Issue - meetings
Proportionate Monitoring Arrangements
Meeting: 07/11/2018 - Grants Determination (Cabinet) Sub-Committee (Item 6)
6 Proportionate Monitoring Arrangements PDF 123 KB
Decision:
Steve Hill (Head of Benefits) presented the report setting out proposed proportionate monitoring arrangements for grant awards in light of the LGA Peer Review and voluntary sector feedback that the existing arrangements were resource intensive. Internal Audit have been involved in the development of the new proportionate monitoring arrangements, in line with the LGA Peer Review recommendations and Internal Audit were satisfied with the new system.
The report set out the existing arrangements. It also set out the new arrangements that would continue to operate a RAG ratings system with less frequent but more proportionate robust monitoring. There were a number of benefits to this process and Officers would contact the groups directly to explain the new arrangements on a project by project basis.
The Mayor enquired and it was noted that the GSSC welcomed the plans and asked questions about how the new arrangements compared to the previous monitoring approach and whether the grant size ceiling were based on single or cumulative grants. The GSSC endorsed the recommendations but sought clarity on these issues.
In response, it was noted that a number of projects received funding from various grants funding streams. Officers proposed a grant by grant proportionate monitoring approach as as opposed to cumulative approach as projects often covered different themes, involved different staff and were delivered from different locations by the same organisation. Officers will work with Audit to review the need for an additional monitoring inspection trigger where it was felt necessary and it was noted the 3% visits trigger will be kept under review.
The Mayor then invited GDSC Members to comment on the report. They noted the merits of an additional trigger for monitoring inspections and questioned whether the Council could at its discretion carry out additional monitoring of an organisation if necessary. In view of this, Members agreed that this additional monitoring trigger should be added to the process.
DECISION
1. That the proposals outlined to rationalise grant monitoring arrangements making them proportionate to the level of risk be agreed subject to the inclusion of an additional trigger for monitoring and inspections
Minutes:
Steve Hill (Head of Benefits) presented the report setting out proposed proportionate monitoring arrangements for grant awards in light of the LGA Peer Review and voluntary sector feedback that the existing arrangements were resource intensive. Internal Audit have been involved in the development of the new proportionate monitoring arrangements, in line with the LGA Peer Review recommendations and Internal Audit were satisfied with the new system.
The report set out the existing arrangements. It also set out the new arrangements that would continue to operate a RAG ratings system with less frequent but more proportionate robust monitoring. There were a number of benefits to this process and Officers would contact the groups directly to explain the new arrangements on a project by project basis.
The Mayor enquired and it was noted that the GSSC welcomed the plans and asked questions about how the new arrangements compared to the previous monitoring approach and whether the grant size ceiling were based on single or cumulative grants. The GSSC endorsed the recommendations but sought clarity on these issues.
In response, it was noted that a number of projects received funding from various grants funding streams. Officers proposed a grant by grant proportionate monitoring approach as as opposed to cumulative approach as projects often covered different themes, involved different staff and were delivered from different locations by the same organisation. Officers will work with Audit to review the need for an additional monitoring inspection trigger where it was felt necessary and it was noted the 3% visits trigger will be kept under review.
The Mayor then invited GDSC Members to comment on the report. They noted the merits of an additional trigger for monitoring inspections and questioned whether the Council could at its discretion carry out additional monitoring of an organisation if necessary. In view of this, Members agreed that this additional monitoring trigger should be added to the process.
RESOLVED
1. That the proposals outlined to rationalise grant monitoring arrangements making them proportionate to the level of risk be agreed subject to the inclusion of an additional trigger for monitoring and inspections
Meeting: 05/11/2018 - Grants Scrutiny Sub-Committee (Item 6)
6 Proportionate Monitoring Arrangements PDF 123 KB
Minutes:
Steve Hill, Head of Benefits Service informed Members this report related to the monitoring arrangements in place for the Mainstream Grant programme.
The Sub-Committee were told the proposal was to reduce the burden on grant recipients by introducing a more nuanced approach to monitoring with an increased level of monitoring as the grant increases.
In response to questions asked by Members the following was noted:
· Mystery Shoppers would be used as part of the evaluation process and grant recipients will be aware of this.
· Assurances were given that the new regime of monitoring were robust and would deliver what was required, when compared to the system in place during the previous administration.
· Mr Hill said that with the previous three years’ experience of grants administration, organisations have become more professional and have successfully complied with a far more onerous monitoring regime to date. The sector has lobbied extensively for a more proportionate approach. They will be freed up from a considerable administrative burden and will instead be able to focus more on delivery.
· It is expected that organisations will be responsible for flagging issues as they arise in order to work with the Council to address them and in doing so, not jeopardise their green performance rating, for example, the onus being on them to advise of the loss of key members of staff.
Members of the Sub-Committee AGREED to ENDORSE the recommendations to the Grant Determination Sub-Committee to
1. Consider and agree the proposals outlined to rationalise grant monitoring arrangements making them proportionate to the level of risk.