Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence, although Councillor Waddington, (Assistant City Mayor with responsibility for Jobs and Skills), apologised that she would have to leave this meeting early.

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed.

Councillor Dr Chowdhury declared an Other Disclosable Interest in agenda item 9, “Social Welfare Advice Procurement Options Paper 2017/22”, in that he worked in a voluntary organisation that provided welfare advice and had received a small grant to do so.

Councillor Fonseca also declared an Other Disclosable Interest in agenda item 9, “Social Welfare Advice Procurement Options Paper 2017/22”, in that a few years ago he had worked for three months as a volunteer with the Citizens Advice service.

Councillor Aldred declared an Other Disclosable Interest in the general business of the meeting, in that she was a volunteer at Thurncourt Community Centre and was Secretary of the Community Association.

In accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct, these interests were not considered so significant that they were likely to prejudice the Councillors’ judgement of the public interest.  They were not therefore required to withdraw from the meeting.

The Minutes of the meeting of the Neighbourhood Services and Community Involvement Scrutiny Commission held on 6 July 2016 are attached and Members are asked to confirm them as a correct record.

The Commission noted that minute 13, “Response to the Leicester Advice Sector: A Report Outlining the Risk and Demands in the City”, stated that the Council had had a contract with the Social Welfare Advice Partnership (SWAP) for one year.  This was inaccurate, as the Council did not have a contract with SWAP, but worked with the partnership to share good practice, including monitoring, in relation to advice provision.

AGREED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Neighbourhood Services and Community Involvement Scrutiny Commission held on 6 July 2016 be agreed as a correct record, subject to the second bullet point of minute 13, “Response to the Leicester Advice Sector: A Report Outlining the Risk and Demands in the City”, being amended as follows (new wording shown in italics):

·           “The Council had had a contract for the provision of advice services worked with the SWAP for approximately one year to share good practice on, and monitor, advice provision”

To note progress on actions agreed at the previous meeting and not reported elsewhere on the agenda (if any).

The Commission noted that all actions agreed at its last meeting had been carried out.

The Chair reminded Members that proposals for a revised Council Tax Reduction Scheme were being consulted on.  The consultation was due to end on 28 September 2016.

A report on the outcome of the consultation would be made to the Commission before the Executive considered the proposals.  A date for this had not been confirmed yet and it was possible that a Special Meeting would be arranged to consider the report.

The Monitoring Officer to report on the receipt of any petitions submitted in accordance with the Council’s procedures.

The Monitoring Officer reported that no petitions had been received.

The Monitoring Officer to report on the receipt of any questions, representations and statements of case submitted in accordance with the Council’s procedures.

The Monitoring Officer reported that no questions, representations or statements of case had been received.

The Director of Finance submits a report providing the Commission with an overview of the historical context of The Furniture Bank pilot scheme and advising of future sustainable options for awarding furniture for vulnerable low-income households in crisis.  The Commission is recommended to receive the report and make any comments and/or observations that it sees fit.

The Director of Finance submitted a report providing the Commission with an overview of the historical context of The Furniture Bank pilot scheme and advising of future sustainable options for awarding furniture for vulnerable low-income households in crisis.

The Head of Revenues and Customer Support introduced the report, reminding the Commission that the Furniture Bank scheme had been run as a pilot project for about 2 years.  This had delivered 3,000 pieces of furniture to homes in the city and over the last year had avoided 77 tonnes of waste being sent to landfill.

However, the scheme was not sustainable in its pilot form, so the Leicestershire and Rutland Reuse Network (LRRN) had become the Council’s new charitable partners.  It was recognised that, in the current climate of making financial savings, support to households needed to be sustainable.  This new venture therefore expanded on the current partnership arrangement.  It also offered other charitable organisations in the city the opportunity to join the LRRN and help more households in need.

A dedicated webpage was being developed.  This would list the current partners, (Sofa Loughborough, Work link project and React local), provide a contact telephone number and explain what sort of reusable pieces of furniture they accepted.  It was anticipated that this website would be available from 23 September 2016.

Councillor Waddington, (Assistant City Mayor with responsibility for Jobs and Skills), noted that various issues had arisen in the running of the pilot scheme.  Having considered options for the future operation of the scheme, the Executive had agreed that the most suitable option was to work with the voluntary sector.  It also was recognised that people would like to be able to see the furniture before selecting it.

Councillor Waddington also noted that voluntary organisations did not provide items that were provided new, (such as white goods).  These were sourced through existing Council contracts.

The Commission welcomed the proposals, but queried whether the LRRN would be able to meet demand, particularly if this rose.  In reply, Councillor Waddington confirmed that analysis of items provided under the pilot scheme and what was likely to be needed in the future showed that demand would be met with the improved collection service to be offered.

The Head of Revenues and Customer Support confirmed this, explaining that previously there had only been a small team of people working on the pilot project.  Staff absences had made it difficult to provide a full service at times, so little promotion of the scheme had been undertaken.  It also had meant that it had only been possible to make approximately 30 collections of donated furniture per week. 

Although it was anticipated that doing future collections of donated furniture through the Bulky Waste Collection service would be more productive, there would be a “soft” launch of this service, to enable the number of referrals received and the number of furniture donations made to be monitored.  If the scheme was successful, a “hard” launch would be undertaken in 2017, probably involving  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

The Director of Finance submits a report providing an overview of social welfare advice and outlining options for future procurement of social welfare advice.  The Commission is recommended to note the report and consider how it would wish to be engaged in the procurement review.

The Director of Finance submitted a report providing an overview of social welfare advice and outlining options for the future procurement of this. 

The Head of Revenues and Customer Support introduced the report, reminding the Commission that a number of social welfare advice contracts were due for re-procurement in March 2017.  This provided an opportunity to review and rationalise the Council’s approach to procuring advice services.

The Social Welfare Advice contract awarded to Citizens Advice Leicestershire already had been extended by one year, so work was underway on plans to re-procure the provision from 2017 onwards.  The Head of Revenues and Customer Support stressed that the Council did not have a duty to ensure an advice provision was available beyond statutory services such as homelessness and community care.  However, in undertaking this exercise it was assumed that the current areas of advice would remain the same.  In addition, other contracts which mainly included advice had been considered and provisionally included in this planning exercise, as set out in the report

It was proposed to procure good quality general and specialist advice, with some outreach provision, with the aim of removing contract specification duplication that would deliver efficiency savings to the Council.  The advice contract would include welfare benefits, community care, debt, personal budgeting support, housing and employment.  Contract specifications potentially would include a three tier model of provision and providers currently were being consulted on these tiers.

To help understand the sector, the Social Welfare Advice Project Manager currently was undertaking an engagement programme.  This launched on 1 August 2016, with a well-attended event open to all organisations providing information, advice and guidance services, (regardless of whether they were funded by the Council), and other interested key stakeholders.  This event had been facilitated by Voluntary Action LeicesterShire.

The key messages from the event were that advice needed to be affordable and accredited, a holistic service was needed that met client needs, outreach services should be placed where they were needed most, a co-ordinated referral system and client journey was needed and commitment to partnership and collaborative working was required from advice providers.

Meetings were now being held with organisations in the city to map demand and need and to explore what good advice outcomes looked like.  It was anticipated that this work would be completed in late September 2016 and would inform the procurement recommendations put forward to the Executive in early October 2016.  Following this, the invitation to tender was likely to be published in mid-February 2017, with the commissioned service starting in the summer of 2017.

The Social Welfare Advice Project Manager advised the Commission that the agencies she had met with had identified an element of double counting of service users, as some people visited various agencies to seek help, or stopped engaging with one agency and sought advice from another.  Despite this, all agencies had indicated that demand for social welfare advice was high and agreed that they needed to work in partnership with others  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

To consider a proposal by the Chair that a Task Group is established to consider:

a)     Whether residents understand what the new service offer is and the changes that have come about as a result of the centralisation and transfer of customer services online and into fewer buildings, and

b)     Whether this meets residents’ needs.

The Commission received a draft scoping document for a proposed review entitled “Getting the best out of our neighbourhood services”.

It was noted that:

·      This review was not restricted to the Council’s Neighbourhood Services division.  As such, there would be more than one Executive Lead and Divisional Director involved in this review;

·      The review would contain a number of work streams.  Members could either participate in the whole review, or just in particular work streams;

·      Site visits would be made as part of this review, to which all Members of the Commission would be invited; and

·      Some customers could be asked to act as witnesses in this review, such as representatives of those who had been affected by the Transforming Neighbourhood Services programme.

AGREED:

1)    That the title of this review be amended to “Getting the best out of our neighbourhoods”;

2)    That Customers be included as witnesses from whom evidence should be gathered as part of this review;

3)    That the scrutiny Policy Officer be asked to work with the Chair of this Commission and relevant officers to develop the scoping document for the review “Getting the best out of our neighbourhoods”.

The current work programme for the Commission is attached.  The Commission is asked to consider this and make comments and/or amendments as it considers necessary.

AGREED:

That the Scrutiny Policy Officer be asked to amend the work programme to include:

a)     an item on the whether the meat purchased by the Council for school meals is just Halal meat, or whether a mixture of Halal and non-Halal meat is bought;

b)     a report on the operation of the revised Furniture Bank scheme to be submitted to this Commission in one year’s time, as a greed under minute 24, “The Furniture Bank Scheme: Evaluation and Future Options”, above.

The meeting closed at 6.53 pm