Agenda item
The One Council Programme - second update - 2011/12
This report provides members on an update on the status of the project within the One Council programme.
Minutes:
Phil Newby (Director of Strategy, Partnerships and Improvement) provided an update on the One Council programme and informed Members that some projects were in the process of closing and were now helping to deliver services. The overall status of the programme remained amber, however further savings were required so there was to be an expansion in the range of projects and there would be an element of risk involved in some of these. Individual Directorates were playing a greater role in the delivery of projects and there was an implicit need to achieve the savings targets set. Seven projects had now been completed, whilst 15 new projects were due to start. Phil Newby explained that the nature of the programme was changing, with initial goals focused on achieving efficiencies, however this now included implementing a transformation of services which sought to achieve the desired outcomes despite the fewer resources available. Risk areas included procurement, where savings were taking longer to achieve than anticipated, however efforts were being made to further professionalise staff in that area, despite the heavy demand for such skills. It was intended to undertake procurement activities at a larger scale, including working with other West London boroughs, although this would require a longer period to be achieved. There were also moves to migrate skills and knowledge more widely across the council to minimise the need for external assistance. The committee noted that the programme was on track to achieve the £27.8m savings target for 2011/12. Phil Newby then referred Members to appendix one of the report that outlined the structure of the One Council programme.
Irene Bremang (Programme Management Officer Manger, One Council Programme) then explained some of the processes involved in delivering the programme and advised that all projects were required to submit monthly project status reports to the Programme Management Office (PMO), and that the Programme Board meets every two weeks. The piloting of Departmental Portfolio Boards (DPB) was being undertaken within Environment and Neighbourhood Services, whereby the DPB ensures that greater departmental responsibility and ownership of One Council projects was undertaken, although these would still be reported back to the Programme Board, who would only intervene if problems had been identified. It was anticipated that additional DPBs would be phased in over the next quarter. Irene Bremang explained that a new project initially required the submission of a concept paper, followed by a business case outlining the justification for the project; the alignment with the Programme's strategic objectives and its relationship with other projects and activities. The next stage involved submitting a Project Initiation Document (PID) that needed to demonstrate how the project would be delivered and identify how dependencies and risks would be managed. Once the PID was signed off by the Programme Board, the project would then be reported back to the Board on a monthly basis.
During discussion, Councillor McLennan sought further details with regard to the 15 new projects, including how these would be resourced, and what the role of DMTs would be. Councillor Sheth asked for further information about prospective closure of existing projects and with regard to the trade waste project. Councillor Brown requested that future updates show the date when a project is completed. In noting the parking and highways projects addressing procurement and contractual issues, Councillor Brown suggested that these factors should be a consideration as a matter of course and he sought a further explanation.
The Chair asked what were the underlying causes for total project operational savings and net savings from the programme having a red RAG status and how could it be determined that projects are achieving their objectives. Information was requested on spending on external consultants and on the success of projects that had closed and reasons as to why the consultancy firms and managed services project was withdrawn was sought. He noted the large degree of dependencies relating to IT and asked for further information on Project Athena and whether there was a project related to planning. The Chair asked for details of the success of projects that had since been closed be reported at future meetings of this committee.
In reply to the issues raised, Phil Newby explained that there would be a phased approach taken to the 15 new projects that would start at different times. The business case for each new project would be required to demonstrate both financial and other benefits and would require PID approval by the Programme Board. With regard to DMTs, their role varied depending on the project, although each project had a project manager. It was acknowledged that some projects may need more resources initially to help them succeed. A pool of internal staff was available to help with projects and some posts for these were also advertised internally. If a need for skills for a certain project were not available internally, then external resource would be sought with a view to training internal staff in order to prevent using external resources any longer than necessary. However, occasionally the use of external consultants was unavoidable and the balance of internal/external costs could be provided. Phil Newby advised that additional projects were needed to help achieve the additional savings required and a fundamental review of activities may also be undertaken. A closing report needed to be completed prior to a project closing, along with an explanation to the Programme Board as to how the targets had been achieved and it was noted that four were due to close in 2012. The dates of when projects closed could be provided. Savings targets for projects were regularly checked throughout the financial year. With regard to trade waste, Phil Newby explained that this had been a long running issue and that the Commercial Opportunities Group was looking into this, including whether the council could provide a trade waste service on a commercial basis. It was noted that Project Athena was led by Clive Heaphy, Director of Finance and Corporate Services and that the possibility of sharing an IT platform with other local authorities was being looked at. Initially, the scope of the project was to share HR functions, whilst sharing of financial processing would follow in the longer term. Phil Newby advised that planning was driven by statutory legislation, however elements of the future customer services project would help transform how customers used Planning Services.
Irene Bremang added that a systematic approach was taken to ensure the Programme delivered the significant changes in a co-ordinated way. The progress of the Programme was constantly under review and where hotspots had been identified, a review of what action would be required was promptly undertaken. The consultancy firms and managed services project had originally been set up when consultants were being used more often, however DTMs are now required to justify any use of external consultants and there are a number of control mechanisms in place which similarly are applied in the use of temporary or agency staff. Irene Bremang advised that the parking and highways projects were currently at the conceptual stage, however one of the purposes of these projects was looking at ways to change the way in which procurement was undertaken to ensure better value and provide improvements and efficiencies and this was also being undertaken across the wider council. There were also steps being taken to ensure better practice when undertaking procurement activities. Irene Bremang informed Members that an IT Programme Board met on a monthly basis to ensure that the necessary IT resources were available to ensure the transformation in services could be undertaken.
The committee agreed to the Chair’s suggestion that there be a presentation on Project Athena at the next meeting.
RESOLVED:-
that the report on the One Council Programme be noted.
Supporting documents: