There were no apologies for absence.

The minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 4 June 2024 were signed by the Chair.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Committee were presented with the Corporate Performance report - Quarter one 2024/25.  The purpose of the report was to present Members of the Performance and Administration Cabinet Committee with an update against the Performance Management Framework, as introduced within the Council’s Corporate Plan, for Quarter One 2024-25 (April to June 2024).

The Assistant Director (Corporate Services) advised the report was for information only and highlighted key points in relation to the Performance Indicators set:

• PI 60 outlined the average processing time for new Housing Benefit claims (in days).  In Quarter 1 this stood at 19.4 days, which was below the target of 20 days.  It was noted that 19.4 days was not as strong as the previous year of 18 days, however since the migration to Universal Credit, new cases were more complex.  Remaining Housing Benefit cases included supported or temporary accommodation claims and applications for claimants of pensionable age.  There had also been staff resource issues which impacted the processing time also.  At the end of the last financial year, the national average processing time was 19 days with the Kent wide average of 21 days.  At that time Gravesham was at 15 days.  The trend was improving however, with the figure at the end of August standing at 17.6 days.
• PI 61 set out the average processing time for changes of circumstance in Housing Benefit claims (in days).  Quarter 1 showed a very strong performance of 3.6 days.  The national average was 4 days with a Kent district average of 5 days.
• PI 62 outlined the average processing time for new Council Tax Reduction claims (days).  Quarter 1 stood at 26.7 days.  This had mainly been due to staff resource issues.  However, the figure had since reduced and stood at 23.9 days by the end of August, which continued to improve.
• PI 63 laid out the average processing time for Council Tax Reduction changes of circumstance (in days).  The figure for Quarter 1 was a very strong 1.6 days per change of circumstances.
• PI 68 outlined the percentage of agreed internal audit actions implemented.  The Head of Internal Audit & Counter Fraud Shared Services explained that the figure fluctuated depending upon the number becoming due in any one month. The total number of actions that had been due for completion by the end of June 2024 was 23, 16 of these had been implemented, giving an outturn of 69.6%. This figure had since increased to 78.3%.

It was highlighted that the current position of the Internal audit plan delivery, stood at 14% with a further 5% underway. This was largely due to the impact on resources.

There had been 91 investigations of counter fraud concluded as of 31 July with savings of £99,281 identified, in the form of additional council tax and future liabilities.

• PI 69 set out the percentage of information requests completed within the statutory deadline.  This stood at 83% at the end of Quarter 1, which was below the target of 90%. This was due  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

Members were presented with the Corporate Register of Partnership – July 2024.  The purpose of the report was to inform Members of the Performance & Administration Committee of the Council’s involvement in partnerships that were within the remit of the Committee. 

The Assistant Director (Corporate Service) advised that the report was for information only and highlighted key points:

• The Corporate Register of Partnerships and Shared Working Arrangements was available on the Council’s website and was reviewed on an annual basis.  Members were informed the register could be found on page 22-29 of the agenda report pack.

• There were two current partnerships that related to the work of the Performance and Administration Committee.  These were Internal Audit and Counter Fraud Shared Service plus the Legal and Information Governance Shared Service.  It was noted however that only the Information Governance element, fell under the responsibility of the Performance and Administration Committee. 
• Both shared services had been reviewed and the Section 151 Officer had concluded that both services continued to offer a high-quality value for money service.

The Committee noted the report.

The Committee were presented with the Annual review of the Internal Audit & Counter Fraud Shared Service.  The purpose of the report was to provide Members of the Performance & Administration Committee with a copy of the annual review that has been conducted in respect of the Internal Audit & Counter Fraud shared service with Medway Council.

The Head of Internal Audit & Counter Fraud Shared Service (Chief Audit Executive) advised that the report was for information only and highlighted key points:

• Appendix 2 (page 37) of the report detailed the outcome of the recent review.
• Members attention was drawn to the overview section of the report which gave information on the structure of the service, the outcomes of the balancing the budget activity and recent decisions by Management Team to redirect some staffing resources to internal investigations.  This redirection did not mean a reduction in the level of the resource but a refocus on some of its activity.
• The Committee were informed that the report also set out a summary of performance against the two key objectives, along with outturns against the key performance measures.
• Following a review in 2023, it was acknowledged that further work was required in relation to the speed of the quality control process.
• Recommendations for the coming year were to assess how resilience within internal audit could be improved, along with succession planning for the future and exploring potential opportunities for commercial activities, within the counter fraud side of the service.
• Both Councils were happy with the shared working arrangements.

The Chair invited Member questions:

• Clarity was sought on how internal audit was performed in comparison with external audit.  The Head of Internal Audit & Counter Fraud Shared Service (Chief Audit Executive) explained that it was a statutory requirement for authorities to have an internal audit function to provide the Council with assurance in regard to its governance, risk management and internal control arrangements, while external audit are responsible for the review of the accounts, which cannot be done internally.

It is the Section 151 Officer’s responsibility to ensure an adequate and effective internal audit service, which is delegated to the S151 at Medway under the Shared Service agreement. The service is subject to an external quality assessment every 5 years, to assess compliance with the public sector internal audit standards.  The most recent assessment was in January/February 2023 in which the shared service was awarded a green opinion, which was good.

• Concern was raised regarding the essential savings that were being made and whether such savings would affect the service provided in relation to Counter Fraud.  The Head of Internal Audit & Counter Fraud Shared Service (Chief Audit Executive) assured Members that the savings in relation to the balancing the budget exercise had had no impact on the Internal Audit & Counter Fraud service provided. It was explained the proportion of service costs being recharged to the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) had been reviewed to ensure they accurately reflected the level of resource dedicated to that area of work. Work  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.