Agenda item

This report provides an update on the Council’s Strategic Risk Register.

Darren Armstrong, Head of Audit & Investigations, introduced the report providing the Committee with an update on the Council’s Strategic Risk Register, which summarised the Council’s corporate risk profile at the end of 2021-22.

In considering the report the Committee noted:

·                The Strategic Risk Register had been prepared in consultation with risk leads, Departmental Management and Senior Leadership Teams and the Council’s Management Team and in accordance with the key elements of the Council’s Risk Management Policy and Strategy.

·                The ongoing enhancements to the Council’s risk management framework, which had included risk sponsors being assigned for each strategic risk with accountability for the agreed risk mitigating actions and controls.  In addition, the risk impact matrix had been expanded in order to identify and articulate risk impact across a number of factors including financial, service delivery, health and safety and reputational impacts, as detailed within the Risk Register attached as Appendix A to the committee report.

·                The Council’s Strategic Risk Register was reviewed and updated biannually to include the risks that were considered by senior management to be of impact and/or likelihood of materialising and which may have an adverse effect on the achievement of the Council’s corporate objectives.

·                The most recent review had also been aided by a session on strategic risk management held at the Council’s Senior Managers Group in January 2022.  Members were advised that the outcome from the review process with Senior Managers had resulted in a number of amendments being made to the Strategic Risk Register.

·                As a result of the overall review process undertaken, a number of new risk areas had been added to the register (as detailed in section 4.6 of the report).  These included the cost of living crisis, recruitment and retention of permanent staff and an increased demand from migration and people movement.

·                In addition to the new risks identified, five risks had been closed and removed from the Strategic Risk Register as they had either been subsumed or superseded by new areas of strategic risk, or the risk score had reduced to a level which enabled the risks to be managed and monitored via departmental and service level risk registers.  The closed risks related to delivery of the Digital Strategy; Brexit - Economic uncertainty/loss of workforce; Demand for services; Delays in the re-procurement of key public realm services and Workforce resilience.

·                The amendments made to individual risk scores of existing risks as detailed within the “previous” and “updated “risk scores within the Register.

·                The number of inherent risks also identified which continued to be owned and monitored at a Departmental level and therefore did not form part of the Strategic Risk Register. These included Safeguarding (Children and Adults); Business Continuity; Information Governance; Legislative Compliance; Fraud and Corruption; Major Unforeseen Events; Financial Stability and Health and Safety.

The Chair thanked Darren Armstrong for his report and invited Committee members to ask any questions they may have, with the following responses provided:

·                In response to a Committee question regarding how the latest risks on the register had been identified, officers advised that a number of meetings had taken place with senior management and officers to look at the council’s strategies, objectives and priorities and to assess the risks identified against the impact and/or likelihood of them materialising in a way that would have an adverse effect or could threaten achievement of the Council’s key corporate objectives.  The content was provided via a “bottom-up” approach, with the provision of risks from services and departments being identified that were deemed to require consideration at a strategic level and with risks also being identified directly by CMT where they were deemed to meet the threshold to be identified and managed as strategic risks rather than managed through individual Departmental Risk Registers.

·                The Committee were reminded of the fluid nature required in terms of the approach towards identifying and managing risk with it noted, as an example, of the following significantly enhanced risks identified since the previous review in relation to the Homes for Ukraine Scheme, increased costs in delivery and supply of affordable accommodation and continuing impact of the cost of living crisis.

·                Clarification was provided that the Deficit Management Plan for the High Needs Block of the Dedicated Schools Grant continued to be captured as a risk within the Strategic Risk Register. The committee noted this was historically a high scoring risk and would continue to be closely monitored.

·                In response to a Committee query as to how Departmental Risk Registers were being managed, officers advised that the regular review of these registers formed part of a quarterly review process undertaken by Internal Audit with individual departments.  This included the provision of risk management support to assist with the updating of risk registers with the information provided also used to inform the annual and in-year audit planning process.  Whilst departments would be responsible for maintaining and monitoring their individual risk registers the process also existed for escalating risks to CMT were they were felt t(based on net or mitigated risk scores) to have increased beyond agreed tolerances.  In addition, the role of scrutiny in being able to review and monitor the content of departmental risk registers was also highlighted, with the suggestion made that members could be encouraged to include this process as part of budget setting review process undertaken by scrutiny.

·                In noting the updates provided in relation to recent developments and progress in terms of the mitigating actions against the strategic risks identified, attention was drawn to the reduction in risk score against Item F (Failure to Deliver Planned Services) and Item G (Budget Setting) with members keen to ensure further detail was provided as part of future monitoring reports outlining the basis of any movement in risk scores (Action: Darren Armstrong)

·                Following on from the previous comment, members also sought further detail on the process for removing a risk from the Strategic Register.  The Committee were advised that the decision to remove any high risk items would only be taken after detailed discussion with CMT and the relevant risk sponsor.  In the case of risks relating to delivery of the budget it was noted that these were likely to always remain on the register due to the ongoing and evolving nature of associated risks identified with the process.

·                As part of the developments and mitigating actions identified in relation to the newly identified risk on the cost of living crisis, members highlighted reference to the development of a Financial Inclusion Dashboard, on which further details were requested  In response the Committee was advised that the dashboard had been developed to draw together data from various sources which could then be used (in an intelligent way) to identify and target support and areas for intervention as well as provide a strategic oversight for senior management.  Examples of targeted interventions to date had included pop up community hubs and advice clinics to support residents in identified areas of greatest need.  Members were keen to explore use of the dashboard in more detail and as a result requested that further details be provided at a future meeting on the content of the Financial Inclusion Dashboard and how this was being used as a means of providing an overview and targeting support in relation to the cost of living crisis. (Action: Peter Gadsdon/Sadie East)

As no further issues were raised the Chair thanked officers for the report and the Committee RESOLVED, subject to the actions identified during the meeting and set out above, to note the contents of the report.