Executive Board Minutes – 31 January 2023

Mabs Hussain (MH)          – Deputy Chief Constable, NYP  

Simon Dennis (SD) – Chief Executive & Monitoring Officer, OPFCC 

Tamara Pattinson (TP)      – Director of Delivery & Assurance, OPFCC 

Sarah Arnott (SA)               – Interim Director of Public Confidence, OPFCC 

Michael Porter (MP) – Chief Finance Officer, OPFCC 

Jonathan Dyson (JD) – Chief Fire Officer, NYFRS 

Mathew Walker (MW)      – Deputy Chief Fire Officer, NYFRS 

Rena Brown (RB) – A/Managing Director, enableNY 

Mike Clements (MC) – Head of Finance, enableNY 

Rachel Antonelli (RA)        – Force Solicitor & Head of Legal Services, NYP – Evolve 

Maeve Chappell (MCh)     – Corporate Communications Lead, enableNY 

Claire Tomenson (CT)        – Executive Assistant (PFCC), OPFCC (minutes) 

Xanthe Tait (XT)                 – Director, Evolve Legal Services 

Jenni Newberry (JN) – Director of Commissioning & Partnerships, OPFCC 

The Action Log was discussed and updated.  

3a.(i) 2022/2023 Treasury Management Update  

MP introduced the mid-year Treasury Management report and reported that he expected interest rates to increase in 2023/24.  There were no plans to borrow funds, however, the delivery of the Capital Programme would have an impact on cash balances and loans would be undertaken if required.  

In response to the cash balances position MP explained that they should reduce due to the Capital Programme delivery, as it would have an impact on reserves and cash balances.  ZM expressed concerns in relation to the retention of public money and highlighted the requirement for assurances that the Capital Programme would be delivered.    

3a.(ii) Quarter 3 Capital Programme   

MC presented the update of the forecast expenditure at Quarter 3 and highlighted the projected reduction in the 2022/23 Capital Programme to £7.3m.  It was estimated that the overspend would increase to £3m and this was due to an additional £613k required for the Airwaves radio replacement, however, this was not reflected in the Programme.  The findings from the Fleet Audit would be presented to the next Joint Independent Audit Committee.  

In relation to the Change Pipeline, CF explained that it had been refreshed and the work undertaken had identified duplicate costings along with inaccurate forecasts.  It was noted that some significant Business Cases had been approved, therefore, they had moved into the Capital Programme.  Profiling was now more precise and the predicted spend was now £10k.  

In response to a query regarding the VRI Northallerton, CF explained that a property had been identified, however, the price had become unsuitable and it was noted that an exception report may be required.      

3a.(iii) Change Pipeline Update     

CF informed Members that the trend was very stable and a full review had been undertaken of the forecast.  There was a £1m recurring cost in the pipeline, however, this would be refreshed and reviewed against the National Pipeline.  It was noted that portfolios had been realigned, business cases had been approved and many projects had been closed.  A significant amount of resource from the Portfolio and Programme Management Office (PPMO) had been allocated to the HMIC Action Plan, however, all the required work was being covered.  CF then outlined issues in relation to the Common Platform, Out of Court Disposals and the Airbox Mosaic business case.  

SD requested whether a report that provided a greater understanding in relation to the organisational design and The Source project could be submitted to a future meeting.  In response it was confirmed that early scoping work was underway, though no principles had been agreed.  It was then agreed that a high-level verbal update would be provided to the next meeting.  

In relation to the RRM delivery, CF confirmed that additional resources had been placed into the Team and milestones were in place.    

Action: Verbal strategic update in relation to the organisational design and the review of The Source to be presented to the February meeting.          

3b. EAT Closure Reports  

3b.(i) Intel Tasking  

CF reported that the purpose of the Intel Tasking Project had been to review delivery and capture lessons learnt.  The overall costs had been lower than planned, however, it was too early to assess whether any benefits had been achieved.  Further work would be required but overall, it had been a positive result.  

MH informed Members that unanimous positive feedback had been received and the rollout had been effective.  The Force needed to look at how it could maximise the use and the next phase would be to judge the effect on the public.  It was then requested that a report on the benefits and best practice from the Project be submitted to the meeting in six months.  It was noted that the Project was included within the Improvement Plan and would be phased in.    

As an associated issues, Members also noted that work was ongoing to revise the templates and future Business Cases would include benefits.    

Action:  Benefits and best practice from Intel Tasking Project to be submitted to meeting in six months (July 23).  

3b.(ii) Briefing and Pathways  

CF confirmed that project had been delivered, however, any benefits would take time to realise due to the long- term cultural change.  In response SD indicated that the OPFCC Executive Management Team (EMT) would discuss the matter outside of the meeting and convene a Working Group to expand on the issues.  

Action: OPFCC EMT to discuss Briefing & Pathways EAT Report then convene a Working Group outside of Executive Board.  

RB informed Members that following the approval of the Business Case for a new build, a further report had been undertaken and the costs had escalated.  In light of this it was agreed that the refurbishment of the existing station to accommodate NYP and NYFRS should be pursued, along with the renting of space in the Town Hall from Harrogate Borough Council.  The total estimated cost, though significantly higher than anticipated, would be shared between NYP and NYFRS proportionate to their footprint in the building.  The proposal would result in a fundamental re-structure that addressed the majority of the requests and the costs would be contained within the original budget for the new build.  Members noted that the corporate network would not be available for the Team relocated into the Town Hall until the matter regarding the Wi-Fi network was resolved.  

Discussions ensued and it was requested that the ownership of the Town Hall was clarified.  Further deliberations in relation to the proposed options were undertaken and the door entry system and window replacement schemes were assessed.  In conclusion ZM agreed that Option 2, without the inclusion of the security fencing work be approved and progressed.       

As an associated issue, MW reported that amendments to the communication message had been submitted but he had not had a response and it was due to be circulated to staff that day.  MCh undertook to progress the issue as a matter of urgency.     

ZM approved Option 2 subject to the removal of the security fencing work.  

Action: RB to clarify ownership of Ripon Town Hall.   

Action: Staff communication regarding Ripon to be amended and submitted to MW as a matter of urgency.  

5a.(i) 2022/2023 Treasury Management Update  

MP presented the results of the mid-year review and highlighted the importance of the current interest rate forecasts, as the Service would need to borrow money over the next few years.  The organisation had not taken out any loans since 2015/16, however, they were now in the process of securing three.  MP explained that he would like the loans to be in place prior to the next interest rate increase and the percentage rate would be fixed around 4% with an end date within the second half of the financial year.   

• Local Government Reform and Devolution

SD confirmed that a Project Board had been established and the transition structure had been agreed.  The Mayoral Combined Authority would work closely with the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) from November 2023, however, there may still be issues that would affect the Devolution process.    

In relation to recruitment, the Mayoral Combined Authority (MCA) vacancies had now been made permanent positions and shortlisting would be undertaken as soon as possible.  Dialogue had commenced with the leads from the City of York in relation to the statutory officer structures and the Joint Devolution Committee had agreed that the organisation would be ringfenced and independent.  A letter had also been sent to the Home Office.       

7b. Commissioned Services Update   

SA informed Members that the final costings for the Victims Centre were due on 10 February and further details would hopefully be available for the February meeting.  Regular meetings were being held in relation to the new SARC contract, work was ongoing with NHS England and a report on perpetrator crime funding was being finalised.       

7c. OPFCC Delivery Plan Update   

SD reported that the stretched target had been met and the public version of the Delivery Plan would be presented to the Police, Fire and Crime (PFC) Panel on 6 February.  The Panel paper would also be circulated to Members following the meeting.  He indicated that the aspiration was to present the post Panel Activity Plan and Assurance Framework product to the meeting in February.  

Action: OPFCC Delivery Plan paper submitted to PFC Panel to be circulated to Members. 

Action: Post PFC Panel Activity Plan & Assurance Framework Product to be submitted to February meeting.  

7d. HMICFRS Annual Assessment of Policing in England and Wales – Discussion to propose joint response by CC and PFCC    

SD informed Members that HMICFRS had invited views in relation to the Annual Assessment and suggested that a joint response from the Force and the OPFCC be submitted.  ZM undertook to discuss the matter with LW.  

SD indicated that TP had been designated as the OPFCC lead on the matter and would meet with NYP’s lead.  

Action: ZM to discuss joint response to HMICFRS Annual Assessment of Policing letter with LW. 

Action: TP (OPFCC lead) to discuss annual assessment with CB (NYP lead)   

RB introduced the Annual Update Report against the Sustainability Strategy stating that it was not due to be updated for another five years, however, it did not contain any hard targets or measures that could be accounted for.  Insufficient progress had been made on this important matter and a comprehensive plan was not in place.  RB indicated that opportunities were available to acquire corporate funding and it was proposed that another Strategy be created and governance be established.    

During the discussion Members welcomed the refresh of the Strategy and stated that the work needed to be progressed as soon as possible.  RB confirmed that the Strategy would be developed in-house alongside additional work with partners.  The ownership of the new Strategy and creation of a new Board was then debated.  It was agreed that it would need to be elevated beyond the Estates Department and the benefit of strategic leadership from the OFPCC was suggested.  SD indicated that this could be allocated from the Executive Management Team (EMT), but the Board should be collegially led and undertook to discuss the matter outside of the meeting.     

Action: OPFCC EMT to discuss ownership and way forward for proposed Environment and Decarbonisation Board outside of the meeting.  

XT presented a report that provided an update on proposals in relation to the charging structure for the Civil Disclosure Unit (CDU) and noted that charging had occurred in Cleveland for many years.  A review of the practices had been undertaken and a staged funding agreement on a three-year incremental basis was the preferred option.  XT stated that the implementation of the Policy was key and a decision as to how to phase in the proposal would be required.  Members noted that the updated charges would commence from the new financial year and a communications strategy for the implementation would be developed.    

ZM approved the phased implementation of the CDU Charging Structure Policy.      

9a. Evolve General Update  

XT provided Members with an overview of Evolve explaining that strategies were now being embedded and a Lexcel Review had been undertaken that had not raised any concerns.  A Peer Review that covered standards had been carried out and the details would be reported in due course.  Activity was monitored and they had delivered a service of £5m against a budget of £2.5m.  Since 2020 the organisation had developed expertise and a Corporate and Governance Team was being established.  A decision as to whether full Lexcel accreditation should be pursued had not been agreed and this would be subject to a report to the Governance Board.  

In response to queries it was reported that some of the Teams recorded 100% of the work undertaken, however, 80% was the minimum expectation and this was 20-30% higher than external services.  With regard to the management of risk, XT indicated that there was scope for Evolve to contribute to this as it was an underutilised area and the service could add value.  They had a national link with the Association of Police Lawyers and were well connected to deal with risk.  Conflicts of interests were covered by a long-standing protocol and the service had acted successfully for two or three clients.    

With regard to the onboarding of NYFRS as a client XT stated that the final stages of the structure were being implemented, though there was still work to be carried out.  Evolve had the depth of speciality but not all that was required by the Fire Service and it would not be ready for approximately 12 months.  The importance and priority of the transition work for NYFRS was acknowledged.   

MH provided an update on the Force’s Principal and Force Risk Registers and confirmed that the Registers now reflected current ongoing issues and would be discussed at meetings.  SD indicated that organisational capacity was a shared risk with the OPFCC and it may be worthwhile to develop parallel risk registers.  In response MH confirmed that the issue had been discussed with LW.  

Members noted that the HMICFRS had highlighted issues with the Force Risk Register (FRR) and these needed to be addressed within a short timeframe.  MH stated that the risks within the document would be continuously reviewed to reflect the current and ongoing challenges.  The risk governance had been re-aligned and the Registers would be regularly reviewed and monitored by the Risk and Assurance Board.  SD confirmed that TP would be a member of the Board to ensure that the work was linked and the HMIC Improvement Plan was progressed.     

10(ii). NYFRS  

JD explained that the Risk Register demonstrated a significant way forward for the Service and had been achieved with the help of an external consultant.  MW led the Risk and Assurance Group and the Register was discussed at the Senior Leadership Team (SLT) meeting.  The document was currently being embedded across the organisation and had parity with NYP in relation to its governance.  It was noted that exceptions would be reported to the meeting alongside the monthly report.  

MW confirmed that the inaugural meeting of the Risk and Assurance Group had taken place and work was ongoing in relation to risk management.  He stated that the subsequent report would be amended and some risks would be de-escalated.   

In conclusion JD acknowledged that the previous Risk Register had not been fit for purpose and the revised Register could now be developed.         

10(iii). OPFCC  

SD presented the OPFCC’s Risk Register and reported that a Risk Management Workshop had been planned.  Members noted that the approach to be taken would mirror that of NYP and NYFRS, however, the system in place would need to be progressed to ensure that it was at a substantial assurance level.  

In relation to National and discrimination risk, XT reported that it was her intention to link in with the Force’s Risk Manager and progress the issues.  

The risks associated with Commissioning and Partnership were highlighted.  SA confirmed that further information was expected in relation to the Victims Centre and work was ongoing regarding the Mental Health triage.       

Action: ZM to be briefed on measures in place to mitigate risks on Risk Registers  

• Wellbeing Strategy 
• Fleet Strategy 
• Communication Update/Forward Planning as a standard agenda item. 

It was also requested that the OPFCC liaised with CF in relation to the Change Pipeline.  

Action: Wellbeing and Fleet Strategy to be placed on the Forward Planner 

Action: Communication Update/Forward Planning to be placed as a standing item on future agendas. 

Action: OPFCC to consult with CF in relation to the Change Pipeline.  

SD reported that authority to disclose contracts relating to the BMW vehicles had been requested by Blue Light Commercials.  RB indicated that permission had been granted in June 2022.  XT added that Evolve also had an interest in the litigation.  

Action: That the contracts relating to BMW vehicles be disclosed to Blue Light Commercials.  

SD provided Members with a summary of the position to date explaining that following several meetings a Heads of Terms had been established on 19 January 2023.  Further investigations would be required and there would be a need for investment and refresh work.  SD highlighted the need for a collective communications position and circulated a number of key points for deliberation.  The possibility of further discussions was acknowledged and SD agreed to meet with MC in order to finalise the Heads of Terms.     

In conclusion ZM requested that the key communication points circulated be considered and that a combined NYP and NYFRS Communication Plan be submitted by 5pm.       

Action: SD and MC to finalise Heads of Terms.   

Action: NYP and NYFRS Communication Plan to be submitted to ZM and SD by 5pm on 31 January