Agenda item

The Executive Director Core Services will submit a report presenting the Authority’s 2019/20 Annual Governance Statement as required by the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015 and seeking approval to refer it to Council for consideration.

The Chief Executive and Executive Director Core Services submitted a report presenting the Authority’s 2019/20 Annual Governance Statement (AGS) as required by the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015.  The report requested the Committee to refer it to the Council for consideration and adoption as part of the process for approving the 2019/20 Statement of Accounts.  A copy of the Statement was appended to the report.

The Head of Internal Audit, Assurance and Anti-Fraud gave a brief resume of the contents of the Statement and how the review had been undertaken.    An Action Plan had been prepared to capture issues raised throughout the review process and this document would form the basis for the Committee monitoring throughout the Year.  The Action Plan was appended as Appendix 1 to the Annual Governance Statement and outlined the items upon which further action was required.  An update of the Action Plan would be submitted to the Committee throughout the year.

He reported that CIPFA Guidance for 2019/20 had recommended that the AGS should specifically reflect the impact that COVID-19 had had and whilst the greatest impact would fall within the current financial year, the AGS was signed at the point when the statement of accounts was singed off and, therefore, needed to reflect the most up to date position.

As the Committee was aware, a new approach to broader governance assurance was being developed which would support and integrate into the new risk management arrangements but would also embed the focus on governance that the recent Annual Governance Review introduced.  The Committee would be kept informed of the development of the governance assurance framework which would provide members with a clearer focus across the Committee’s wider governance remit.

Written responses to questions asked by Members of the Committee were provided as follows:

·         The Council was working with the Sheffield City Region to come forward with a consistent approach to how funding for the movement into Tier 3 would be allocated.  This included a discretionary business support scheme for those businesses not forced to close but still affected by the new restrictions.  Further details would be provided for the Committee when these arrangements had been confirmed

·         In relation to the need to ensure that procedures were in place to ensure that the Council responded to enquiries of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) in a timely manner, it was reported that a detailed review had been undertaken of the arrangements to deal with customer complaints and requests for information. Key actions that were now in place included:

o   Daily management of the LGSCO mailbox

o   All LGSCO enquiries were formally logged and associated tasks tracked and managed through the SharePoint Online system

o   There was a timely issue of automatic system generated reminders to officers tasked with preparing responses

o   All LGSCO enquiries were co-ordinated, responses collated and issued by the appropriate officers

o   The relevant Head of Service and Service Director were copied into the initial SharePoint Online system generated task and to all reminders

o   A RAG rated process was built into the SharePoint Online System which then produced alerts as to potential delays before they arose

o   An Escalation process was also built into the system which alerted the relevant Head of Service and Service Director of the lack of appropriate response

o   A LGSCO dashboard was under development which would capture performance in this area by Directorate

o   Members of staff from the Corporate Programmes, Projects, Feedback and Improvement Team attended all Departmental Management Teams to discuss learning points from the LGSCO Annual Review letter and to impress the importance of meeting timescales.  In addition, an internal Communications Plan had been developed and messages were to be circulated expressing that all responses (but not restricted to the LGSCO) should not be delayed

·         The main reasons for the 5 cases referred to the Information Commissioner’s Office were as follows:

o   18/4/2019 – a concern had been raised by a member of the public, this was fully investigated by the Council.  The outcome was not formally referred to the information Commissioner’s Office as the data breach had been appropriately concluded

o   5/08/2019 – related to a Subject Access Request and information had been shared – a decision was awaited

o   25/10/19 – this related to a Data Breach.  The Information Commissioner’s Office had stated that no further action was required in the light of the agreed action plan being fulfilled

o   4/9/2019 – this related to a Subject Access Request.  Not all information had been provided to the Data Subject.  The Information Commissioner’s Office had stated that no further action was required by the Council

o   17/12/2019 – related to a Data Breach.  The Information Commissioner’s Office had recommended that the Council carry out regular audits to ensure that all staff were adhering to policies and procedures.  Role specific data protection refresher training should be carried out bi-annually to ensure that all members of staff were aware of their obligations to ensure the security of the personal date they processed and stored

·         In relation to hate crime, it was reported that this was monitored through the Community Tolerance and Respect Sub-Group of the Safer Barnsley Partnership and remained a key priority action within the delivery plan of that group.  During the COVID pandemic, fluctuating levels of recorded hate crime and hate incidents dropping (in comparison) had been experienced initially but had increased more recently but not beyond levels experienced prior to the pandemic.  One hate crime was obviously too many but he police undertook robust investigations of all hate incidents in order to determine the most appropriate course of action to deal with the offender and to support the victim.  There was an increased risk due to COVID that community tensions would be exacerbated and where this happened, this could result in increased incidents and crimes of this type.  Community cohesion had been recognised as an area of strategic focus and through the Tolerance and Respect Group work was progressing towards adapting the delivery plan to respond to this risk

·         In response to questioning about the financial impact of fraud from businesses claiming Council COVID-19 funding when not entitled, it was reported that one clear case of fraud had been identified.  The Council had subsequently recovered the full amount paid in error.  A few other cases (less than 10) were being investigated to establish whether other fraud had been committed.  As previously reported, there was no financial impact on the Council as these grants were funded by Central Government.  Any fraudulent grants subsequently recovered, would be repaid to the Government accordingly

·         In relation to potential deadline changes outlined within the Action Plan a result of entering COVID Tier 3, these would be kept under review.  It was proposed that given the number and range of the improvement actions, an update would be presented on progress to each meeting of the Committee

RECOMMENDED TO FULL COUNCIL ON THE 26^th NOVEMBER, 2020 that the final Annual Governance Statement 2019/20 be approved and adopted.