Agenda item

[To note the latest summary of the Council’s strategic risk register and the main sources of assurance available to show that the risks are being mitigated]

Peter Farrow, Head of Audit, presented a report on the key risks the Council faced and how it could gain assurance that these risks are being mitigated.

In accordance with the request at the last meeting, Julien Kramer, Director of Education was in attendance and presented an update on strategic risk 14 – school improvement and the contribution his directorate make to strategic risk 2 – skills for work.

During the discussion on the Director’s presentation Cllr Phil Bateman commented that the Council did not appear to put sufficient inference on its early years provision.  Given that it was the main building block as a child moved into primary education he felt that not enough had been made of this in the paper tabled by the Director.  He suggested that paragraph 2.3 of the Director’s report could be expanded in terms of early years.

Members of the Committee expressed concern and disappointment that the Director’s report indicated that schools in Wolverhampton were not taking up opportunities at Jaguar Land Rover Education Centre.  They queried why the Head Teachers were not seeing the positives of the Education Centre located on the Council’s doorstep. They asked what action was being taken to establish why Wolverhampton’s schools were not making use of the Education Centre and action proposed to reverse the position.

In response to the Committee’s questions and observations, the Director of Education reported that:

·         The picture regarding early years’ provision in the city was mixed with some outstanding provision and some not doing as well as the local authority needs them to.  The Local Authority does have a link process to Key Stage 1 and the latest performance profile could be evidenced to the Committee. 

·         The pathway initiative was reinvigorating best practice. 

·         There are many different categories of schools in the city.  The Council’s approach is that they are all there to educate children and therefore there was a common cause.  We all know what to do and we must go out and do it and find a way of delivering. 

·         All academies and Head Teachers have signed up to a way of working together in the interests of the City’s young children. 

·         In terms of sixth form provision, the City does well for children who are able but there are other children who need post 16 education who are not getting the provision they should. Therefore, we are seeking to influence change in terms of the vision the Council has.

·         He was looking into the reasons why every Wolverhampton secondary school were not taking up the opportunities at JLR Education Centre.  He had met with secondary head teachers and made them aware of what the Centre was and what it offered. 

·         In term of the timescale for achieving the target of at least 85% of Wolverhampton’s school being rated good, the Local Authority was in the hands of others such as OFSTED.  However, on present predictions, by the end of this calendar year he believed that the Council would achieve the target of more than 85% of its school ratings being good. 

As a result of managers not recording appraisals on Agresso correctly and due to adjustments required to the data used to calculate the performance indicator, such as the removal of apprentices and employees who have been with the Council for less than six months, there had been a delay in the managing of the Employee Management risk. Therefore, the Chair asked that a report on the latest position regarding performance appraisals be submitted to the next meeting.  He also invited the Committee to identify if there were any further risks that they would like to discuss further at the next meeting. The Committee agreed that a report on risk 8 - Business Continuity management be submitted to the next meeting, as a result of delays in the progress made with the development of the service resilience incident management system, and that the risk owner Linda Sanders (Ros Jervis) be invited to attend the meeting.

Resolved:

1. That the strategic risk register at Appendix A be noted.

2. That the reduction in the assessment of Risk 3 – Information Governance be noted

3. That the changes to target dates for the reduction of the following risks be noted:

·         Risk 8 – Business Continuity Management from June to December 2016 as a result of delays in the progress made with the development of the service resilience incident management system.

·         Risk 16 - Equal Pay from March to September 2016 as a result of the revised timescales by when settlement for a significant number of first and second generation claims may be reached.

·         Risk 17 - Employee Management (from March to July 2016) as a result of  managers not recording appraisals on Agresso correctly and due to adjustments  required to the data used to calculate the performance indicator, such as the  removal of apprentices and employees who have been with the Council for less  than six months.

4. That the main sources of assurance available to the Council against its strategic risks be noted.

5. That a report on the latest position regarding performance appraisals (risk 17 Employee Management) be submitted to the next meeting.

6. That a detailed report on the risk 8 - Business Continuity management be submitted to the next meeting and the risk owner (Linda Sanders (Ros Jervis) be invited to attend the meeting.