Report of the Head of Finance (Shared Services) and Head of Assurance (Shared Internal Audit Service – SIAS)

This report details the progress made in implementing the internal auditor’s recommendations.

The Committee received a report of the Head of Finance (Shared Services) and the Shared Internal Audit Service’s Audit progress report.

The Audit Manager highlighted some of the key points in the report and provided updates on the performance indicators, as it had been two weeks since the Committee reports were published.  He advised that a further three final reports had been issued, that the target for billable days of 95% had been achieved and that the target for delivery of projects to draft report was further advanced as two more drafts had been issued.

The Head of Finance (Shared Services) advised that some of the IT recommendations from 2010/11 may possibly be obsolete.  Before the next meeting officers would review the recommendations and decide which ones had been superseded.  The Committee’s agreement would then be requested to remove those recommendations from the report.  If officers considered the recommendations to still be valid they would remain until completed. 

In response to a question from Councillor Khan about the IT recommendations, the Head of Finance (Shared Services) explained that the current contractor had been disengaged.  The Managing Director and Director of Finance were working on a settlement figure.  He informed Members of some of the current work planned or taking place.

The Portfolio Holder added that the Partnerships and Performance Section Head had produced a report setting out the direction of travel.  He would contact the officer and ask if it could be circulated to Members.

Following a question from Councillor Khan, the Portfolio Holder advised that Watford’s Cabinet would be making the decision regarding future arrangements.

Councillor Khan stated that he had been a member of the Joint Shared Services Committee, which had made the original decision.  Members needed to be involved in the process.  He questioned whether scrutiny had been part of the decision process.

The Committee and Scrutiny Officer responded that she was not aware of any scrutiny involvement in the original decision.  She reminded Members that when the decision about future arrangements was to be made, if it were a key decision it would be open for call-in. 

Following comments about two recommendations from 2014/15 related to Benefits, the Head of Finance (Shared Services) responded that the Head of Revenues and Benefits had been busy ensuring the service was on track and delays were limited.  He acknowledged that Members were concerned that the deadlines had passed and that no responses had been received. 

Councillor Williams asked that a response was requested and then circulated to the Committee.

Councillor Silver referred to the Safeguarding audit and noted that one of the recommendations had the priority ‘merits attention’. It was also noted that the report had been given moderate assurance.

The Audit Manager advised that eight of the recommendations had been given a ‘medium’ priority and the ninth one ‘merits attention’.  This was one of the more prominent audits carried out during 2015/16 and provided a forward looking gap analysis in response to the Rotherham Report and other guidance emerging from similar safeguarding experiences at other councils.  As a final audit report, it was publicly available.

Councillor Mauthoor asked that the final report be circulated to the Committee.

The Portfolio Holder said that as a County Councillor he endorsed a review of the Child Sexual Exploitation policy.

The Audit Manager said that the service had carried out similar audits in five Hertfordshire authorities.  It had also looked at the relationship with the County Council, which had the larger role.

Councillor Silver noted that recommendation eight had been issued in November but the deadline was not until June 2016.  He felt this was too long on such an important issue.

The Committee was advised that the subject would be included on scrutiny as soon as possible.

The Committee and Scrutiny Officer informed the Committee that an all-member briefing on Child Sexual Exploitation and other matters was due to take place before the Community Safety Partnership Task Group on Tuesday 22 March.  She would also be discussing Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s work programme with the Head of Community and Customer Services and whether an item could be included at the June meeting.

RESOLVED –

1.      that the Internal Audit Progress Report against the 2015/16 Audit Plan be noted.

2.      that amendments to the Audit Plan as at March 2016 be approved.

3.      that the removal of the implemented recommendations be agreed.

4.      that the changes to the implementation date for 21 recommendations (paragraph 2.6 of Appendix 1) for the reasons set out in Appendix 3, be agreed.