This involves having due regard, in particular, to the need to – - tackle prejudice; and - promote understanding.

8b) No equality impact assessment is required for this report. The matters concern internal control, governance and risk management arrangements only.

Legal and Resource Implications

Legal – Not sought

Financial – None arising from this report. Financial advice provided by N/A

Land/Property – Not applicable

Human Resources – Not applicable HR advice provided by N/A

Page 112 Report for Audit Committee

Appendices: Appendix A – Internal Audit Activity Report – Period 1st April 2019 to 31st August 2019

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT 1985 Background Papers:

Various Audit Files

Page 113

INTERNAL AUDIT ACTIVITY REPORT FOR THE PERIOD OF 1 April 2019 to 31 August 2019

1 Page 114 1. Introduction

1.1 The role of the Internal Audit function is to provide Members and Management with independent assurance that the control, risk and governance framework in place within the Council is effective and supports the Council in the achievement of its objectives. The work of the Internal Audit team should be targeted towards those areas within the Council that are most at risk of impacting on the Council’s ability to achieve its objectives. In addition, the team provide a Counter Fraud Service to the Council to enhance arrangements for the prevention, detection and investigation of fraud.

1.2 Upon completion of an audit, an assurance opinion is given on the effectiveness of the controls in place. The results of the entire programme of work are then summarised in an opinion in the Annual Internal Audit Report on the effectiveness of the internal control, governance and risk management arrangements within the organisation.

1.3 This second activity report provides the Audit Committee and Management with an update on the work completed by the Internal Audit team for the period of 1st April to 31st August 2019.

1.4 Additionally, the report provides an update on the approved Annual Internal Audit plan and highlights any proposed changes thereof, as well as updates in the following areas:

. Outcomes from internal audit and counter fraud activities including summaries of completed audit reviews where the level of assurance was concluded as ‘Limited’ . Internal Audit Resources, as required by the Public Sector Internal Audit Standards (PSIAS) . Grant certification . Recommendation Implementation status . Counter Fraud Activity

1.5 Full details of all of the Internal Audit work completed or in progress at the half year stage will be provided in the Half-Year report which is presented to the Committee at its November meeting.

2. Key Messages

. Further work is required to improve the control environment and strengthen management assurance arrangements as well as streamlining audit processes to ensure the organisation makes sufficient progress in moving from the ‘Limited’ Assurance opinion in the last three years to a more positive position in future years. . The Audit Plan is constantly under review to reflect the fast changing operating environment as well as ensuring that the Internal Audit Service has the capacity and capability to deliver the assurance requirements on the plan; . 10 grants with a total value of £13.7m have been certified to date with no compliance issues identified; . Counter Fraud work has identified circa £448k recoverable savings to date in 2019/20;

2 Page 115 . Recommendation implementation rate at 47% fully implemented, when compared to 75% target. Limited follow up reviews have however been completed.

3. Updates

3.1 Annual Risk Based Internal Audit Plan Status:

Work completed to date included finalising audit reviews that were carried forward from 2018/19 and completion of some of the reviews on the 2019/20 Audit Plan. Table (1) below provides details of the reviews finalised in the period, together with the level of assurance obtained in each review. Where reviews have concluded a ‘Limited’ level of assurance during quarter 2, summaries providing the reasons and remedial actions agreed are also provided at Appendix A to this report. As per Table (1), out of the 18 engagements finalised 9 had a ‘Limited’ assurance conclusion highlighting the need to prioritise any initiatives to strengthen the control environment.

Internal Audit continue to work with management in order to facilitate improvements in the control environment, this includes: . Improving engagement with the business by implementing a new client engagement model that enables greater understanding of the business . Early and continuous involvement of service management in the audit process . Working collaboratively with service management in developing robust management actions required to addresses any weaknesses identified during audits. . Reviewing the process for following up, monitoring and reporting the implementation of agreed management actions.

Progress in the delivery of the approved 2019/20 Audit Assurance Plan is behind schedule, as the percentage of the plan completed to draft report stage at this point in the year is, 22% against a target of 30%. Resources expended in the completion of brought forward work from 2018/19 has exceeded that which was planned and this has impacted on the number of reviews from the 2019/20 Assurance plan that have reached the draft report stage in the period. Resource matters are further discussed in Section 3.3 below.

By necessity, the Audit Plan must be flexible to ensure it remains relevant to risks facing the Council throughout the year. Consequently, a high level review of the plan has been undertaken resulting in a proposal to defer all project / programme assurance and assurance mapping activities not yet started to enable Internal Audit to build capacity and capability in these two key areas. The proposed changes are summarised in Table (2).

Table (1) all assignments completed to date:

No. Assignment: Level of Assurance: Commentary: 1 Housing Options – Payment to Reasonable Satisfactory level of control – no issues voluntary groups identified. 2 Business & Service Planning Reasonable A good framework has been rolled out, but requires time to fully embed. 3 Financial Review of Park Cafes Reasonable Good controls within the limitations of current technology. 4 Public Health Ring-Fenced Reasonable Grant returns have been made in the Grant Governance appropriate format and within the specified

3 Page 116 No. Assignment: Level of Assurance: Commentary: timescales. All expenditure review was appropriate under the grant rules. 5 Care Act – Deferred Payments Reasonable Charges were appropriately placed on relevant properties. Guidance is available to service users who may be subject to a charge on their property. 6 Colston Hall – Initial Project Reasonable Project objectives directly support the key Governance commitment to ‘Keep Bristol a leading cultural city’. 7 Bribery & Corruption Reasonable Good management awareness within the areas reviewed of the risks associated with bribery and corruption. Risk Management Review Reasonable A reasonable risk management framework 2018/19 is now in place, but it requires time to fully embed. Schools Financial Governance N/A Overarching summary provided at Appendix Study A 8 Apprenticeship Levy Account Limited Summary provided to July 2019 Committee. 9 IT Project Management Limited Summary provided to July 2019 Committee. Approach (Design & Security) 10 Effectiveness of the New Limited Summary provided at Appendix A Procurement Arrangements 11 Data Sharing with Partners Limited Summary provided at Appendix A 12 Financial Interfaces Limited Summary provided at Appendix A 13 Direct Payments - Full Study Limited Summary provided at Appendix A 14 Traffic Control Services Limited Summary provided at Appendix A Cloud/Resilience (Operations Centre) 15 Strengthening Families Limited Summary provided at Appendix A Transformation Phase II 18 Information Technology (IT) Limited Summary provided in separate report to Transformation Programme this Committee meeting. The item is to be considered in confidential sessionto avoid likely disclosure of exempt information under paragraph 3 of part 1 of schedule 12 A of the Local Government Act

Table 2 – Proposed Plan Amendments:

No. Reasonable Assignment Description Assurance Area 1 Programmes and Programmes and Project Contingency allowance for ongoing embedded Projects Assurance assurance to key programmes and projects across the Council. 2 Risk Management Assurance Mapping provision - To Contingency allowance for working with review the effectiveness of management to develop assurance maps that mitigating actions to manage the identify and record the key sources of assurance risk identified in the Corporate on the management and mitigation of key strategic Risk Register risks to the Council ensuring that the identified sources are well coordinated.

4 Page 117

3.2 Grant Certification:

To date, the team has audited and certified 10 grant claims to the value of approximately £13.7m. Work is progressing on further certifications in quarter two.

3.3 Resources:

Since the beginning of the year, the Service has been carrying vacancies in the Assurance and the Counter-Fraud Teams, as well as being impacted by long-term sickness. These vacancies are currently being assessed as part of a wider review to determine the nature and level of resources required to effectively deliver the 2019/20 Audit Plan as well as exploring options for building capacity and capability that can meet the complex assurance needs of the Council now and into the future.

2019/20 is viewed as a transition year, both in terms of a new Chief Internal Auditor and the delivery of the Service’s key priority of fully automating its processes as well as increasing the use of data analytics. The proposal to defer the two reviews cited in Table 2 above will also free the time for the Service to build capacity, develop relevant methodologies and deliver the audit automation project. The automation project is not only key to improving internal audit efficiency and effectiveness but will enhance management arrangements for monitoring and reporting agreed management actions. This will also enable Internal Audit to provide deeper insights to the business as well as enrich the audit customer experience.

5 Page 118 3.4 Counter Fraud Update:

. The Committee will receive full reports on counter fraud work undertaken by the team in November 2019 (half year) and May 2020 (Annual). To update, however, the following represents the significant outcomes of fraud work for the year so far: . 13 housing properties have been recovered as part of the continued tenancy fraud initiative; . 1 property recovered as a result of National Fraud Initiative (NFI) intelligence . £443k in recoverable saving have already been identified this year . Key Amnesty – Please see section 3.5.1 below for outcome details

Fraud Area Recoverable Notional Weekly cost avoidance Tenancy Fraud £37,830 £1,302,000 £1,262 Benefits £308,463 - £690 Council Tax Reduction £1,650 - £413 Direct Payments £5,298 - £268 NFI £25,149 - - NFI HMRC Pilot £66,758 - - Pool Car Misuse £2,849 Figures used for notional savings are: Council property recovered = £93,000 (figure recommended by Cabinet Office)

NB: The above does not reflect the extent of recovery of any savings.

3.4.1 Key Amnesty Outcomes:

As Members are aware, the Counter-Fraud team instigated a Tenancy Fraud campaign whereby a Key Amnesty exercise was undertaken during the period of April to May 2019. A summary of the outcomes from the exercise is provided below:

. 470% increase in referrals has resulted with 30 cases currently being actively investigated . 1 voluntary surrender of keys (BCC) . 7 voluntary surrender of keys during the amnesty period for ‘no apparent reason’ by people previously or currently subject to tenancy fraud investigation . 2 - 3 United Housing Association regains

Work on the referrals received will continue throughout the next quarter, with a further update provided to the Committee in the Counter-Fraud Half Year report at the November Audit Committee meeting.

6 Page 119 3.5 Recommendation Implementation:

A limited number of Follow Up reviews have been completed during the period and an analysis of the rate of implementation of recommendations is summarised in Table (3) below. For the 4 concluded Follow Up audits in this period, 94% of recommendations were either fully (47%) or partially (47%) implemented against a target of 75% fully implemented. This target has been revised from the 2018/19 target of 90% fully/partially implemented, as only fully implemented recommendations can maximise the impact on the control framework and the level of assurance that can be derived from that framework.

For each of these Follow Up reviews, the objective was to test whether the recommendations identified in the original audit report had been implemented. Internal Audit continues to work with management to improve the control environment, as detailed in section 3.6 below. Internal Audit can supply further details to Members on any of the reports detailed in table (3) if required.

Table (3) Summary of Implementation of Internal Audit Recommendations:

Follow Up Review: Date of Org. Total Implemented or Partially Not Implemented Total: Report Recs: Superseded Implemented H M H M H M Security Services Cash - 30/06/2017 4 2 1 1 4 in- Transit (Further follow-up) Sale of Council Assets ( 07/09/2017 5 2 3 5 follow-up) Contract Management: 31/03/2019 5 2 3 5 Council Wide Carbon Reduction 15/10/2018 3 2 1 3 Commitment Totals: 17 0 8 3 5 0 1 (6%) 17 (47%) (18%) (29%)

3.6 Proposed changes to internal audit reporting

It is proposed that Internal Audit will no longer make audit recommendations as a standard requirement in Internal Audit reports. This is meant to enhance the value of audit outcomes and importantly address some of the challenges faced in the implementation of agreed audit recommendations as well as increasing management ownership and accountability. The proposed process will see Internal Audit drafting reports highlighting the findings or weaknesses, their causes and the associated risks and implications. Internal Audit will then engage with the Senior Responsible Officers to agree the appropriate management actions required to address the weaknesses identified. This collaborative approach will ensure that the agreed management actions are business driven and management takes full responsibility for the implementation and reporting of the actions. The process for monitoring the implementation of the agreed management actions will be embedded in the performance management arrangements at Service level.

7 Page 120

3.6 Proposed Revised Internal Audit Opinions:

Internal Audit has given further consideration to the proposed revision to the assurance opinions in light of the feedback received from Members, at the July 2019, Audit Committee regarding the level of assurance that can reasonably be provided. The proposed new opinions which align with the annual opinion and are consistent with Audit Committee reporting are detailed below. These changes are supported by CLB and consultation with the wider management team is scheduled for September. The changes will come into effect once this engagement is completed.

Level of Definition Assurance Substantial There are sound risk management, internal control and governance processes which are designed to achieve the service objectives, with key controls being consistently applied. Reasonable Whilst there is basically sound risk management, internal control and governance processes, there are some weaknesses which may put service objectives at risk. Limited There are weaknesses in the risk management, internal control and governance processes; putting service objectives at risk. No The risk management, internal control and governance processes are generally poor and as such service objectives are at significant risk.

8 Page 121

APPENDIX A - SUMMARIES OF COMPLETED AUDITS

A. Corporate

A1. Data Sharing with Partners

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 2016 protects citizens’ rights in relation to how their personal data is used. It came into effect on 25th May 2018 and non-compliance can result in significant fines. The Regulation sets out certain restrictions and conditions when the authority shares personal data with third party organisations. This is to ensure that personal data is protected adequately and handled properly by others.

In response to the requirements of the GDPR, the Council has implemented a requirement for Data Sharing Agreements when sharing personal information with third parties to ensure that the obligations of the data controller (the person or organisation that decides why and how personal data is processed) and the data processor (a person who processes the data under contract on behalf of the Data Controller) are met and that citizen’s rights are protected.

The purpose of this audit was to review the arrangements in place for data sharing agreements where personal data is passed between the council and external organisations. Specifically the audit reviewed:

• Leadership and Governance • Policies and Procedures • Training & Understanding • Review of Data Sharing Agreements • Monitoring arrangements

The audit excluded internal data sharing arrangements.

Based on the completion of the fieldwork, an unsatisfactory opinion was assigned and Limited Assurance given. The key findings identified in the Internal Audit review were:

• The Council has formed an Information Governance Service (IGS) with objectives of implementing and embedding an information governance framework across the Council. This includes overseeing compliance with all aspects of information governance (data protection; information security; information management; records management, information and subject access requests and training) including compliance with GDPR. However the team are not currently resourced adequately to meet its full objectives.

• The role of IGS needs to be communicated across the council so that services understand the support and assistance it can provide in the areas of data sharing as well as its wider remit. Nominated points of liaison with the IGS would benefit services.

• Guidance and template documentation has been provided to services via a data sharing web portal however it is in need of review and updating to enable services to better understand and meet their obligations.

1 Page 122

• Data sharing agreements are being used but adequate sign off was not in place for 70% of the sample reviewed. Sign off was either not by the Information Asset Owner as required or the agreements had not been signed at all.

• Governance and oversight arrangements, by the IGS, over data sharing agreements are hindered by outdated registers of information asset owners and incomplete Information Sharing Agreement Registers.

The audit identified areas for improvement, for which 12 recommendations were made, which included:

• Benchmarking the resourcing requirements of the Information Governance Service so that it can carry out and delivery its statutory function.

• A regular review process to ensure that the correct information governance custodianship is kept up to date.

• Monitoring of data sharing agreements by the IGS to ensure that they comply with the terms agreed and are correctly approved.

• Ensuring services are aware of the need and maintain Data Sharing Registers on Sharepoint and if no register is in existence, that immediate action is taken to create one.

• Review of agreements by the Statutory Data Protection Officer to confirm records and arrangements are appropriate.

All recommendations, including those detailed above, have been provided to management, and agreement has been obtained as well as appropriate implementation time scales.

2 Page 123

B. People

B1. Schools Financial Governance Study

Bristol City Council (BCC) has responsibility for 71 maintained schools city-wide, with a combined budget of £134m for 2018/19 financial year, which is devolved to each individual school to manage year on year.

There is a level of financial acumen required to manage a school budget which should be drawn from the school governors, head teachers and finance leads within the school, with support from the Council’s Trading with Schools (TWS) arm and the Finance function. The level of financial skills and experience within schools has historically been varied, as identified by numerous internal audit reviews of individual schools in past years.

Due to this variable, Internal Audit made the decision to undertake an in-depth study of the level of financial understanding across the 71 schools under the Council’s responsibility, while at the same time taking the opportunity to understand the level of understanding that existed within schools with regards to fraud awareness and the whistleblowing process.

An extensive amount of data was collected as part of this study, too much to summarise in a report, however a summary of the key finding and conclusion drawn from the study is provided below:

• 87% of schools responded either directly or as a result of an Internal Audit visit; • 71% of respondents stated that the Governing body has approved a scheme of delegation; • 61% of respondents either had a Fraud Policy or access to one, with 60% of schools having Fraud and Whistleblowing policies that were communicated and appropriately accessible; • 69% of respondents confirmed that the governing body have a good understanding school funded and schools financial reporting requirements; • School Development Plan forecasting and costing was inconsistent; • Whilst the number of schools in deficit for 2018/19 had decreased, (9 in 2018/19 against 14 in 2017/18,) the number of schools forecasting a deficit within the next four years increases to 24 by 2022/23; • There is no correlation between Ofsted ratings against the assessed level of financial governance within schools

Overall, 48% of schools were rated as having “Good Financial Governance”, with 18% of schools rated as having “Reasonable Financial Governance”, and 34% rated as having a level of Financial Governance that was in need of improvement.

Recommendations for improvements were made and agreed by relevant responsible officers. Implementation of said recommendations will be monitored as part of the ongoing Schools audit programme for 2019/20.

3 Page 124

B2. Direct Payments Joint Review

The Direct Payments scheme gives service users in both Adults and Children’s’ services, the funding to directly commission their own care, rather than follow the traditional route of commissioning care from the Council.

The objective of this assignment was to provide an independent opinion on the adequacy and effectiveness of the Council’s governance, risk management and internal controls in respect of Direct Payments made to both Adults and Children, including the risk of fraud.

Based on the completion of the fieldwork, a Limited Assurance Audit opinion was assigned. The key findings are summarised as follows:

• The Direct Payments Policy 2010 is out of date and does not reflect The Care Act 2014 and Regulation. • The Regulations do not specifically require recovery of “excessive contingencies”, however this is the Council’s most common reason for Direct Payment recovery. • Finance has begun standalone financial probity reviews. • Financial reviews allow four weeks of contingency, when the current policy states eight weeks. • The Care Act 2014 requires that care reviews are carried out annually at a minimum, with the emphasis on care needs, self-determination, safeguarding and financial probity; however in 2018/19 only 13% of adult service users were recorded as having received a review. • Although legislation for children does not specify annual care reviews, in 2018-19 53% were recorded as having had an annual care review. • Children Social Care relies on spreadsheets with their inherent data integrity issues to manage direct payments. • No link is documented between the Children’s spreadsheet and the payment schedule it generates.

The audit identified 15 areas for improvement, of which 4 recommendations were high priority. The high priorities are:

• The need for a new Direct Payment Policy, which incorporates Children’s Services, the current requirements of The Care Act 2014 (and its regulations) and The Children & Families Act 2014. • The requirement for the Direct Payments Team to obtain legal advice about the appropriateness of recovering “excessive contingencies” without first doing a care review. • The Development of a care review process, including initial reviews and annual reviews. Focussing these reviews on the care needs of the client and satisfying the Council’s safeguarding responsibilities. • To extend the care review process to include financial probity reviews, with emphasis on those clients who are likely to be an employer.

All recommendations, including those detailed above, were discussed with the appropriate management and agreement to implement within an appropriate timescale was obtained.

4 Page 125

B3. Strengthening Families Transformation Programme – Second Embedded Assurance Review

The Council’s vision for children and families in Bristol is that they get the “right response, the right assessment, the right help, at the right time”.

The Statement of Intent for the Strengthening Families Programme is to make cost savings whilst holding our ambition of improving outcomes, commissioning and delivering quality services and keeping “children and families” at the heart of what we do.

This is the second embedded assurance review Internal Audit has carried out on this programme. The first review, which was carried out in 2018, focussed on the first two stages of the programme, Start up and Initiation and concluded a Reasonable level of assurance.

This second review focussed on stage three of the programme – Delivery, providing assurance on the following areas:

• Financial Benefits – previous audit recommendations, measuring outcomes, reviewing responses to changes in scope and VFM • Risk Management – review of project risk register • Governance (strategy & decision-making) – previous audit recommendations, effectiveness of recording systems • Cost Management – review of budgetary control systems • Communication – review progress reports to stakeholders, consider efficiency of escalation measures

Based on the fieldwork completed a Limited level of assurance was concluded. This was predominantly due to concerns that the financial benefits of the programme may not be achieved. Other findings from the review are summarised below:

• Project Plan: o A detailed five year plan was prepared for Cabinet at the approval stage with key events and an annual timeline. The detailed five year plan was costed with assumptions being made for the impact of specific events. • Benefits and Savings (Costs and Outcomes): o Programme performance reporting is not straight forward. o Teams need to keep under review how they intend to deliver the programme savings once the programme has been handed over. o Key information to support handover to service teams requires finalisation and this is in progress. • SMART Measures: o Project objectives have clear measures, however these measures are not always presented in reporting as SMART KPI’s. o There is no reporting of the progression pathways of cared for children. • Active Risk Management: o A key risk of increasing children numbers in Bristol is not included on the RAID risk log. o Risks are managed through a RAID log, however there are errors in the recording and progress of risks to mitigation.

5 Page 126

The audit identified 9 areas for improvement, these included:

o The need to revise savings and success of the programme in order to reflect the remainder due after 30th September 2019 when the Project Management Office (PMO) support finishes.

o The need for Service Teams to regularly re-evaluate the saving expectations and refer to EDM and Finance Partners. Finance should be kept informed about revised savings expectations.

o That all SMART KPI’s should be measured numerically. Prior month numeric to be included in the report and changes explained. Service Teams to continue to enhance pathway analysis for all new children entering care.

All recommendations, including those detailed above were discussed with the relevant officers. Internal audit will be carrying out a third review at the end of September 2019, when the PMO hands over full delivery of the programme to the Service Teams.

6 Page 127

C. Resources

C1. Financial Systems Interfaces

The Council uses Unit4 Business World (ABW) as its online corporate finance system to record financial transactions to enable budget monitoring and the preparation of the Council’s annual financial statements and accounts.

Information is passed between ABW and other Council applications through automated or semi-manual data exchanges, which are recognised as input and output ABW interfaces. The business objective of the ABW interfaces is to provide a secure, robust and resilient methodology to transfer financial information between ABW and other applications.

The risks associated with the ABW interfaces were assessed as follows:

• Unreliable communication between systems necessary to support business activities and management decisions. • Data integrity, completeness of information. • Data security. • Malfunctioning interfaces affecting data integrity and discrediting financial reports with a significant negative influence on business decisions.

The objective of the assignment was to provide an independent opinion on the adequacy and effectiveness of the Council’s governance, risk management and internal controls regarding input and output ABW interfaces.

Based on the completion of the fieldwork, a Limited Assurance Audit opinion was assigned. The key findings from the review are summarised as follows:

• Internal Data Sharing Agreements were not in place to comply with GDPR requirements • Undocumented ABW interfaces without formal change control • Obsolete interfaces with no process for review to ensure such interfaces are promptly deleted • Data Security issues • High reliance is placed on manual interaction, which increases risk and impacts on resources • Failure to identify incomplete files at download stage resulting in the need for further manual intervention.

A number of Audit recommendations were made to help address the level of assurance in this area, they included:

• The need for a data flow assessment of all of the financial systems that flow into ABW. • The benefits of an interface specification for each current interface, with all changes to interfaces documented, and appropriate document control management • A review of current interfaces and deletion of those which are now obsolete. This practice should be incorporated into ‘business as usual’ so obsolete interfaces are promptly deleted • Conformation with data security requirements • Inbound interfaces should be reviewed for the possibility of full automation. • A resolution to the issue of incomplete files needs to be urgently sought.

7 Page 128

All recommendations have been provided to management, and agreement has been obtained, with appropriate timescales for implementation.

8 Page 129

C2. Effectiveness of the New Procurement Arrangements

A new Category Management ‘Hub and Spoke’ approach was agreed by the Director of Finance in November 2018. This comprised a centralised procurement resource to act as the main hub for leading and managing the way procurement and contract management is undertaken Council wide, through the procurement cycle.

The purpose of the assignment was to evaluate the effectiveness of implementation of the new approach. Specifically, the audit approach included the following:

o Review of approach towards new ways of delivery

o Progress made towards delivering the approach

o Effectiveness of new approach in ensuring consistent good contract management across the Council and ensuring the Council’s Procurement Rules are adhered to.

Based on the completion of the fieldwork, an opinion of Limited Assurance was assigned. The audit identified areas for improvement, which included;

• The need for full agreement to the new approach and a supporting action plan • The establishment of clear lines of responsibility for ICT contracts • An agreed process for preparing and updating Category Plans together with a timescale for implementation of 2019/20 plans • Establishment of a clear escalation process to identify and stop out of contract payments • The use of Client Engagement Plans together with clear procedures, including lines of responsibility and communications between Category Managers and clients (contract managers) • Improved management information and reporting • Establishment of an overarching Contract Monitoring framework, with consideration to the size, value and complexity of the procurement • Training and support to be provided when overall Category management approach has been finalised • Provision of standard documentation, according to Category and type of contract • Ensuring that procurement and contractual risk is considered in Service Plans and escalated where appropriate.

All recommendations have been provided to management, and agreement has been obtained together with appropriate implementation time scales.

9 Page 130

D. Growth and Regeneration

D1. Traffic Control Services – Cloud and Resilience

The Operations Centre is part of the Smart City agenda, focused on the needs of the citizens and aided by an information platform geared towards the safety needs of citizens. The project brings together Traffic Management, Bus Lane Enforcement, Public Space Monitoring, Out of hours, Concierge and Telecare Services. The Operations Centre relies on a sound technological infrastructure which is provided via the ICT service.

The objective of the audit was to review the cloud based technologies in use at the operations centre to ensure security and resilience of operations. Currently, only the Traffic Control Services has a cloud platform, which is third party hosted, and as such the audit work covered arrangement in this service only.

Specifically the audit reviewed:

• Governance arrangements over ‘cloud’ and its resilience. • System and data security controls at the interfaces between Bristol architecture and third party and telecommunications infrastructure. • Third party hosting arrangements. • Business Continuity, including back-up and recovery.

Based on the completion of the fieldwork, a Limited level of assurance was concluded, with a number of areas identified for improvement. The key findings identified were:

• Systems and data security arrangements in the ‘cloud’ (third party arrangements) were satisfactory and to industry standard • The third party has best practice business continuity plans which are appropriately tested • Security, governance and business continuity arrangements within the Traffic Control Service were not to industry standard.

The audit identified areas for improvement, for which 10 recommendations were made to the Traffic Control Services Manager, which included:

• Updating and testing business continuity plans • Testing of failover processes • Reviewing the operational level agreement with the ICT service to align support to full operating hours • Testing the emergency generator to ensure resilience against power outage • Improvement to a number controls to enhance resilience and security.

All recommendations, including those detailed above, have been provided to management, and agreement has been obtained as well as appropriate implementation time scales.

10 Page 131 Agenda Item 14

Report for Audit Committee

1. Audit Committee Monday 30th September 2019

Report of: Director Finance, S151

Title: Corporate Risk Management Arrangements and the Q1 2019/20 Corporate Risk Report Update

Ward: Citywide

Officer Presenting Report: Denise Murray – Director of Finance, S151

Contact Telephone Number: 0117 3576255

Recommendation The Audit Committee review and comment on progress made on the Councils Risk Management arrangements and the Corporate Risk Report (CRR) Appendix A, as a source of assurance that risk management arrangements are in place and developing. Summary This report presents the progress being made in embedding and maintaining risk management arrangements, the revised Risk Management Assurance Policy within Bristol City Council and the CRR summary report as at 23rd July 2019 presented to Cabinet September 2019. The significant issues in the report are:  The Risk Management Assurance Policy will be reported to Cabinet in January 2020.

 The CRR is an important tool in managing risk. It aims to provide an overview of the significant risks facing the council and how they are being managed. The CRR attached to this report at Appendix A is the latest formal iteration following a review by members of the council’s Corporate Leadership Board (CLB) in July 2019. The risk review has included managers from across the Council.  As strategic planning, resource management and resilience processes are strengthened; the identification, management and communication of risk to the achievement of the Council’s strategic priorities and objectives will continue to embed.  The output from the CRR will annually contribute to the annual Audit Plan.

Page 132 1 Report for Audit Committee

1 Policy

The Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015 require the council to have in place effective arrangements for the management of risk. These arrangements are reviewed each year and reported as part of the Annual Governance Statement (AGS). The Council is required to comment on the effectiveness of its arrangements in this regard. The statement must also identify any significant governance issues that may have resulted from failures in governance and risk management.

Risk Management is an integral part of good governance to which the Council is committed. Risk Management provides the framework and processes that enables the Council to manage uncertainty in a systematic way. As part of the Risk Management arrangements the Council reviews the Risk Management Assurance Policy on an annual basis. It is considered good practice to regularly review and update the Risk Management Assurance Policy to ensure it strengthens the Council's approach to its risk management and assurance arrangements.

Ensuring that the Corporate Risk Report (CRR) is soundly based will help the council to ensure it is anticipating and managing key risks to optimise the achievement of the council’s objectives and prioritise actions for managing those risks.

The CRR provides assurance to management and Members that the Bristol City Council’s significant risks have been identified and arrangements are in place to manage those risks within the tolerance levels agreed.

The CRR is a management tool and needs regular review to ensure that the occurrence of obstacles or events that may put individual’s safety at harm, impact upon service delivery and the council’s reputation are minimised, opportunities are maximised and when risks happen, they are managed and communicated to minimise the impact.

Risk Registers and reports are an important part of risk management, and the CRR has been prepared and presented in line with the Risk Management Assurance Policy that was approved by Cabinet in January 2019.

2 Consultation

Internal - First to fourth tier managers, Extended Leadership Team, Corporate Leadership Team, Cabinet Member, Finance, Governance and Performance.

External - None

3 Context

3.1 Risk Management Framework

3.1.1 Risk management is the culture, process and structures that are directed towards effective management of potential opportunities and threats to the council achieving its priorities and objectives and a key element of the council’s governance framework. The Annual Governance Statement (AGS) declaration for 2018-19 highlighted a number of opportunities to enhance Risk Management. Areas for improvement include:

 Increasing the level of engagement and ownership by Service Managers.  Enhancing the engagement of Members in the risk management process.  Refreshing the Corporate and Directorate Risk Registers. Page 133 2 Report for Audit Committee

 Risk Management training and awareness.  Risk Management within Business Case approvals, Project Management and  Procurement Frameworks.  Maintaining the focus of the process on reducing risk against the council’s Corporate Plan 2018-23. 3.1.2 An additional resource has been sourced to assist the Risk and Insurance Manager to further embed Risk Management principles and practices within the council.

3.2 The Corporate Risk Register (CRR)

The Corporate Leadership Board (CLB) reviewed the CRR in July 2019 and accepts it as working summary report of the critical and significant risks from the Service Risk Registers.

The CRR sets out the significant critical and high rated risks both threats and opportunities. All other business risks reside on the Service Risk Registers and reported in through the Directorate Risk Reports and the Corporate Risk Report.

The Corporate Risk Report (CRR) as July 2019 contains:

Threat Risks Opportunity Risks External / Contingency Risks  0 critical threats  1 significant opportunity  2 high threats  17 high rated  2 high  0 improving  5 medium  1 medium  1 deteriorating  1 new  0 improving  0 closed  5 improving  0 deteriorating  2 deteriorating  0 closed  1 closed  2 de-escalated

A summary of the progress of new, improving, deteriorating and closed risks for this reporting period are set out below.

There is one new threat risks this quarter:

 CRR29: Information Security Management System. There is a risk that if the council does not have an Information Security Management System then it will not be able to effectively manage Information Security risks. The risk rating being 4x5 (20) high risk. This risk is managed and monitored within the Resources Service Risk Registers.

There are 5 improving threat risk:

 CRR13: Financial Framework and MTFP – The risk of failure to be able to reasonably estimate and agree the financial ‘envelope' available, both annually and in the medium-term and the council is unable to set a balanced budget. The risk rating being 2X5= (10) medium risk. This risk is managed and monitored within the Resources Service Risk Registers.

 CRR18: Failure to deliver 2000 Homes per annum by 2020 - The risk of failing to deliver the range of housing to meet Bristol's needs and not realise the ambition to deliver 2000 homes per annum by 2020 of which 800 are affordable. The risk rating being 2x5 (10) medium risk. This risk is managed and monitored within the Growth and Regeneration Service Risk Registers. Page 134 3 Report for Audit Committee

 CRR21: Information Governance – The risk if the Council fails to maintain a defensible and compliant response to the Data Protection Act 2018 and General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) then it will fail to fully comply with its statutory requirements. The risk rating being 2X5= (10) medium risk. This risk is managed and monitored within the Resources Service Risk Registers.

 CRR26: ICT Resilience – The risk if the Councils ability to deliver critical and key services in the event of ICT outages, and be able to recover in the event of system and/or data loss. The risk rating being 2X7= (14) high risk. This risk is managed and monitored within the Resources Service Risk Registers.

 CRR27: Capital Programme - The risk Management of the overall transport capital programme is key to ensuring we deliver against mayoral priorities in the most cost and time efficient way possible. Failure to do so negatively impacts the council's reputation and finances and makes the council less likely to reduce congestion, air pollution and inequality. The risk rating being 3x5= (15) high risk. This risk is managed and monitored within the Growth and Regeneration Service Risk Registers.

There are three deteriorating threat / external and civil contingency risks :

 CRR15: Financial Deficit. The council’s financial position goes into significant deficit in the current year resulting in reserves (actual or projected) being less than the minimum specified by the council’s reserves policy. The likelihood of this risk has increased slightly due to the start of a new financial year. It is expected as mitigations to overspends are put in place this will reduce to a tolerable level. The risk rating being 2x5 (10) medium risk from 1x5 (5) medium risk. This risk is managed and monitored within the Resources Service Risk Registers.

 CRR25: ICT Line of Business (LOB). The Councils reliance on legacy systems. The risk rating being 4x5 (20) high risk from 3x5 (15) high risk. This risk is managed and monitored within the Resources Service Risk Registers.

 BCCC2: Brexit: The risk that Brexit (and any resulting 'deal' or 'no deal') will impact the local economy, local funding and delivery of council services, and that uncertainty around Brexit could impact our ability to accurately assess or plan for potential positive or negative outcomes. The risk rating being 3X7 (21) high risk from 4x5 (20) high risk. This risk is managed and monitored within the Resources Service Risk Registers.

There is one closed risk:

 CRR28: Instability of Housing's new IT - The stability and efficiency of the Housing IT systems present a current and future risk to effective service delivery and performance, tenant satisfaction and trust, and corporate reputation. (The risk replaces the Housing IT CRR20). The stability and efficiency of the Housing IT systems present a current and future risk to effective service delivery and performance, tenant satisfaction and trust. The risk rating being 3x7(21) high risk. This risk is managed and monitored within the Growth and Regeneration Service Risk Registers.

The risks CRR16 Leadership and CRR17 Strategy Management consistently improved throughout the year and was de-escalated within the Resources Service Risk Registers from Q1 2019/20.

Page 135 4 Report for Audit Committee

The risks BCCC2/OPP4 - Brexit is an unpredictable external threat and opportunity, and because of this the reporting for these entries may already be out of date. This is being managed within the Resources Service Risk Registers via a council-wide Brexit Project Board (for general preparedness) and Brexit Coordination Group (a tactical response group to manage any immediate issues presented in a ‘no deal’ scenario).

All risks on the CRR have management actions in place. The CRR will continue to be subject to a refresh during 2019.

As with all risks, it is not possible to eliminate the potential of failure entirely without significant financial and social costs. The challenge is to make every reasonable effort to mitigate and manage risks effectively, and where failure occurs, to learn and improve.

Further details are contained in Appendix D: The summary of the threat risks are set out on pages 1 to 21, opportunity risks pages 22 to 23, and external and civil contingency risks on page 24 and 25 all including controls and management actions. A summary of risk performance on pages 26 to 27 by level of risk, the risk matrix on page 28 and the risk scoring criteria on page 29. More detail is available on request.

4 Proposal

The Audit Committee review and comment upon the Corporate Risk Report (CRR) as a source of assurance that risk management arrangements are in place.

5 Other Options Considered

None necessary. Having robust risk management processes in place is a requirement of the City Council. The CRR has been developed in line with the Risk Management Assurance Policy.

6 Risk Assessment

The Risk Management Assurance Policy and the CRR will further develop risk management assessment within the City Council, and help the management of risk arrangements embed.

7 Public Sector Equality Duties

8a) Before making a decision, section 149 Equality Act 2010 requires that each decision-maker considers the need to promote equality for persons with the following “protected characteristics”: age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation. Each decision-maker must, therefore, have due regard to the need to:

i) Eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct prohibited under the Equality Act 2010.

ii) Advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and those who do not share it. This involves having due regard, in particular, to the need to --

- remove or minimise disadvantage suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic;

- take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of people who do not share it (in relation to disabled Page 136 5 Report for Audit Committee

people, this includes, in particular, steps to take account of disabled persons' disabilities);

- encourage persons who share a protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low.

iii) Foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and those who do not share it. This involves having due regard, in particular, to the need to – - tackle prejudice; and - promote understanding.

8b) No equalities assessment necessary for this report.

8 Legal and Resource Implications Legal - N/A Financial - N/A Land - N/A Personnel - N/A

9 Appendices:

Appendix A - Risk Management Assurance Policy Appendix A - Corporate Risk Register The summary of the threat risks are set out on pages 1 to 21, opportunity risks pages 22 to 23, and external and civil contingency risks on page 24 and 25 all including controls and management actions. A summary of risk performance on pages 26 to 27 by level of risk, the risk matrix on page 28 and the risk scoring criteria on page 29. More detail is available on request.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT 1985 Background Papers:

Risk Management Assurance Policy

Page 137 6 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Corporate Risk Register as at July 2019 – Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Impact Risk Impact Risk Performance Likelihood Likelihood

CRR1: Long term commercial We have reviewed Capital Governance arrangements and have established the Capital and A review of the medium term financial plan and capital strategy to develop a investments and major projects Investment Board in order to improve capital programme governance and accountability longer term financial planning horizon including sensitivity and scenario capital investment. arrangements. The Board is overseen by the Delivery Executive to make improvements to capital analysis. This will allow the Council to better manage and understand its long term investments. BCC’S long-term commercial project business cases, taking account of whole life costing principles and improving capital investments and major projects monitoring arrangements. The Growth and Regeneration Board meets monthly to continue to improve may require greater than The first meeting of the CLB / Capital Board was held on 2 July 2019. Terms of reference and project, programme and portfolio risk management to ensure robust anticipated capital investment. governance arrangements for the Capital Board were agreed, and meet on a monthly basis. The arrangements are in place and challenge against deliverables. We will maintain a balanced portfolio of investment assets so that exposure to Key potential causes are: Board will ensure that there is greater rigour and control, including Risk Management, of the Council's Capital Programme. particular classes of risk can be minimised.  The cost is higher than Harbour Strategy: Colleagues across Growth & Regeneration and Resources expected. We are understanding, monitoring and reporting the cost-determining factors, and seeking relevant Directorates are working together to ensure we have a joined up approach to  The project is delivered later professional advice to ensure Value for Money (VfM) by undertaking due diligence which covers the delivering a new Harbour Strategy. This falls in to three main work streams than planned. economic, financial, social and environmental case. This is ongoing. Assets, Design and Harbour/Marina activity. Whilst these 3 pieces of work are  The operating and Governance arrangements are in place for the council as a Company Shareholder. in differing project stages, an umbrella group to act as a steering and maintenance cost of the asset governance forum is being established. This is progressing and remains under exceeds expectations. The Growth and Regeneration Directorate is responsible for delivery of major infrastructure projects. discussion across Resources and Growth and Regeneration Directorates, with  Strategic, geographic, social, Some of the key projects include: the Commercialisation and Citizens Service leading on the Harbour Estate financial and economic Harbour Strategy

Page 138 Page Review. conditions changing over time. We are looking to secure capital funding to commence in 2019/20 through a robust capital business  Oversight of Project case to make commercial improvements across areas such as new pontoons, and boaters facilities,’ Harbour Condition Survey: A robust asset management planning framework. Interdependencies not well both of which will generate income and make the area more attractive economically. We are carrying out condition surveys on the docks walls to produce a future maintenance schedule as part of the BCC Asset Management Plan. managed. We have completed a commercial benchmarking exercise in terms of charges and commercial offering using similar marina sites across the UK. 3 7 21 Cattlemarket Road: Further funding may be required to discharge the 1 7 7 obligations of the City Council under the terms of the sale agreement to the We are constructing a plan around our commercial offering, fees & charges, leases etc. to ensure we University of Bristol (UoB). Discussions are underway between are maximising income that can be used to invest in the area. Commercialisation and Citizens and Property colleagues with the UoB to Carrying out condition surveys to assist with the development of a robust maintenance schedule. reach a resolution. Temple Quarter Colston hall: Following the instigation of the 10 point plan and the For contracts we ensure that robust contingencies are built into the project costs, and secure subsequent discussion and negotiation with the preferred contractor consultant's advice relating to appropriate risk allocation and reward, and other contractual engaged through the SCF, Willmott Dixon, BCC successfully entered into a arrangements. building contract with a contract sum of £36,722,948 on the 28th May 2019 Cattlemarket Road with a revised project budget standing at £52,204,947 ( this figure will form Cabinet approved reallocation of existing budget in January 2019 to enable demolition of the former the actual project envelope). sorting office to ground level. The said figure of £52,204,947 being made up from the £48,800,000 Cabinet Colston Hall approval plus £3,404,947 WECA funding for Project inflation Consultants were engaged last year to undertake an options appraisal to verify the project in its Work commenced on site 3rd June 2019 with an agreed Contract completion current format i.e. the scope of the works and ensuring that the correct option has been chosen to date of 25th October 2021. make the hall financially sustainable. Cabinet has approved the underwriting of the project to a maximum of £48.8m. The project is progressed through the Southern Construction Framework (administered by Devon County Council). Energy In the last 2 years Bristol Energy has grown significantly however the energy market is extremely complex with strong competition from new and existing energy retailers with high volatility in wholesale prices and the industry is currently subject to price scrutiny from Industry regulators. Risk Owner: Interim Executive Action Owner: Interim Executive Director Growth and Regeneration, Director Finance, Director Portfolio Flag: Strategy Theme: Our Organisation, Empowering and Caring, Fair and Inclusive, Well Director Growth and Commercialisation and Citizens. Finance, Connected, Wellbeing. Regeneration, Executive Director Governance and Resources and S151 Officer. Performance. 1 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Resources Directorate Risk Report Summary as at July 2019 Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR3: Failure to Manage Asbestos. We have an ongoing plan for properties to be surveyed prior to any work being All managers will be informed of reviewed Asbestos Failure to manage the asbestos management plan for undertaken by Asbestos Consultants plus an ongoing programme of surveys is arrangements by use of CHaSMS by September 2019. This was properties. being carried out. originally planned for September 2018. Key potential causes are: Funding for Contractor training was agreed in February 2018. The Housing and Property Service review and updating of the service area Asbestos arrangement procedures This was  Staff availability to carry out work plans in a safe There is a process for reporting Asbestos exposure incidents to the HSE via F2508 originally planned for December 2018. way. form. Asbestos incidents are reported via the Corporate health and safety  Lack of appropriate training. accident/incident process. Asbestos incidents are investigated in-house and Housing are reviewing and updating the service area Asbestos  Lack of oversight and control by local management. appropriate actions taken. Significant asbestos issues are reported to the arrangements, as part of a wider action plan to improve the  Lack of information on the potential or known appropriate Health & Safety Committees, senior management and executive. management of Asbestos, following a Corporate Safety review risks. Ongoing. of the Service. 3 7 21 1 7 7  Inadequate contract management arrangements. Corporate Asbestos arrangements have been reviewed and published on the Contractor training to inform of BCC’s expectations of  Lack of effective processes and systems Source, 12th June 2018. standards, whilst on our sites. This was originally planned for consistently being applied. A corporate review of Asbestos arrangements was carried out. March 2019 has been delayed.  Policies are not kept up to date. Property Services have reviewed their asbestos arrangements. Housing are recruiting a new Health and Safety Post to support  Budget pressures. Page 139 Page We are holding regular ‘Asbestos working group’ meetings to progress the effective Health and Safety Arrangements and monitoring end management of Asbestos across the authority. Ongoing. 2019. This was originally planned for May 2019. CHASM process is being reviewed and a specific toolkit for Property "persons in charge" is being created which will enable central monitoring of asbestos arrangements in practice by end September 2019. Risk Owner: Head of Paid Service and Corporate Action Owner: Director of Commercialisation and Citizens (for Corporate Estate) Portfolio Flag: Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Leadership Board (CLB) / Director HR, Workforce and and Director of Housing and Landlord Services (for Social Housing). Finance, Governance Organisational Design, John Walsh and Performance.

2 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Resources Directorate Risk Report Summary as at July 2019 Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR4: Corporate Health, Safety and The Corporate Health & Wellbeing (HS&W) team is in place to support the council and provide advice and A revised electronic accident /incident database is Wellbeing. guidance. The Corporate Policy Statement, service specific policies, procedures and systems of work and being developed will be launched in October 2019. If the City Council does not meet its safety arrangements are in place and routinely reviewed. A review of the Health and Safety Management wide range of Health & Safety BCC has a Corporate Health and Safety Management System (CHaSMS) to identify and monitor hazards, risks arrangements was carried out in and an requirements then there could be a and appropriate actions. Each manager (with staff and /or premises responsibilities) have an action plan improvement plan in place which will be monitored risk to the safety of citizens. which is completed by all Managers on a quarterly basis. Once completed the (HS&W) team check the returns at SPB quarterly. Ongoing Key potential causes are: and give relevant feedback to the individual Managers and report the overall results to Senior Management. Business partnering arrangements plan to be put in  If services do not have sufficient The accident/Incident reporting procedure is in place to monitor injury to colleagues and is communicated. All place by October 2019 to strengthen Director level staff numbers to carry out work incidents are subject to the investigation procedure to reduce the potential for any recurrences. support for Health and Safety (within existing plans in a safe way. Corporate procedures and a risk assessment pro-forma exist for core safety functions including arrangements resources). Working with the Director teams in each  If services are not able to order for fire risk assessment of all workplaces. A register is in place for potential asbestos exposures. We have Directorate, quarterly reports will be expanded to appropriate equipment required reviewed and further invested in statutory health surveillance equipment and training and a programme of cover CHASM returns and themes, incidents, for staff safety. work in place within council housing post Grenfell. training provision compliance. Directorates will be  Lack of appropriate equipment. supported to develop action plans.  Lack of appropriate training. BCC has a programme of e-learning and personal face to face course delivery available to all staff and Page 140 Page members. Ongoing specific training on H&S and excessive pressure/ personal resilience is also available. Stress All policies and procedures plan to be reviewed and  Lack of oversight and control by management training and stress risk assessment training is available for managers and employees. refreshed by April 2020. local management. CHASMs will be reviewed by end October 2019 to  Lack of information on the An independent occupational health support (NHS Avon Partnership Occupational Health Service) is in place ensure it is risk based; enabling priority to be given potential or known risks. to provide advice, employee support, management medical opinion and advice to support managers dealing to risk areas identified and create a clearer line of  Inadequate contract management with employee ill-health and absence. A pre-employment health screening service is in place to ensure sight for Directors on the risks being managed in arrangements. reasonable adjustments are identified to support employees and also an HGV driver medical support service. 3 7 21 1 7 7 their business areas.  Lack of effective processes and A confidential Employee Assistance Programme, Wellbeing telephone helpline operates (24hrs / 7 days a systems consistently being applied. week); this programme also includes a range of Wellbeing information via a website. Partnerships with CHASMs will be expanded to include a greater focus  Policies are not kept up to date. external providers of counselling and physiotherapy services are in place to provide fast-track access to these on property risk, with a new arrangement for those  Budget pressures. services. The council is routinely monitoring these services. "persons in charge" for reporting and discussing premises risks and resolution by October 2019. The Intelligence network including the Corporate Safety Information System is in place to share details of the addresses to the Citizens of Bristol considered to present risks to staff. A review of training will be carried out to ensure that all relevant and required training is available. Corporate Health and Safety is reported to the Leadership team quarterly using the CHaSMS to help monitor Linked to CHASM review by April 2020. compliance. Arrangements for controlling risks of Hand Arm BCC also has a system of Trade Union Consultation with Health and Safety trained Representatives. Vibration, Noise and respiratory sensitizers will be Benchmarking and annual reports are provided to BCC along with the annual performance report. carried out, with a supporting Occupational Health Surveillance programme where required by All contracts set up with external providers include checking their relevant Health and Safety competency. December 2019. The council’s audit programme monitors compliance with statutory duty and best practices. A refreshed focus on wellbeing and health is in A review of the Health and Safety Management arrangements was carried out and an improvement plan in progress with a plan in place within the place. Organisational Improvement Plan to focus on mental health by April 2020. Time to Change action plan is planned for April 202O which will be monitored. Risk Owner: Head of Paid Service and Action Owner: Director of Workforce Change. Portfolio Flag: Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Corporate Leadership Board (CLB). Finance, Governance and Performance.

3 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Corporate Risk Register as at July 2019 – Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR5: Business Continuity and Councils Service The council has a Corporate Resilience Group (CRG) supported by directorate representatives who Recruitment is in train with staff expected in post Resilience. meet quarterly to oversee the council’s Business Continuity arrangements and to receive significant in Autumn 2019. If the council has a Business Continuity disruption risks outside council’s Control which are reflected on the Local Resilience Forum Community Risk and is unable to ensure the resilience of key BCC Register. The Business Continuity Policy is planned to be reviewed by November 2019. operations and business activities, then the impact A number of Policies and procedures are in place including the Business Continuity Policy of the event maybe increased with a greater impact communicated to relevant staff. The Incident Response Plan updated in July 2017. The Corporate Business Continuity Plan will be on people and council Services. reviewed by in December 2019. Service Business Continuity Plans were in place for January 2018, the plans have undergone Key potential causes are: ‘refreshing by services’ during 2019. The Businesses Continuity Working Group will be  Strikes (People, Fuel). An Incident Management Team training session was carried out October 2018. refreshed within the year and we are currently  Loss of key staff (communicable diseases and drafting a plan for future exercises to test A Senior Management on-call rota has been devised agreed and is regularly monitored. 3 5 15 1 7 7 influenza epidemics). different elements of BCC Business Continuity  Loss of suppliers. A successful annual recovery exercise Day Two was carried out 25th May 2018 and relevant arrangements with partners.  Loss of accommodation to deliver key services. improvements are being built into the wider council arrangements and will be briefed to the CRG. Business Continuity refresher training is planned  Loss of equipment. CLB accepted growth bid for extra staff on CPU team. for November/December 2019.  Any event which may cause major disruption.

 141 Page Unavailability of IT and/or Telecoms.  Loss of staff /staff availability.  Knowledge loss.  Reduced chances of preventing/ responding to incidents due to a lack of forward planning or investment. Risk Owner: Interim Executive Director Growth and Action Owner: Director Management of Place. Portfolio Flag: Strategy Theme: Our Organisation, Wellbeing. Regeneration / Head of Paid Service. Finance, Governance and Performance.

4 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Resources Directorate Risk Report Summary as at July 2019 Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR6: Fraud and Corruption. We are continually improving the comprehensive system of control which aims to prevent fraud and increase On-going monitoring of fraud indicators (warning Failure to prevent or detect acts of the likelihood of detection. This includes a strong and robust policy on anti-fraud, corruption and bribery. signs and fraud alerts) to ensure anti- fraud significant fraud or corruption against We take a strong stance when fraud is found and seek financial recovery through a strong and effective approach is correctly targeted (Ongoing). the council from either internal or counter fraud team. Revised structure of the Counter fraud service external sources. The team concentrates on areas of high fraud risk, investigates fraud promptly where suspected and sanctions agreed and implementation is ongoing. Key potential causes are: appropriately. By, investing in specialist fraud prevention and detection software and utilising cross More work to be undertaken with Legal Services  Failure of management to organisation data will minimise the council’s exposure to fraud risk and aid early detection / prevention. to maximise recovery with minimum resource. implement a sound system of An accessible route to report suspected fraud is available to both the public and employees via a Analysis of how much ‘recoverable’ overpayment internal control and/or to is recovered is currently under way. demonstrate commitment to it at Whistleblowing Policy Anti-Fraud, Bribery and Corruption Policy and web page. all times. Employees are aware of probity standards expected of them via an Employee Code of Conduct, improving Project to develop a data warehouse and  Not keeping up to date with awareness of fraud and compliance through a process of reminders about ethics and conduct, fraud potential regional hub is in early stages. Plan and developments, in new areas of awareness training and other publicity, continual maintenance of Counter Fraud information on Web pages dataset matrix are currently being developed. fraud. and monitoring and review of the effectiveness of the Counter Fraud Arrangements. Ongoing exercises to establish proof of concept  Insufficient risk assessment of new are under way. Page 142 Page Counter Fraud Performance is monitored by Audit Committee via the Annual Counter Fraud Update, periodic 3 5 15 2 5 10 emerging fraud issues. Internal Audit Updates and the Annual review of arrangements against CIPFA Count Fraud Assessment Tool. Council wide fraud and avoidance initiatives  Lack of clear management control including: of responsibility, authorities and / We have revised the structure of Counter Fraud team and agreed HRA as a funding source for tenancy fraud  NNDR Small Business Rate Relief (in progress). or delegation. work. A service agreement is in place period reports are provided to housing to monitor performance of our  Tenancy fraud key amnesty (March to May  Lack of resources to undertake the tenancy fraud work. 19). depth of work required to We have regular meetings taking place with Legal services to ensure cases progress swiftly.  National Fraud Initiative 2018 (data received minimise the risks of fraud / and being reviewed). Data sets are submitted to the National Fraud Initiative and output received for review. avoidance.  Accounts Payable forensics software.  Under investment in fraud The effectiveness of whistleblowing arrangements is reviewed annually and recommendations made.  Personal budgets – data analytics. prevention and detection Arrangements to increase confidence in reporting concerns are currently under review.  Bribery and corruption risk assessment technology and resource. An audit review of how bribery and corruptions risks are managed has been completed and determined that development is underway. the risks are understood and managed in the areas most likely to be affected. Some areas of improvement  Fraud Policy to be reviewed and updated were identified and management actions to address these have been agreed including strengthening the  New fraud case management system to be declarations of interest, gifts and hospitality processes. explored and implemented before April 2020.

Risk Owner: Executive Director Action Owner: Director of Finance and Chief Internal Auditor. Portfolio Flag: Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Resources and Director of Finance Finance, Governance (S151 Officer). and Performance.

5 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Resources Directorate Risk Report Summary as at July 2019 Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR7: Cyber-Security. Budget provision for Cyber Security was allocated within the Future ICT are working closely with the Council’s SIRO to improve the approach to all aspects of The Council's risk level in regards to State Assessment Plan (FSA) as approved by Cabinet June 2018. Information Assurance (including adoption of ISO27001). In addition to this, ICT are working Cyber-security is higher than should with the Resources Executive Director and colleagues to review and enhance the current Independent full security assessments have been carried out policies and strategies pertaining to Information Management. be expected. November 2018. Key potential causes are: The FSA Programme currently has plans to implement technology platforms to move the Increased training - Phishing attacks November 2018. Council from file storage to document storage platforms, increase team collaboration  Lack of investment in without use of email, implement file retention policies, introduce document marking and appropriate technologies. rights management, implement data classification and improve federated search across  Reliance on in-house expertise, structured and unstructured data stores. and self-assessments (PSN). 3 7 21 1 5 5  Lack of formal approach to risk The FSA Programme will align with the new Information Assurance approach and the management (ISO27001). strategy set by the Council’s SIRO, as direction becomes clear.  Historic lack of focus. As well as technical controls, the ICT team is currently undertaking a Phishing attach exercise where we are sending emails to staff to see how users react to this type of Cyber Attack. Anyone clicking on links is directed towards targeted training. We will use the

Page 143 Page outcome of this exercise to inform on how we improve non-technical controls and training in future. ICT will continue to work with the SIRO to develop appropriate targeted training. We are currently recruiting for a Head of Information Assurance. Risk Owner: Senior Information Risk Action Owner: Director, Digital Transformation. Portfolio Flag: Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Owner (SIRO). Finance, Governance and Performance.

6 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

People Directorate Risk Register Summary Report as at July 2019 – Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR9: Safeguarding Vulnerable We provide regular analysis of performance and reports to Cabinet Members and Directors regarding safeguarding Safeguarding Board and related Children. performance and progress. arrangements are under review, with the aim of improving efficiency and The council fails to ensure that The Safeguarding Children’s Board provides independent scrutiny of children’s safeguarding arrangements in the city and effectiveness, and ensuring robust adequate safeguarding measures are holds BCC and partner agencies to account. governance arrangements continue to hold in place, resulting in harm or death to There has been a review of arrangements to meet the Prevent Duty and the Safer Bristol Board has adopted an multiagency partners (inc. BCC) to account. a vulnerable child. Improvement Plan to deliver better outcomes in service provision quality and safety. Ongoing action is being taken to extend information sharing arrangements and Key potential causes are: BCC works with partners to effectively identify victims and perpetrators of CSE and take action to disrupt and protect. improve response to children at risk of  Safeguarding arrangements do not Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements are in place (MAPPA) with BCC contributors at every level to support family criminal exploitation and going missing meet the requirements of the safeguarding. following CSE/Missing National Working Children Act and associated Group recommendations. The Safeguarding and Quality Assurance Service has been remodelled to secure additional capacity (Independent reviewing legislation, guidance and Under the delivering of Strengthening officer and Child Protection Chairs) and has the Local Authority Designated Officer for allegations against people who work regulations. Families Programme we have an ongoing with children.  Inadequate controls result in harm. plan to: Page 144 Page  Poor Management and operational Comprehensive training and development offer, together with publication of Bristol’s policies and procedures and monthly  Reduce caseloads of social care practitioners. practices. professional supervision help ensure safe practice and adequate control of risks. This is monitored and tested through a  Ensure purposeful practice that  performance and quality assurance framework. Demand for services exceeds its supports children to live safely within capacity and capability. September 2018 Ofsted ILACS single inspection identified that, ‘services have improved substantially for care leavers, their families and provide local  Inability to recruit/retain social children in care and children in need of help and protection.’ However, there is more to do to ensure all children and 2 7 14 authority care for those who need it. 1 7 7 care staff in a competitive market. families receive a good service. Based on this and self-evaluation, we are refreshing our transformation and improvement  Ensure effective management oversight plan to address areas identified for improvement (these incorporate actions in response to learning from other Inspections,  Poor information sharing. is evident on all children’s records. Peer Review, Serious Case Review, complaints and other feedback received).  Strategic commissioning Measures to improve recruitment and arrangements do not meet Bristol’s Strengthening Families transformation programme is taking a whole system approach to meeting the needs of retention of Social Workers will be presented through the Decision Pathway in identified need and our ability to children and families at the earliest point. In this way we aim to manage demand and maintain capacity within the system. September 2018. commission safe care for children Universal services may be supported by early help and targeted services, including a team around the school offer. This should allow us to work proactively is impaired. Bristol has an active workforce strategy in place to attract, recruit and retain social workers with a particular emphasis on where poor practice is identified.  Increase in complex safeguarding recruiting and retaining excellent, experienced social workers. The Management Team monitors social work vacancies and In response to an identified and increasing risks, criminal exploitation, serious agrees strategies for urgent situations. Competent agency social workers and managers are used on temporary basis to fill risk of serious youth violence, criminal youth violence and gang affiliation. vacancies. A number of further measures are being progressed with the aim of improving the retention of social workers. exploitation a multiagency plan is being A robust social worker caseload monitoring framework is in place. developed and implemented, focussing on Information sharing protocols are in place with services taking action to comply with GDPR where sensitive data is primary, secondary and tertiary stored/processed. prevention. Children’s strategic commissioning team have a work plan in place. BCC commissioners work closely with operational services to identify need and ensure appropriate service commissioning. Due diligence and quality checks of all commissioned services for vulnerable children are in place. Risk Owner: Executive Director, Action Owner: Director Children’s and Families Services. Portfolio Flag: Strategy Theme: Our Organisation, Empowering and Caring, People. Children and Young Wellbeing. People.

7 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

People Directorate Risk Register Summary Report as at July 2019 – Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR10: Safeguarding Adults at Risk The Safeguarding Adults Board is an independent scrutiny board led by BCC alongside our statutory in partner and key Social workers working with Multi-agency with Care and support needs. agencies. There has been a multi-agency led review of existing arrangements led by BCC in light of the new Prevent partners supporting Adults and elderly The council fails to ensure adequate Duty and the Board has adopted an Improvement plan to deliver better outcomes in service provision quality and people to live safety within their families safeguarding measures are in place, safety. The Board is now on a statutory footing following implementation of the Care Act 2014. The Multi Agency Public and community. Adults at risk. Protection arrangements are in place (MAPPA). We are increasing capacity this year in the Key potential causes are: The Bristol Safeguarding Adults Board Learning and Development Competence Framework has been reviewed and will commissioning team to lead on monitoring  Adequacy of its controls. be reviewed on an annually basis to ensure continued best practice. quality in the care sector. Improving the  Management and operational Safeguarding improvement plans are in place for Older People, Physical Disability and Disabled Children and the quality services for those who need it and practices. Capability framework for safeguarding and the mental capacity act have been introduced. The Adult Change ensuring effective management oversight.  Demand for its services exceeded Programme ‘ Better Lives’ - Transforming Care Programme has been established to implement policy objectives of It is planned to make a one off retention its capacity and capability. moving people into more suitable care settings.  Poor information sharing. payment to all social workers as part of the We have an active strategy in place to attract, recruit and retain social workers through a variety of routes with council's retention policy. A wider review  Lack of capacity or resources to particular emphasis on experienced social workers. The Adult South West Recruitment and Retention Strategy has of the remuneration package for social deliver safe practice. been drafted, the risks and costs identified. The strategy will be presented through the Decision Pathway. Regular workers is planned to improve recruitment  Failure to commission safe care for

Page 145 Page strategies and campaigns support the recruitment and retention of high calibre social workers and managers, with and retention. adults at risk. 2 7 14 1 7 7 competent agency social workers and managers used on temporary basis to fill vacancies.  Failure to meet the requirements Review of the Safeguarding Pathway is of the “Prevent Duty “placed on All key staff working with people directly at risk are trained in the essentials of safeguarding and BCC has an ongoing planned for April 2020. Local Authorities. awareness-raising ‘Prevent’ training programme. Regular reporting on safeguarding is taking place quarterly for Directors and Cabinet Members, with an annual report We are transforming the Safeguarding for elected Members to allow for scrutiny of progress. The quality assurance framework and performance framework is Adults Board routinely monitored and reported on. The outcome of the recent Kamil Ahmad Safeguarding Adults Review has been considered in detail and all recommended actions noted and acted upon.

Risk Owner: Executive Director, Action Owner: Director Adult Social Care. Portfolio Flag: Adult Strategy Theme: Our Organisation, Empowering others and People. Social Care. Caring, Fair and Inclusive, Well connected, Wellbeing.

8 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Corporate Risk Register as at July 2019 – Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR11: Bristol City Council (BCC) Infrastructure Delivery. Governance arrangements have been established through the Growth and The Operational Property Group (OPG) as a sub-group to the If the council fails to prioritise infrastructure investment Regeneration (G&R) Board and the Strategic Property Group both launched in Strategic Property Group (SPG) was launched in September and resources, has inconsistent policies and attitudes, and Q4. 2017/18 to enable the integration of thinking about property with financial, 2018 to unlock the value of assets, seek efficiencies through has no bargaining power regionally or with central regeneration and other considerations and enhance reporting of asset disposal joint arrangements with public sector partners and maximise government; there is a risk that inward investment will be plans and progress. private sector investment. Actions are now being progressed reduced. It makes it difficult for the council to realise its The G&R Board identified a number of areas of growth and regeneration (AGR) through the work of the SPG and (from April/May 2018) strategic priorities, ensure assets are efficient and fit for across the City during Q4. 2017/18 to enable place shaping including through OPG which will adopt a Corporate Landlord role to purpose in meeting current and future demand and contributing to regeneration activity, affordable housing, community building ensure the ownership of an asset and the responsibility for its support development of the local area. and the financial sustainability of the Council. management; maintenance and funding are transferred to a centralised corporate crosscutting group. Key potential causes are: AGR is regularly reviewed and re-prioritised by the G&R Board. Recruitment of specialist Asset Management Plan resource was  No clear strategic direction and objective set for the The Strategic Property Group (SPG) was established in January 2018 and meets agreed in April 2018. Work on outline business case for the Property estate. on a monthly basis. The SPG identified the need for an Operational Property Asset Management Plan is progressing, and on-going.  Services and resources (human and financial) are not Group in March 2018. Remit and membership of both groups was reviewed and Develop strategies and Implementation plans that ensure the fully aligned and/ or controlled to deliver the objectives. re-lauched in April 2019. property portfolio remains a major asset in supporting the  Failure to deliver the level of anticipated Capital achievement of corporate aims and objectives will be well Receipts. Corporate Leadership Board identified the need to re-establish a Capital Board advanced by end March 2019. Page 146 Page  Leadership capacity, engagement and capability are which existing until December 2016. Development and implementation of a Property Asset insufficient to drive change and transformation within The first meeting of the CLB / Capital Board was held on 2 July 2019. Terms of Management Strategy - DWG decision (04/04/2018) to recruit the council. reference and governance arrangements for the Capital Board were agreed, specialist Asset Management Plan (AMP) resource to develop 2 7 14 1 7 7  Resources are poorly managed, short term approach and go-going forward the Capital Board will meet on a monthly basis. The CLB / the outline business case by July/August 2018 and to inject pace being adopted or are not contributing fully to council Capital Board will ensure that there is greater rigour and control, including Risk into the production of the AMP. The current estimated priorities; resulting in agreed outcomes and objectives Management, of the Council's Capital Programme. timescale for completion of the AMP by end March 2019 not being fully achieved. Property Strategy work is on-going as at July 2019, and progress  Ineffective collection, integrity and use of data and Bristol Transport Board established in January 2019 and Bristol Transport with this and delivery of the AMP is subject to regular discussion information. Strategy. The latter sets the framework and will hold us to account for delivery. at the Strategic Property Group (SPG) which meets monthly.  Infrastructure Condition and suitability of overall asset This item is on the agenda at the next SPG Meeting on 22 July base is not being used or managed efficiently or 2019. effectively. We are proactively supporting the development of a local  Lack of joined up planning, decision making and development strategy to appropriately reflect Bristol's effective project management. Infrastructure needs.  Ineffective collection, integrity and use of data and Recruitment of sufficient resources, to ensure the capacity and information. skills required are available to enable the objectives from the  Reduced public sector funding impacting on the estate to be delivered. resources available. A key action arising from the first meeting of the Capital Board  Currently a more uncertain future due to Brexit. is for Growth and Regeneration Directorate to hold workshops to review its Capital schemes with a view to pausing / stopping / reprioritising where appropriate. Review of Areas of Growth and Regeneration and agree new approach. Risk Owner: Interim Executive Director Growth and Action Owner: Director Management of Place. Portfolio Flag: Strategy Theme: Our Organisation Regeneration. Finance, Governance and Performance.

9 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Corporate Risk Register as at July 2019 – Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR12: Failure to deliver suitable The Avon and Somerset Local Resilience Forum (LRF) is a legally required multi-agency partnership of all We need to continue to strengthen our joint, multi-agency working emergency planning measures, the organisations needed to prepare for an emergency in the LRF area. It includes the emergency arrangements with responder organisations in the City. respond to and manage emergency services, health services, Maritime and Coastal Agency, Environment Agency, volunteer agencies, utility An ‘Introduction to Emergency Planning’ e-learning package will be events when they occur. companies, transport providers and the five councils of Bath and North East Somerset, Bristol, North available for all staff by December 2019. Key potential causes are: Somerset, Somerset and South Gloucestershire. The Avon and Somerset LRF to drive work identified by risk and impact based on Avon and Somerset Community Risk Register. Key roles of the group includes: Recruitment and training of additional Emergency Centre Managers  Critical services unprepared or Intelligence gathering and forecasting, regular training exercises and tests, Task and Finish groups and Emergency Volunteers is ongoing. Training sessions delivered have ineffective emergency and addressing key issues, procedure, plan writing and capability building, and a multi-Agency recovery and ongoing. business continuity plans and structure is in place. associated activities. An Emergency Centre live exercise was planned for November 2018.  Lack of resilience in the supply Bristol is working with Avon and Somerset Local Resilience Forum (LRF) together with personnel as an However this was postponed, although smaller training exercises chain hampers effective response integrated and co-located team to deliver enhanced emergency planning and business continuity along have been completed. The corporate exercise is now planned for to incidents. with Avon and Somerset Local Health Resilience Partnership to ensure a coordinated health services and Nov 2019.  Lack of trained and available Public Health England and planning, response is in place. Training for ABS staff to support incident response and recovery strategic staff. A system is in place for ongoing monitoring of severe weather events (SWIMS). (admin, logging and logistics) is ongoing. 2 7 14 1 7 7 (Previously Civil Contingencies and Emergency planning training has been rolled and a multi-agency exercise is regularly conducted to test We are embedding lessons from Exercise Day Two, particularly Council Resilience). around housing capacity, community engagement and mutual aid. A Page 147 Page different elements of BCC emergency arrangements with partners. The most recent exercises being Day Two May 2018, Dark Zodiac April 2018, Saxon Resolve November 2017 and major COMAH training report is planned for the Corporate Resilience Group (CRG). exercise in November 2018 (Operation Spitfire). A senior management on-call rota has been devised, agreed and is monitored. Emergency Reservists have been recruited to aid emergency responses. External IT security incidents are logged and reviewed from an IT and wider Information Governance perspective. Local procedures have been established and are being continually reviewed and refined for when the national threat level increases to critical. This includes an update of the Incident Management Plan. Note 120+ volunteers recruited to support city response to incidents. Active volunteer agency group pulling voluntary resources together to be available to incidence response.

Risk Owner: Interim Executive Action Owner: Director Management of Place. Portfolio Flag: Strategy Theme: Our Organisation, Wellbeing. Director Growth and Regeneration. Finance, Governance and Performance.

10 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Resources Directorate Risk Report Summary as at July 2019 Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR13: Financial Framework and MTFP. BCC manages its financial risks through a range of controls including budget preparation, budget The development of the finance team Failure to be able to reasonably estimate and agree the setting and a Budget Accountability Framework. Roles and responsibilities for managing, monitoring remains a key priority which will include financial ‘envelope' available, both annually and in the and forecasting income and expenditure against approved budgets have been updated. commercial and business acumen. This will medium-term and the council is unable to set a balanced be an ongoing and aligned with professional budget. The council has developed a strong rolling Medium-term financial planning process to enable the development. Ongoing. strategic objectives and the statutory duties are met. We are working to ensure a rigorous structure Key potential causes are: Ensuring that Bristol City Council are engaged exists to oversee the budgetary control process from budget setting through to monitoring, oversight with or receiving timely feedback from the  Failure to achieve Business Rates income- appeals/ and scrutiny including: range of Government working groups general economic growth/loss of major sites (in  The maintaining of the evolving financial model that reflects in a timely manner changes in national exploring future local funding. Ongoing. budget setting). and local assumptions.  Economic uncertainty impact on locally generated  The level of reserves and balances are regularly reviewed to ensure that account is taken of any Review of the medium term financial plan, revenues - business rates and housing growth, financial /economic risk and the adequacy of general reserves is determined as part of this exercise. capital strategy and developing a financial impacting on council tax, new homes bonus and  Financial Regulations and Financial Scheme of Delegation is in place. sustainability strategy by December 2019. business rate income.  Regular in-year monitoring and reporting, review of future financial plans and assessment of  Brexit - the general uncertainty affecting the financial financial risks and reserves are undertaken to ensure the financial plans are delivered. A review will be ongoing to identify a Page 148 Page markets, levels of trade & investment.  Changes to savings in year are monitored by delivery executive. programme of propositions that exceed the  Governments spending review 2019. forecasted budget gap to provide members  Inadequate budgeting & budgetary control/Financial 2 5 10 with options and headroom for variations in 1 5 5 Settlements & wider fiscal policy changes: financial estimates. . The potential for new funding formulas such as fair funding, business rates retention to significantly reduce the government funding available to the council alongside possible increase in demand for council services. . Embedding of the new national funding formula for schools and High Needs. . Political failure to facilitate the setting of a lawful budget. . Unable to agree a deliverable programme of propositions that enable the required savings to be achieved. . Insufficient reserves to mitigate risks and liabilities and provide resilience. . Rising inflation could lead to increased costs.  Judicial review. Risk Owner: S151 Officer and Director of Finance. Action Owner: Section 151 Officer, Executive Director Resources and Director of Finance. Portfolio Flag: Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Finance, Governance and Performance.

11 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Resources Directorate Risk Report Summary as at July 2019 Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR15: Financial Deficit. BCC’s Financial framework ensures that we have in place sound The likelihood of this risk has increased slightly due to the start of a The council’s financial position goes into significant arrangements for financial planning, management, monitoring and new financial year. It is expected as mitigations to overspends are deficit in the current year resulting in reserves (actual or reporting. New spend decisions and borrowing is only supported where the put in place this will reduce to a tolerable level. projected) being less than the minimum specified by the source of revenue resources to meet the costs is clearly identified and A review of robustness of forecasting in light of YTD run rates and council’s reserves policy. availability confirmed by Finance. other associated evidence. Key potential causes are: Corporate Revenue Monitoring Reports with identified risks are reported Budget Improvement – The executive will review service to Cabinet, overspending departments prepare action plans with  A failure to appropriately plan and deliver savings recovery/delivery plans, options for mitigation and their viability, responsible Directors identified. unscheduled loss of material income streams. risk and priority outcome implications - both immediate and the  Increase in demography, demand and costs for key The ongoing review and due diligence of all budget savings by Delivery wider MTFP impact. council services. Executive, Corporate Leadership Board and the Executive. The pipeline of Where viable in year recovery/delivery plans cannot be achieved,  The inability to generate the minimum anticipated propositions to be incorporated into the tracker, due diligence undertaken Strategic Directors will report to the Mayor and Cabinet seeking a level of capital receipts. and subject to DE governance and assurance process. supplementary funding approval in accordance with the council’s  Insufficient reserves to facilitate short term The ongoing regular monitoring reports to Corporate Leadership Team and delegated executive approval powers (up to £1,000,000 for an area mitigations, risks and liabilities. Cabinet. Setting out progress on delivery of savings and other risks and of activity).  Interest rate volatility impacting on the council’s debt Page 149 Page opportunities in addition to the forecast expenditure. Where viable in year recovery/delivery plans cannot be achieved, costs. We have continual oversight and ongoing management of the council’s Strategic Directors will report to Full Council (in accordance with the  Impairments in our commercial Investments are 2 5 10 1 5 5 financial risks. Budget & Policy framework) to seek agreement to a supplementary realised. Internal audit also undertakes a number of reviews of our financial estimate (> £1,000,000 for an area of activity). planning and monitoring arrangements. We will seek agreement from the Executive of the alternative measures held in abeyance across other General Fund services e.g. which will be offset and advise all associated Strategic Directors appropriately. We will carry out a re-assessment of service delivery risks and opportunities and risk and other reserves.

Working with external advisors to undertake due diligence of commercial investments to provide the council with Assurance and further opportunities to explore. Ensuring we get our accounts certified is important to ensure that we have properly accounted for the resources we have used during the year.

Risk Owner: S151 Officer and Director of Finance. Action Owner: Section 151 Officer, Executive Director Resources and Portfolio Flag: Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Director of Finance. Finance, Governance and Performance.

12 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Corporate Risk Register as at July 2019 – Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR18: Failure to deliver 2000 Homes per annum Secured planning permissions. We are addressing all areas of provision including: Community Led Housing by 2020 of which 800 are affordable. Secured additional grant funding for infrastructure. (CLH), Registered Providers (RPs) and Direct Delivery, (New Council Homes). The risk of failing to deliver the range of housing to Releasing land. We are carrying out a Service Review of Housing Delivery Team. meet Bristol's needs and not realise the ambition to Significant land release programme to RPS. deliver 2000 homes per annum by 2020 of which Issuing grants to Registered Providers (RPs). 800 are affordable. Established Local Housing Company (Goram Homes) We are looking at opportunities to fund the acquisition of additional units in Key potential causes are: developments on site  Not enough planning applications submitted Secured funding from Homes England under HIF and Accelerated External funding bids have been made to secure infrastructure funding to  Not enough permissions granted Construction and Community Development in order to release further accelerate delivery.  Inability of the housebuilding industry to deliver housing land. 2 5 10 1 5 5 at this level.  Increased uncertainty in the market due to Brexit  Lack of capacity within the council’s delivery system and the local market.  Insufficient housing land identified in Planning documents Page 150 Page

Risk Owner: Interim Executive Director Growth and Action Owner: Director Development of Place. Portfolio Flag: Housing. Strategy Theme: Fair and Inclusive. Regeneration.

13 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Corporate Risk Register as at July 2019 – Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR19: Tree Management. Analysis work on trees is underway by the tree team. Cabinet report in June was agreed including re- Budget for 19/20 is available to continue tree analysis Risk of trees falling as a result of failure under procuring the tree management contract to create additional capacity to manage all off the councils and maintain trees on the existing contract. certain weather conditions and/or due to disease trees. The cost of this will be covered by the departments on whose land the trees are situated - more Budget for new contract is proposed to be from land finance work is needed on this. One additional officer is also needed to complete the analysis and Key potential causes are: owning departments this needs to be confirmed by provide ongoing management for the additional trees, the report proposes recruiting to this role and finance and departments.  Severe weather conditions and/or disease. using the Parks reserve to pay for this until the role can be mainstreamed into the council's revenue  Lack of maintenance of trees. budget. 3 5 15 1 5 5  Lack of tree inspections.  Reduction in budgets and fragmentation of management of trees across service areas putting pressure on the ability to adequately manage the council’s trees.

Risk Owner: Interim Executive Director Growth and Action Owner: Director Management of Place. Portfolio Flag: Strategy Theme: Our Organisation, Wellbeing. Regeneration. Communities. Page 151 Page

14 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Resources Directorate Risk Report Summary as at July 2019 Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR21: Information Governance. The GDPR Project was started in November 2017 and has put in place a comprehensive We have made significant progress on council wide package of changes for the introduction of the new regulation. It included compliance with the General Data General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) compliance. awareness training, data audits, updated contracts, retention policy and privacy Protection Regulation (GDPR). If the Council fails to maintain a defensible and compliant notices and improved processes for responding to subject access requests and The Office of Data Protection is working on response to the Data Protection Act 2018 and General Data completing data protection impact assessments. Support has also been provided to a prioritised programme of work to fully elected Members, Schools and the Bristol Companies. The GDPR Project completed its Protection Regulation (GDPR) then it will fail to fully comply with transition from the GDPR Project and objectives and deliverables and was formally closed July 2018. its statutory requirements. embed GDPR compliance into business as A newly formed Office of Data Protection has been established, led by a dedicated usual. Key potential causes are: Statutory Data Protection Officer (SDPO) who was appointed August 2018 to ensure We are embedding a new Information  Failure to invest in the required systems, equipment and posts the City Council maintains and further enhances its policies and procedures and to Governance team, which has brought required to implement these regulations. provide ongoing advice, guidance and support to service areas. Additional Data together existing specialists into a central Protection specialists have also been appointed to support the SDPO.  Failure to adequately train staff in the requirements of the team to provide advice guidance and regulations. A Steering Group and Working Group is in place and regular reports continue to be support on all related aspects in a more  Lack of resource (capacity or expertise) to manage Subject provided to Executive Directors Meetings (EDM’s) to ensure that the high-level of coordinated manner. engagement and buy-in across all levels of the organisation is maintained. Access Requests. 2 5 10 Continuing delivery of prioritised 2 3 6 Page 152 Page  (This risk replaces CRR14 Introduction of the General Data Improved data breach reporting for EDM's from December 2018. objectives to embed GDPR compliance, in Protection Regulation). Updated Source pages in January 2019. this quarter we are working on:  New starters induction and awareness Budget prepared and bid for growth approved in February 2019. training Improved PIA process and PIA register in February20 19.  Training for offline staff Business Continuity plan produced and updated to reflect new IG Service in March  Reviewing procurement templates 2019.  Reviewing data protection policies  Progressing the business case for a privacy management system (with Head of Service and Director)  Implementing Prescient+ case management system  Team training plan.

Risk Owner: Senior Information Risk Owner (SIRO). Action Owner: Senior Information Risk Owner (SIRO) and Statutory Data Protection Portfolio Flag: Finance, Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Officer (SDPO). Governance and Performance.

15 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Resources Directorate Risk Report Summary as at July 2019 Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR22: Partnerships Governance BCC has close involvement of Elected Mayor and Members in key partnerships. Regular We are reviewing and refreshing the If the council does not maximise (or cannot quantify) the benefits review and evaluation of the current position by CLB. Partnership Policy and Toolkit by August 2019. of partnership working and/or experiences negative or counter- Leads have been defined for recommendations to develop partnership working which productive results may arise from partnership working. were received by the Audit Committee in April 2016. Creating a central Partnership Register Key potential causes are: including Service Level Agreements (SLAs), BCC has mechanisms in place for regular dialogue including formal partnerships. Terms of Reference (Terms of reference)  Failure to establish and/or manage contracts, Service Level The role of Director: Policy and Strategy has been expanded to include oversight of and contracts where appropriate. Agreements and/or Terms of Reference in relation to partnerships and a permanent appointment to this post has been made. partnerships. Creating a template terms of reference by 3 3 9 2 3 6  Not maintaining a central register of partnerships, A refreshed Partnerships Policy has been drafted. (June 2019). August 2019. membership, governance arrangements and performance Scoping and reviewing the need for Commercial Training for relevant managers as part of We are scoping and reviewing the need for measures. Procurement and Commercial Strategy. appropriate procurement training for  No identified lead officer to progress development of Created a central partnership register. relevant managers as part of Procurement partnership working as in proposals presented to the Audit Strategy.

Page 153 Page Committee in April 2016.  Outdated partnership policy and toolkit (last iteration 2010).  A broad range of partnerships with variable degrees of formality. Risk Owner: Head of Paid Service. Action Owner: Head of Delivery Support Unit. Portfolio Flag: Finance, Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Governance and Performance.

16 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

People Directorate Risk Register Summary Report as at July 2019 – Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR23: Better Lives Programme. We have a Programme Board in place that meets monthly and has a key governance We are currently developing a new phase of the Better Failure to deliver the required outcomes and role for the Programme in terms of managing risk. The Board membership contains the Lives Programme, focused on delivering the programme savings from the Better Lives Programme, whilst Cabinet Lead for Adult Social Care, The Executive Directors for ACE and Resources, the vision at pace. This will include activities to deliver further delivering against our statutory duties and Director of Adult Social Care and representation from both Bristol Hospital Trusts and changes which are required around Older People's services maintaining quality services. the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG). They are provided with a verbal update and and an increased focus on Adults of Working Age and written monthly highlight report that contains key risks and issues. Any actions and Preparing for Adulthood. Key potential causes are: decisions arising are minuted with completion tracked through a log. Piloting provider reviews to increase capacity in our  Increased demand and complexity of Service The Programme Senior Responsible Officer (SRO) regularly attends key internal Reviewing Teams and further develop the Market. Users' needs. governance meetings e.g. ACE Scrutiny Commission, Delivery Executive. The (November 18)  The Provider Market is unable to meet needs in programme appointed a dedicated Senior Professional Lead who works within Adult Developing for a new Assistive Technology offer. the required way and/or we suffer relationship Social Care to oversee delivery of the programme outcomes and act as the lead breakdown. Business Change Manager. Completing the delivery of proposals new technology and

Page 154 Page working practices to our Social Workers.  Other Directorates within the organisation are We have delivered and are planning to deliver a number of key interventions to unable to support the Programme in the way improve the diversity of provision and the Provider Market's ability to respond to Completing the delivery of proposals new technology and required. changing requirements and needs e.g. Bristol Price introduced for residential and ways of working to our Home First and Reablement teams.  Statutory requirements of Adult Social Care 2 7 14 1 7 7 nursing care June 2018; Market Position statement provider event held .We are Continue to increase the capacity of the Reablement (ASC) mean resources have to be diverted away actively increasing opportunities to work with us in shaping the future market as well service to the required level, from Programme activity. as investing in key areas such as Home Care (Cabinet approved rate rise and  Changes to the priorities of the wider health innovation fund July 2018). Continuing to discuss dependencies between Healthier system and/or the National context, requires us Together and Better Lives with programme leads. We are working closely with other areas of the Council we have a dependency on to to divert resources/focus away from the Implement Phase 2 of the Integrated Care Bureau. help us deliver the programme outcomes e.g. Change Services, Housing, Communities, Programme's objectives. Information Communication Technology (ICT) and Procurement colleagues. Introducing a further rate increase for Home Care. April  There is a lack of sufficient skills and capacity 2019. within Adult Social Care (ASC) to deliver the We have a specific area of the Programme dedicated to strengthening partnership Opening two new Extra Care Housing sites in the City each required change at the required pace. working. with 60 units with BCC nomination rights 100 units in total).  Focus on savings, demand management and We have introduced a number of interventions that are impacting new demand e.g. Which has been delay from November 2018 to the end of specific areas of the service creates risk in other the introduction of the Bristol Price (June 2018); increased capacity and investment in Q4 18/19. areas of adult social care where we have a Home Care (July 2018); increased capacity in the Reablement Service; Introduced a statutory duty to deliver new Home First Service (October 2018). . Risk Owner: Executive Director, People. Action Owner: Director Adult Social Care. Portfolio Flag: Adult Strategy Theme: Our Organisation, Empowering others and Caring, Fair and Social Care. Inclusive, Well connected, Wellbeing.

17 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Corporate Risk Register as at July 2019 – Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR24: Procurement and Contract In 2018/19 BCC adopted a Category Management approach and revised the We are aligning category management forward plans with 2019/20 service Management Compliance structure of the procurement team to reflect the principles and methodology resource planning across the organisation. Failure to ensure that BCC: A PFI contract management specialist has been appointed to support the council We are developing an improvement action plan which will include the  Achieves value for money when and other stakeholders in the management of the contracts, undertake due following: purchasing goods and services. diligence to ensure maximum value is delivered from the councils PFI contracts.  Further development of the contract register.  Complies with legislation (including Ongoing.  Training and development plan for the procurement staff and the wider the risk of legal challenge), quality Council procurement rules were revised and agreed by Full Council in May 2018 organisation. and cost. and included strengthening procurement forward planning and Contract  Systems and processes to standardise and improve the monitoring of  Meets social value requirements Management. Category Plans have been developed with forward plans which procurement performance. for contract awards. align to service and business plans.  Procurement efficiencies are to be tracked in delivering agreed savings  Ensure orders for goods / services targets. More in-depth performance Data is being collated to give greater visibility of are efficiently placed and observes  Further reviewing and where appropriate streamlining key processes, for compliant and non-compliant procurement activity and delivery of objectives e.g. agreed terms. example the Commissioning Procurement Group (CPG). Social Value. Ongoing.  BCC do not take into account long  Seeking external support to both advance contract reviews to deliver term view with regards to TCO The Commissioning and Procurement Group are in place to ensure that the savings and efficiencies as well as support knowledge transfer and Page 155 Page (Total Cost of Ownership) & Life Councils procurement rules are adhered to. Ongoing. upskilling within the service. Cycle Costs. A pilot tracker system has been developed with Social Care Commissioners within 3 5 15  Implementing the new Social Value Policy and toolkit for measuring, 1 5 5  High incidence of non-contracted the business to monitor performance to capture early warning signs linked to monitoring and reporting additional benefits. spends. supplier failure to enable early intervention and business resilience.  Improving engagement within and across Services to enhance forward Key potential causes are: planning and driving down reliance on use of waivers.  Poor / weak pre procurement Tendering processes are being reviewed to eliminate non-value added forward planning and tender activity and support the appropriate route to market. specifications. The early warning system pilot will be reviewed with a view to wider  Over reliance and inappropriate rollout. use of waivers. This is not an exhaustive list and once the improvement plan has been  Skills / knowledge gaps. endorsed it will inform on next steps – end of Qtr. 4.  Ineffective Supply chain and market engagement.  Poor / weak contract monitoring.  Supplier failure and missed opportunities of warning signs.  Resourcing and personnel gaps in the Procurement Service. Risk Owner: Section 151 Officer, Action Owner: Director Finance (Section 151 Officer). Portfolio Flag: Finance, Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Executive Director Resources. Governance and Performance.

18 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Resources Directorate Risk Report Summary as at July 2019 Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR25: Suitability of Line of Business The FSA Programme plans to introduce a number of enhancements in Ensure that Line of Business (LOB) systems that pose a Cyber Security, Procurement or (LOB) systems regards to being able to better manage systems in the future. This Resilience/Recovery risk are identified and service areas understand the risks to their The Councils reliance on legacy includes the provision of some core capabilities which may be used to services. On-going. systems. displace legacy systems in the future. As approved by Cabinet June Where appropriate ensure that these risks are articulated to Risk, BCP and procurement 2018. Key potential causes are: colleagues, and also to the SIRO, as appropriate. On-going. As a result of FSA Programme activity to date, c40% of redundant  Lack of desire to change; systems. Delivery of the FSA Programme remains the key ICT activity. This will be delivered in line servers have been removed from the Corporate IT estate. Q3 2018.  Significant transition activity leads with the 2-3 year FSA Programme. to systems being. The IT CSRM Team have developed a schedule of contract end dates, Legacy systems highlighted within the Service Risk Registers included: Legal Business Case, expensive/complex to change and are working with service areas to ensure that they have Claims Management, GDPR MORIS system. appropriate plans in place to engage the market and start re-  Lack of understanding of 4 5 20 2 5 10 consequences of not changing procurement Q3 2018. systems on ICT. Through the service planning process, service areas have identified  Lack of adherence to Procurement their procurement requirements and also their strategic objectives for Page 156 Page rules in relation to re- 2019/20 which has enabled ICT and Change Management to review procurements. the options for efficiencies and to ensure resource availability. Q3 2018. Working with Central Procurement colleagues to ensure that we have procurement policies and strategies in place to enable effective procurement activity to take place. Q3 2018.

Risk Owner: Senior Information Risk Action Owner: Director, Digital Transformation. Portfolio Flag: Finance, Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Owner (SIRO) for Cyber Security Governance and Service Areas for BCP/DR. Performance.

19 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Resources Directorate Risk Report Summary as at July 2019 Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR26: ICT Resilience Resilience has been implemented within the Corporate Network to A test of current Disaster Recovery arrangements is due within Q4 2018/19. The Councils ability to deliver critical ensure that the network remains active and available in the event of a Ensure that Line of Business (LOB) systems that pose a Resilience/Recovery risk are and key services in the event of ICT building becoming unavailable or a circuit being interrupted. Work to identified and service areas understand the risks to their services within their BCP outages, and be able to recover in the date. planning. On-going. event of system and/or data loss. Backups are held within, and external, to the corporate network to Delivery of the FSA Programme remains the key ICT activity. This will be delivered in line Key potential causes are: ensure availability. Work to date. with the 2-3 year FSA Programme.  Poor BCP planning and The FSA Programme has the movement to more resilient hosting as understanding of key system part of a core deliverable. Utilising cloud hosting improves resilience architecture. and recovery and enables access to key systems from outside of the  Untested DR arrangements corporate network, and if necessary, from non-corporate devices. As 2 7 14 2 5 10 including data recovery. approved by Cabinet June 2018.  Untested network reconfiguration The FSA Programme includes the review of future DR arrangements to alleviate key location outage. with the move to cloud for most services, and a move to crown  Untested recovery schedules in hosting for remaining, servers. As approved by Cabinet June 2018. terms of order and instructions The FSA Programme includes work to aid with the survivability and

Page 157 Page  Lack of resilience available for recovery of Cyber Security Incidents which will aid the resilience of key legacy systems (single points of Council systems. As approved by Cabinet June 2018. failure – people and technology).  Services undertaking their own IT arrangements outside of the corporate approach. Risk Owner: Head of Paid Service and Action Owner: Director, Digital Transformation. Portfolio Flag: Finance, Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Service Area Leads. Governance and Performance.

20 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Threat Risks

Corporate Risk Register as at July 2019 – Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR27: Capital Transport Programme Delivery Transport Programme Team set up. Transport department split which could endanger Management of the overall transport capital Transport Delivery Board set up. work done to date working on ways to mitigate this. programme is key to ensuring we deliver against Shared paperwork and highlight reporting process initiated. Raising concerns to senior management. mayoral priorities in the most cost and time Regular briefings and reporting to senior management and cabinet members. Retaining Transport Management Team (TMT) efficient way possible. Failure to do so negatively meetings. impacts the council's reputation and finances and 5 year capital programme mapping process underway. makes the council less likely to reduce congestion, Continuing to develop Transport Planning Team (TPT), air pollution and inequality. 3 5 15 Transport Development Board (TDB) and highlight 2 5 10 report processes. Key potential causes are:  Overspend on individual schemes leading to 5 Year mapping ongoing, 19/20 programme mapped uncontainable cost pressures. and ongoing.  Underspend on annual profile. Project prioritisation through WECA Programmes and  Lack of coordination and programme Programme Management. management across divisions.

Risk Owner: Interim Executive Director Growth and Action Owner: Director Management of Place. Portfolio Flag: Strategy Theme: Our Organisation, Wellbeing.

Regeneration. 158 Page Communities.

Corporate Risk Register as at July 2019 – Threat Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

CRR29: Information Security Management System. We have worked with Information Governance Board (IGB) and ICT on introducing and/or designing an We are continuing to work with ICT and IGB on There is a risk that if the council does not have an ISMS aligned to ISO 27001. implementing an Information Security Management Information Security Management System then it System. will not be able to effectively manage Information Security risks.

Key potential causes are: New 4 5 20 1 5 5  Ineffective Information Security Management System, inadequate resources to create and maintain an ISMS, management buy in and support to operate an ISMS

Risk Owner: Senior Information Risk Owner (SIRO). Action Owner: Senior Information Risk Owner (SIRO) and Statutory Data Protection Officer (SDPO). Portfolio Flag: Finance, Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Governance and Performance.

21 Appendix A: Bristol City Council – Draft Resources Directorate Risk Report Q1 2019/20 Opportunity Risks

Directorate Risk Register as at July 2019 – Opportunity Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. . Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk Performance

OPP1: One City Approach We have Launched the One City Plan v1 in January 2019. Scoping options for future operating model and long term The One City Approach will offer a new way to plan funding model, including sponsorship. strategically with partners as part of a wider city We have funded the core City Office staff team for 2019/20 (April 2019). system. Appointing to Operations and Stakeholder Liaison Manager post(s) in City Office. Key potential causes: We have appointed to the Head of City Office role, with post holders to take up job- share position in July/Aug 2019.  Mayoral aspiration and widespread partner sign- Updating OSMB on Board operations (July 2019) up to the principle. We have established the majority of One City Boards, with Environment and Economy 4 5 20 4 5 20  Work to date has produced outline plan and to Launch in the next quarter. Planning work to iterate the One City Plan for v2 in January engaged partners in the long-term vision and 2020. necessary work to complete the plan. We have agreed the top three priority One City projects for 19/20 and are actively supporting these. Submitted shortlisted bid for European Capital of Innovation for Once City work, providing potential prize Aligned internal resourcing for One City Plan development with our review of money to fund continued innovation and engagement.. Partnership Policy (see CRR21) to ensure a joined-up approach. Page 159 Page

Risk Owner: Head of Paid Service. Action Owner: Director Policy, Strategy and Partnerships . Portfolio Flag: Mayor. Strategy Theme: Our Organisation.

Directorate Risk Register as at July 2019 – Opportunity Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. . Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

OPP2: Corporate Strategy We have approved and adopted the Corporate Strategy, Business Plan 19/20 and Designing service and business planning process for The approved Corporate Strategy presents an Performance Framework 19/20 through appropriate Decision Pathways. 2020/21, with a view to launching in September 2019 opportunity to fundamentally refresh and Re-launched and completed 'My Performance' reviews for all colleagues including aligned to budget marking process. strengthen our business planning, leadership and annual objective setting linked to the Corporate Strategy and Business Plan 19/20. performance frameworks. Moved objective setting in to new iTrent system. Key potential causes: Begun work to design the business planning process for 2020/21. 4 7 28 4 7 28  Approved Corporate Strategy provides the Engaged in Audit of this process from 2019/20 to contribute to lessons learned. Held foundation and direction for the organisation. debriefs workshops from 2019/20 with various staff teams. Commissioned an independent review of our approach to data analysis and performance management with a view to identifying ways to improve it further.

Risk Owner: Head of Paid Service. Action Owner: Director Policy, Strategy and Partnerships. Portfolio Flag: Finance, Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Governance and Performance.

22 Appendix A: Bristol City Council – Resources Directorate Risk Report Q1 2019/20 Opportunity Risks

Directorate Risk Register as at July 2019 – Opportunity Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. . Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

OPP3: Devolution We have continued engagement with WECA; but with recognition that focus has been Should the potential arise for opportunities from a placed more on a proposed housing fund. We will continue to engage with WECA at strategic level. region’s evolving, second devolution deal that could We will launch the ‘Powerhouse for the West’ report at the lead to an opportunity to align the Council’s We have commissioned work to investigate the potential for a Western Powerhouse, a House of Lords on 8 July and continue development of the corporate priorities and strengthen regional cross-border, cross-sector partnership akin to the Northern Powerhouse or Midlands concept. 3 5 15 3 7 21 partnership working. Engine. Key potential causes: We will continue to engage with HM Government following  Potential development of second devolution suggestion that more devolution opportunities may be deal. available following Brexit, including specific spending review asks and engagement on the Western Powerhouse proposal. Risk Owner: Head of Paid Service. Action Owner: Director Policy, Strategy and Partnerships. Portfolio Flag: Finance, Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Governance and Performance.

Page 160 Page Directorate Risk Register as at July 2019 – Opportunity Risks to the achievement of Bristol City Councils Objectives. . Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

OPP4: Brexit. We have: We are monitoring the issue on an ongoing basis. If exiting the European Union provides benefits, Undertaken an internal assessment of threat and opportunities following an Have further meetings of Bristol Brexit Response Group such as increased domestic concentration of power, externally-provided workshop, publishing our No Deal Scenario Assessment and Brexit Project Board. this may lead to opportunities for this to be Established a city Brexit Response Group and met since 2016. harnessed at a local or regional level. Continued monitoring of external environment and Met Michel Barnier in Brussels with the Core Cities. government relations. Key potential causes for enhancing and exploiting:  Exiting the European Union. Been monitoring the environment; including news of threats from large local Attend MHCLG regional preparedness workshop for Chief employers of leaving UK. Officers and regularly contribute to Local Resilience Forum Collaborated on draft Inclusive Economic Growth Strategy and Local Industrial (LRF), MHCLG and other formal preparation 1 5 5 1 5 5 Strategy. networks/meetings. Participating in MHCLG events and national working group of local authority Revisiting our No Deal Scenario Assessment to check it representatives. against refreshed evidence base. We continue to work with Core Cities and M8 leaders on concerted joint efforts. We have formed a Brexit Project Board for internal preparedness and provided fortnightly updates to all Members on preparedness work. We have agreed terms of reference for a Brexit Coordination Group to manage daily operations in the event of a No Deal exit. Risk Owner: Head of Paid Service. Action Owner: Director Policy, Strategy and Partnerships. Portfolio Flag: Finance, Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Governance and Performance. 23 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2018/19 External Risk and Civil Contingency Risk Key External Risk and Civil Contingency Risks to note - Flooding and Brexit

Resources Directorate Risk Report Summary as at July 2019 - External and Civil Contingency Risks Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

BCCC2: Brexit We have established Bristol Brexit Response Group. Continue to implement actions identified through No Deal The risk that Brexit (and any resulting 'deal' or 'no With Core Cities, met Michel Barnier in Brussels. Brexit Scenario Assessment. Ongoing. deal') will impact the local economy, local funding Working with Core Cities and M8 leaders on concerted joint efforts. Continued internal Brexit Project Board to oversee BCC and delivery of council services, and that preparedness and respond with agility to changing uncertainty around Brexit could impact our ability Monitored environment; including news of threats from large local employers of circumstances. Ongoing. leaving UK. to accurately assess or plan for potential positive or Continued monitoring of external environment and negative outcomes. Collaborated on draft Inclusive Economic Growth Strategy and Local Industrial government relations. Ongoing. Strategy. Key potential causes are: Continue engagement with all relevant government  Exiting the European Union. Developed a BCC Brexit No Deal Scenario Assessment to inform action planning - departments and partners to ensure sectoral/organisation  Lack of majority view on draft agreement with focusing on workforce, supply chain, city economy, legal, data & regulatory, finance & risks are communicated and mitigations proactively 3 7 21 3 7 21 EU. funding, core operations, civil contingencies and housing. Tested this with partners, suggested. Ongoing.  Unprecedented and complex national / Resources Scrutiny and OSMB. Revisiting our No Deal Scenario Assessment to check it

Page 161 Page international process. Participation in MHCLG events and national working group of local authority  Lack of planning by the authority. against refreshed evidence base. representatives. Formed Brexit Project Board to take forward preparedness actions and met consistently to drive progress. Agreed funding for key areas for mitigation work. Provided fortnightly update emails to members. Established TOR for a Brexit Coordination Group to manage daily activity in a No Deal scenario (Jan 2019) and tested (Mar 2019). Risk Owner: Head of Paid Service. Action Owner: Director Policy, Strategy and Partnerships. Portfolio Flag: Finance, Strategy Theme: Our Organisation. Governance and Performance.

24 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2018/19 External Risk and Civil Contingency Risks

Key External Risk and Civil Contingency Risks to note

Corporate Risk Register as at July 2019 - External and Civil Contingency Risks Current Risk Tolerance Level Risk Level

Risk title and description What we have done What we are doing Rating Rating Performance Likelihood Impact Risk Likelihood Impact Risk

BCCC1: Flooding. The Avon and Somerset Local Resilience Forum (LRF) is a partnership of all the organisations There is sustained resourcing and delivery of all There could be a risk of damage to properties and infrastructure needed to prepare for an emergency in the LRF area. It includes the emergency services, actions in LFRMS over life of strategy. Strategy as well as risk to public safety from flooding which may be caused health services, Maritime and Coastal Agency, Environment Agency, volunteer agencies, includes the following key projects: by a tidal surge, heavy rainfall and river and groundwater flood utility companies, transport providers and the five councils of Bath and North East Somerset,  Working in partnership with the events. Bristol, North Somerset, Somerset and South Gloucestershire. Environment Agency to develop a Bristol Key potential causes are: Bristol is working with the Avon and Somerset LRF to construct new sea defences around Tidal Flood Risk Management Strategy to North Somerset, Bristol and South Gloucestershire. Working with emergency services, local  Tidal surge, heavy rainfall, river and groundwater flood events. protect the city centre, including climate authorities and other agencies to develop flood response plans and procedures, investigating change.  Impact of climate change. instances of flooding, training specialist staff in swift water rescue techniques, communicating  Working in partnership with South  Lack of effective flood defences and preparedness for major 3 5 15 3 3 9 with housing and business developers to incorporate flood protection into new Gloucester and the Environment Agency to incidents. developments. It provide guidance to members of the public about flooding, including flood deliver a flood scheme to help protect warnings and what people can do to help themselves, regular maintenance and clearing Avonmouth Village and the Enterprise Area programs of gullies and culverts, especially in the event of storm warnings. from tidal flooding, including climate Page 162 Page Bristol has in place a local Flood Risk Management Strategy approved at Cabinet in December change. 2017 which comprises of 5 keys areas and 43 separate actions in line with Environment Agency's national strategy.

Risk Owner: Interim Executive Director Growth and Regeneration. Action Owner: Director Management of Place, Flood Risk Engineer, Strategic City Transport. Portfolio Flag: Energy, Strategy Theme: Our Organisation, Empowering and Caring, Fair Waste and Regulatory and Inclusive, Well Connected, Wellbeing. Services.

25 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Performance Summary

Corporate Threat Risk Performance Summary Quarter 4 Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4 The risks are set out by the highest risk rating first in the Q1 19/20 column. Jan – Mar 18/19 Apr – Jun 19/20 Jul - Sept 19/20 Oct - Dec 19/20 Jan - Mar 19/20 Appendix Page Risk ID Risk Risk Owner Rating Travel Rating Travel Rating Travel Rating Travel Rating Travel 6 CRR7 Cyber-Security(Previously Cyber-Attack) Senior Information Risk Owner (SIRO) 3x7=21 3x7=21 1 CRR1 Long Term Commercial Investments and Major Interim Executive Director Growth and Regeneration, projects Capital Investment Executive Director Resources and Section 151 Officer 3x7=21 3x7=21

2 CRR3 Asbestos Management Head of Paid Service and CLB 3x7=21 3x7=21 3 CRR4 Corporate Health, Safety and Wellbeing Head of Paid Service and CLB 3x7=21 3x7=21 19 CRR25 ICT Line of Business (LOB) Director Digital Transformation 3x5=15 4x5=20 (Previously IT infrastructure CRR2) 21 CRR29 Information Security Management System. Senior Information Risk Owner (SIRO) 4x5=20 New 18 CRR24 Procurement and contract management compliance Executive Director Resources and Director of Finance 3x5=15 3x5=15 (Section 151 Officer) 14 CRR19 Tree Management Head of Paid Service 3x5=15 3x5=15 4 CRR5 Business Continuity and Council Resilience Head of Paid Service and CLB 3x5=15 3x5=15 Page 163 Page 5 CRR6 Fraud and Corruption Executive Director Resources and Director of Finance 3x5=15 3x5=15 (Section 151 Officer) 21 CRR27 Capital Transport Programme Delivery Interim Executive Director Growth and Regeneration 3x7=21 New 3x5=15 17 CRR23 Better Lives Programme Executive Director, Adults, Children and Education 2x7=14 2x7=14 7 CRR9 Safeguarding Vulnerable Children Executive Director, Adults, Children and Education 2x7=14 2x7=14 8 CRR10 Safeguarding Vulnerable Adults Executive Director, Adults, Children and Education 2x7=14 2x7=14 20 CRR26 ICT Resilience Director Digital Transformation 3x7=21 2x7=14 (Previously IT infrastructure CRR2) 9 CRR11 BCC Infrastructure Delivery Director of Finance (Section 151 Officer) and Interim 2x7=14 2x7=14 Executive Director Growth and Regeneration 10 CRR12 Failure to deliver suitable emergency planning Head of Paid Service measures, respond to and manage emergency 2x7=14 2x7=14 events when they occur. (Previously Civil Contingencies and Council Resilience) 12 CRR15 Financial Deficit Director of Finance (Section 151 Officer) 1x5=5 2x5=10 13 CRR18 Failure to deliver 2000 Homes per annum by 2020. Interim Executive Director Growth and Regeneration 2x7=14 2x5=10 11 CRR13 Financial Framework and MTFP Director of Finance (Section 151 Officer) 3x5=15 2x5=10

15 CRR21 Information Governance (Replaces CRR14) Senior Information Risk Owner (SIRO) 3x5=15 2x5=10 16 CRR21 Partnerships Governance Head of Paid Service 3x3=9 3x3=9

26 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Performance Summary

Corporate risk performance summary for closed / de-escalated risks Quarter 4 Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4 Jan – Mar 18/19 Apr – Jun 19/20 Jul – Sept 19/20 Oct - Dec 19/20 Jan - Mar 19/20

Status Risk ID Risk Risk Owner Rating Travel Rating Travel Rating Travel Rating Travel Rating Travel

Closed CRR8 Service Review Head of Paid Service 2x5=10 Closed

Closed CRR28 Instability of Housing’s new IT (Replaces Interim Executive Director Growth and CRR20) Regeneration 3x7=21 New 3x7=21 Closed De -escalated CRR16 Leadership Head of Paid Service and CLB 2x5=10 2x5=10

De -escalated CRR17 Strategy Management Head of Paid Service 1x7=7 1x7=7

Corporate Risk Performance Summary for Opportunity risks Quarter 4 Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4 The risks are set out by the highest risk rating first in the Quarter 1 April June 2019/20 Jan – Mar 18/19 Apr – Jun 19/20 Jul – Sept 19/20 Oct - Dec 19/20 Jan - Mar 19/20 Page Risk ID Risk Risk Owner Travel Rating Rating Travel Rating Travel Rating Travel Rating Travel 22 OPP2 Corporate Strategy Head of Paid Service 4x7=28 4x7=28

22 164 Page OPP1 One City Head of Paid Service 4x5=20 4x5=20

23 OPP3 Devolution Head of Paid Service 3x5=15 3x5=15

23 OPP4 Brexit Head of Paid Service 1x5=5 1x5=5

Directorate Risk Performance Summary for External and Civil Contingency risks Quarter 4 Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4 Jan – Mar 18/19 Apr – Jun 19/20 Jul – Sept 19/20 Oct - Dec 19/20 Jan - Mar 19/20 The risks are set out by the highest risk rating first in the Quarter 1 April to June 2019/20 Page Risk ID Risk Risk Owner Travel Rating Rating Travel Rating Travel Rating Travel Rating Travel

24 BCCC2 Brexit Head of Paid Service 4x5=20 3x7=21

Interim Executive Director Growth and 25 BCCC1 Flooding 3x5=15 3x5=15 Regeneration

27 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2019/20 Risk Matrix

Risk Scoring Matrix Page 165 Page

Current and Tolerance risk ratings: The ‘Current’ risk rating for both threats and opportunities refer to the current level of risk taking into account any strategies to manage risk - management actions, controls and fall back plans already in place. The ‘Tolerance’ rating represents what is deemed to be a realistic level of risk to be achieved once additional actions have been put in place. On some occasions the aim will be to contain the level of the risk at the current level.

Positive Risks (Opportunities): Where the risk is an opportunity, a cost benefit analysis is required to determine whether the opportunity is worth pursuing, guided by the score for the matrix, e.g. an opportunity with a score of 28 would be pursued as it would offer considerable benefits for little risk.

Positive Risks (Opportunities) 28 Appendix A: Bristol City Council - Bristol City Council - Corporate Risk Report (register of risk summary) Q1 2018/19 Risk Scoring Criteria

LIKELIHOOD AND IMPACT RISK RATING SCORING

Likelihood Guidance

Likelihood Likelihood Ratings 1 to 4 1 2 3 4 Description Might happen on rare occasions. Will possibly happen, possibly on several Will probably happen, possibly at regular intervals. Likely to happen, possibly frequently. occasions. Numerical Likelihood Less than 10% Less than 50% 50% or more 75% or more

Severity of Impact Guidance (Risk to be assessed against all of the Categories, and the highest score used in the matrix).

Impact Category Impact Levels 1 to 7 1 3 5 7 Service provision Very limited effect (positive or Noticeable and significant effect (positive or Severe effect on service provision or a Corporate Extremely severe service disruption. Significant negative) on service provision. negative) on service provision. Strategic Plan priority area. customer opposition. Legal action. Impact can be managed within Effect may require some additional resource, but Effect may require considerable /additional resource Effect could not be managed within a reasonable time normal working arrangements. manageable in a reasonable time frame. but will not require a major strategy change. frame or by a short-term allocation of resources and may require major strategy changes. The Council risks ‘special measures’. Officer / Member forced to resign. Communities Minimal impact on community. Noticeable (positive or negative) impact on the A more severe but manageable impact (positive or A lasting and noticeable impact on a significant number

Page 166 Page community or a more manageable impact on a negative) on a significant number of vulnerable of vulnerable groups / individuals. smaller number of vulnerable groups / individuals groups / individuals which is not likely to last more which is not likely to last more than six months. than twelve months. Environmental No effect (positive or negative) on Short term effect (positive or negative) on the Serious local discharge of pollutant or source of Lasting effect on the natural and or built environment. the natural and built environment. natural and or built environment. community annoyance that requires remedial action. Financial Loss / Gain Under £0.5m Between £0.5m - £3m Between £3m - £5m More than £5m Fraud & Corruption Loss Under £50k Between £50k - £100k Between £100k - £1m More than £1m Legal No significant legal implications or Tribunal / BCC legal team involvement required Criminal prosecution anticipated and / or civil Criminal prosecution anticipated and or civil litigation (> action is anticipated. (potential for claim). litigation. 1 person). Personal Safety Minor injury to citizens or Significant injury or ill health of citizens or Major injury or ill health of citizens or colleagues may Death of citizen(s) or colleague(s). colleagues. colleagues causing short-term disability / absence result in. long term disability / absence from work. Significant long-term disability / absence from work. from work. Programme / Project Minor delays and/or budget Slippage causes significant delay to delivery of Slippage causes significant delay to delivery of key Significant issues threaten delivery of the entire project. Management overspend but can be brought back key project milestones, and/or budget project milestones; and/or major budget overspends. Could lead to project being cancelled or put on hold. (Including developing on schedule with this project stage. overspends. Major threat to delivery of the project on time and to commercial enterprises) No threat to delivery of the project No threat to overall delivery of the project and budget, and achievement of one or more benefits / on time and to budget and no the identified benefits / outcomes. outcomes. threat to identified benefits / outcomes. Reputation Minimal and transient loss of public Significant public or partner interest although Serious potential for enhancement of, or damage to, Highly significant potential for enhancement of, or or partner trust. Contained within limited potential for enhancement of, or damage reputation and the willingness of other parties to damage to, reputation and the willingness of other the individual service. to, reputation. collaborate or do business with the council. parties to collaborate or do business with the council. Dissatisfaction reported through council Dissatisfaction regularly reported through council Intense local, national and potentially international complaints procedure but contained within the complaints procedure. media attention. council. Higher levels of local or national interest. Viral social media or online pick-up. Local MP involvement. Some local media/social media interest. Higher levels of local media / social media interest. Public enquiry or poor external assessor report.

29 Agenda Item 15

Report for Audit Committee

1. Audit Committee 30 September 2019

Report of: Director – Homes & Landlord Services

Title: Asbestos Management Update

Ward: Citywide

Officer Presenting Report: Richard Noakes – Construction Safety Manager Gillian Durden – Head of Service – Planned Maintenance

Recommendation

That the Audit Committee notes the progress made to address asbestos safety management .

Summary

This report provides information setting out the improvement in asbestos management with a focus Homes and Landlord Services. It maps progress against the asbestos action plan that was drawn up as a result of an asbestos review in September 2018 and details where further progress is ongoing. The significant issues in the report are:

- Asbestos remains present in BCC premises and action is being taken to continually improve the management of Asbestos at BCC - Progression against the asbestos action plan from September 2018

Page 167 Report for Audit Committee

Policy

The Asbestos policy, termed as the ‘Asbestos Arrangement’ is owned by Corporate Health and Safety services and was introduced in February 2013, it was again reviewed in June 2018. Recognising that maintaining the Bristol City Council (BCC) housing stock holds significant risks from asbestos a subsidiary ‘Asbestos Management Plan’ sitting under this policy was introduced by Housing and Landlord Services in 2015. Both of these set governance arrangements to achieve compliance with the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012.

Consultation

1. Internal Not applicable

Context

2. Corporate Risk

Premises are managed within the BCC in three areas; 1. Housing and Landlord Services 2. Building Practice 3. Premises Management

Due to the age and complexity of the BCC assets, asbestos surveys are routinely carried out in all premises and there is an ongoing programme to keep registers up to date.

Specifically for housing, The large housing stock is made up of many different designs having been constructed over the last century. Asbestos was a material commonly used to serve many different roles and because of this its presence is widespread throughout BCC housing stock. Asbestos should be less prevalent in housing stock constructed after the mid 1980’s, thereafter being subject to banning although it was not fully banned from use until 1999.

Legislation to manage asbestos has been predominant for a number of years and BCC has over this time introduced asbestos management systems and supportive arrangements to prevent the likelihood of exposure and the risk of harm. In further support to this BCC has operated with ‘Keystone’ software which performs the role of an asbestos register holding asbestos survey results and other related information. Keystone is available to staff, managers and planners and it is routinely interrogated ahead of pursuing planned works or response repairs to enable safe working.

Asbestos has been used over many years for many different purposes and because of this it is not always possible to accurately determine where every piece of Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) may have been placed by builders at the time. Historical construction methods and commonality with asbestos use can however provide an informed indication of where it is likely to be found, but this cannot be relied upon to prevent ACM exposure.

Asbestos surveys are the key resource in providing accurate information of where it is located Page 168 Report for Audit Committee

and BCC have invested purposefully to gain an accurate register of ACM’s, this work continues routinely on a weekly basis.

3. Asbestos Action Plan

I

The Corporate Health and Safety Team carried out a review of the asbestos arrangements in in 2018 as a number of incidents occurred that were reportable under the Reporting of Injury Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations. An action plan was produced and a risk was added to the corporate risk register. The action plan has been governed twice since it was developed and progress has been noted by the Corporate Health and Safety Team.

This report provides a summary of the actions that were identified and of progress to mitigate risk. The action plan is available as Appendix 1.

The asbestos action plan looked to address findings of the review giving prioritisation to elements carrying higher risk and requiring immediate action as well as intermediate and lower risk that have an extended time for completion.

Ownership of the asbestos action plan is shared between Corporate Health and Safety team and Housing and Landlord services.

The action plan has 13 actions addressing higher risks for which 12 have been completed, 10 addressing medium risk for which 7 are completed and 5 addressing lower risk for which 4 are completed. In summary, 23 of the original 28 actions are competed, subject to a follow up reivew which is planned for September 2019.

 Notable progress has been made to raise the risk profile of asbestos amongst managers and operatives and this has led to the introduction of more robust strategies for managing staff and contractors, asbestos good working practice is also regularly communicated.  Significantly a high number of staff and operatives (425) have attended asbestos training that has included a practical focus to challenge the attendees understanding of risk and the use of asbestos surveys. A management directive has made this training a mandatory requirement for staff at every level with Housing and Landlord Services and mop up sessions are in progress. Training feedback from attendees has been excellent.

 A new dedicated safety Team based within Housing and Landlord Services has been created. The structure of the new team is currently being formulated by the newly Page 169 Report for Audit Committee

appointed Construction Safety Manager. The new Team will serve and support the health and safety needs of Planned Programmes and Responsive Maintenance in all construction areas of risk. The terms of reference for the new Team are at this time being developed, it is envisaged that the team will take working responsibility for the Keystone asbestos management software and for leading asbestos and other safety improvement strategies. The health and safety team will likely take responsibility for all health and safety training, this increasing resilience to deliver training of the right type to the right people at the right time.

 Outstanding actions are controlled and scheduled to a point of planned closure.

In addition to the work carried out in Housing and Landlord Services, the Building Practice team have been working with the asbestos survey contractor to ensure that BCC premises under its remit (c.283 Properties) is up to date with asbestos surveys.

The current model of devolved risk management (nominating persons within a building to manage the premises) is also being reviewed; there is work planned within the Corporate Health and Safety Team action plan to create a toolkit for those persons in these roles and develop a training package for them. A plan is underway to develop a compliance team in Building Practice to further strengthen its management of all Health and Safety compliance activities. This has been approved by CLB.

The Corporate Health and Safety team can confirm that the number of RIDDOR incidents involving accidental exposure to asbestos has reduced.

 21 in 2016  6 in 2017  17 in 2018  2 in 2019 to date

It is noted that the number of exposures appear to oscillate. A second year of reduction and retaining zero/ low numbers will identify if the actions taken have been effective. In the meantime, the Corporate Health and Safety Team, working in partnership with the new Construction Health and Safety Manager will as a next step, audit the arrangements again to take additional assurance that action place are preventing exposure.

Proposal

4. That the Audit Committee notes the action that has been taken to date to reduce the risk identified. 5. The Audit Committee are asked to acknowledge the investment made to increase competent leadership of this agenda both in terms of the investment in Housing (H&S Construction Manager), Building Practice (CLB approval for additional Compliance posts). Page 170 Report for Audit Committee

6. There has been widespread action taken to reduce the risk and work to address the current action plan and completion of a section follow up audit will continue into 2020. 7. Asbestos, given the age and profile of the building stock remains a risk however, BCC continues to be committed to ensuring that exposure incidents do not occur.

Other Options Considered

8. None

Risk Assessment

9. The management of asbestos is a live risk on the corporate risk register.

Public Sector Equality Duties

No implications

Legal and Resource Implications

Legal Legal advice provided by

Financial

There are no new financial implications arising from the report (a) Revenue

(b) Capital Financial advice provided by

Land/Property

There are no new property implications arising from the report

Land/property advice provided by

Human Resources Implication with recruitment for additional health and safety resources, completed.

HR advice provided by

Appendices: Page 171 Report for Audit Committee

Asbestos Action Plan

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT 1985 Background Papers:

None

Page 172 HOUSING ASBESTOS REVIEW – ACTION PLAN (v4) updated Sept 2019

Deadline for action: IMMEDIATE Situation requires immediate attention to improve INTERMEDIATE Situation requires remedial work to improve NOT URGENT Procedures in place or underway shortly, working well and require an annual review

Immediate Action

Ref Recommendations from H and S Response / actions agreed by H Timescale investigation and LS. H1 It is imperative that a training Create Safety Manager Role – to COMPLETED matrix is established and data oversee safety and manage extracted from the HR system Construction Health and Safety Co- Now in post and to (Vision) to ensure appropriate ordinators (CHSC) and technical create a team training is delivered as required. Business support.

Will create technical support role Training log for (to work under Safety Manager – asbestos – in place see later)

Historical Health and Safety (H and S) training spreadsheet Interim – Business Support to collate and update, starting with asbestos, and hand over to new role. H2 In relation to the specific Review training content, and legal COMPLETED subject matter asbestos, that requirements. Tailor to work group nominated competent persons requirements. Some can be UKATA certified receive ‘Train the Trainer’ shortened. (use of online for wider training packages training in order to deliver staff) with practical at the differentiated in-house training end. Training has as required. Check up to date with train the started feedback is trainer training. positive CHSC now attended PTTLS H3 It is a requirement that Yes COMPLETED competent persons are able to also ensure their training is kept CHSC to find out when / where CHSC’s now current and in line with changes briefings are and to attend, and attending regular in legislation. In light of this use info to update training IOSH meetings. competent persons should be released to attend relevant IOSH (Institute of Occupational Safety and Health) briefings in work time.

Page 173 H4 Regular briefings should take Use existing process in place COMPLETED place in the form of either email following exposure or other communications to Lessons learned part of Safety Managers managers to inform them of investigation reports – with actions meetings in place exposures and remind them of and responsibilities and reviews of the need to update the training Feedback into training incidents takes matrix. Communication to teams and place. managers Safety Manager to ensure consistency of approach to reports, CHSC is using take on management of CHSC and messaging service processes. such as Rapide when incident occur Report exposure incidents to safety for operatives and meetings. managers,

it is a further recommendation that monthly safety bulletins are sent out from the safety team including lessoned learned. H5 A formal Management Safety Quarterly Safety Management COMPLETED meeting is put in place to Board meetings to be set up. discuss issues including but not Meetings started limited to Asbestos. Board members: Heads of Planned Sept 2018. Programmes and Response Repairs, Safety Manager when recruited, Team Managers / CHCS / Policy and Project Officer Technical report to board as and when required,

H6 Immediate clarity of roles and Briefing note / instructions - Clarity COMPLETED responsibilities to ensure that on roles and responsibilities – Asset management systems are maintained, access to data, and keeping / to update data as consistent and available. updating data this has to be (aligned to new contractor standardised. arrangements). Integration of the Surveys and removals. information with the asbestos contract with CASA now in place. H7 Complete procurement process Due to go out to tender by mid COMPLETED for Corporate Contract as a October and mid November Surveying and matter of urgency. Subject to checks across teams asbestos removal involved. frameworks now in Head of Planned Maintenance is place by Housing lead sponsor. Services.

Page 174 H8 A process implemented to AMT to update staff where COMPLETED ensure that when an ICT system Keystone Asbestos data not fails that there is directorate available Process in place wide communication with using Rapide. updates on reinstating. (New ICT system support to be in place post Civica go live).

H9 Review approach to first on site Review Risk Assessment and PPE / COMPLETED to relet works – PPE and RPE. RPE provision for relets, and clarity on circumstances (dynamic risk DL reviewed risk assessment) assessments, (DL) Dynamic RA to be carried out by surveyors and Electricians they are now first on site. H10 Add reminder to check sheets Part of above work – will add to COMPLETED to warn about hazards such as check list to read asbestos survey. asbestos and actions to take Asbestos has been added to the surveying sheet, first on site now Electricians. H11 Inform managers and Actioned - general instruction COMPLETED supervisors of the need for clear issued to trade managers July 2018 and consistent reporting of all Planned and major safety breaches. Part of safety managers meetings. projects follow and use the system set up by response. Managers to report all incidents, reviewed in safety meetings.

H12 Inform managers that H and S Agreed. COMPLETED breaches are subject to the Any disciplinary action as Council’s existing HR policies appropriate following investigation Process will be and procedures on and in line with HR policies standardised so investigations and disciplinary breaches following action. training with zero tolerance and in accordance with HR Policies. H13 Label identified Asbestos to Review how tenants are informed Work in Progress ensure third parties understand of survey results, and check the risk and improve reporting of legal advice / best practice Process and damage. elsewhere. approach needs Review approach to labelling – review by the new already approach in AMP. safety team – timescale July 2020. Piece of work for new Safety Team.

Page 175 Currently asbestos New tenants to get asbestos survey identified and information (including mutual checked as part of exchanges). FRA process.

Methods of reporting / checks / New Tenants get already part of Fire Risk asbestos report / Assessments to check condition. advice.

Intermediate Action

Ref Recommendations from H and S Response / actions agreed by Timescale investigation H and LS. M1 It is recommended that Housing Agreed – see above re safety COMPLETED Delivery employ a small team, to manager and team. monitor health and safety Manager in place, and training and monitor compliance two CHSC will report to and whose focus is health and him. safety compliance. This would Safety team will be in involve auditing safety practice place July 2019 – and raising issues with senior March 2020. Work has managers without delay with started on compliance support from Corporate Safety discovery across Advisors. housing teams and on shaping new team requirements – new Team Manager role in place. M2 Training sessions should be See above – will be tailored to COMPLETED smaller in size and broken down workgroup requirements. into sessions to ensure staff do Training content has not ‘tune out’. Feedback on training was very been reviewed, started positive and monitored. One April 2019. Feedback is issue dealt with and positive. improvement evidenced. M3 Staff allocated to training should Agreed – attendance is COMPLETED not be withdrawn from training mandatory and monitored. under any but the most Operatives booked by exceptional of circumstances managers and operatives to sign In at the training session and records kept. M4 Where an incident of exposure is We will ensure contractor COMPLETED the result of probable negligence, breaches are reported to this should be recorded in order corporate H and S team to Arrangements in place. to quality control contractors and monitor for citywide view, Will be supported and

Page 176 ensure other managers are able where identified as part of monitored by new make informed decisions. Again investigations. safety manager and this needs to be open access for All investigation reports sent team June 2019, and all managers to H and S team. with Corporate H and S Landlord services H and S team. accident and incidents report log in available on G Drive. M5 Investigate the use of iPads or This has long been a part of Work in progress. other tablets to ensure speed of the ITE project (since 2014), information exchange and still not got corporate Training has shown a tablet solution. Awaiting lot of issues could be further trials again. removed if operatives were given direct access to Keystone

Testing of new models at present.

Target July 2020

M6 Ensure call handlers have tailored See above tailored training, COMPLETED asbestos awareness training and roles when tasked with accessing Schedulers included in Keystone the training plan

CSC/ECO also due to have tailored training specific to their roles, the way response works at the moment

M7 Retrain first on site operatives in Will be a priority for refresher COMPLETED tailored asbestos awareness training Started April 2019 with Tersus M8 Push for resources to allow for Gas and electric safety quality COMPLETED increased site visits and control checks in place, compliance checks CHSC site visits in place to Will be supported by check CDM, PPE, CSCS cards, new safety team – July- site diaries and check sheets. Mar 2019

Review frequency and record keeping. M9 Ensure panels are clearly marked To be part of new tender COMPLETED on a survey diagram to avoid documentation errors Part of new contract specifications M10 Ensure tenancy books are See above – new tenant COMPLETED updated with Asbestos information

Page 177 information In place See H13

Not Urgent Action

L1 Time should be given on a weekly Part of new team Work in progress as basis for the Competent Persons arrangements and part of new team to meet and co-ordinate safety responsibilities creation issues. July 2019 – Mar 2020 New Safety Team arrangements L2 Content of training should be Training to be tailored to be COMPLETED reviewed to ensure compliance more role specific, and in line with legislation. with legislation. See above. Jan / Feb 2019 L3 In line with corporate Review specifications and Work in Progress arrangement and statutory terms legislation, contractors will need All contractors are to attend BCC briefings before All contractors to receive briefed now on working on our properties. This briefings asbestos risks relevant will need to be documented and to contract. available to commissioning Currently is done in contract managers. start meetings, and site A new set of briefing safety inductions, PCI. slides being developed to enable a contractor sign off process – due by December 2019 L4 Discuss the timeframes allocated Will review process around COMPLETED to re letting in relation to “is this the second survey needs, reasonable and does it affect the review approach to incidents safety of operatives?” where asbestos contract Noted and process in removals are found to be place false. With involvement H and S team in reporting to HSE / licensing bodies.

We agree safety comes first, and letting times have increased to accommodate surveys and removals for safe site working. L5 Review monitoring of communal See earlier – done as part of COMPLETED areas possibly in partnership with FRA already. New reporting caretakers. process in place with caretakers

September 2019

\\Ds\home\USERS\BRPESDH\Documents\ASBESTOS REVIEW - Action Plan - Sept 18 -v4 Final.docx

Page 178 Agenda Item 17 By virtue of paragraph(s) 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Document is Restricted

Page 179