None received

To note any declarations of interest made by Members, including those restricting Members from voting on the questions detailed in Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act, 1992.  See attached note from the Monitoring Officer.

Councillor Candida Ronald declared that she had a disclosable non – pecuniary interest in agenda item 6.4 as she was a patient of the Island Health practice

To confirm as a correct record of the proceedings the unrestricted minutes of the meeting held on 27^th September 2018

RESOLVED:

The minutes of the meeting held on 27^th September 2018 were presented and approved as a correct record of proceedings.

Consideration of any written comments received from members of the public in relation to any of the reports on the agenda.

[Any submissions should be sent to the clerk listed on the agenda front page by 5pm the day before the meeting]

There were no public submissions relating to the agenda items to be considered at the meeting.

To note for information individual decisions relating to the award of grants that have been taken by the Mayor the last meeting.

The Sub - Committee noted that, since the last meeting, the Mayor had taken no urgent decisions in the form of an Individual Mayoral Decision that related to grants.

Alison Denning (Festivals and Events Officer, Place) presented the report which provided an overview of Event Fund applications for events taking place  between April 1^st 2017 and March 31^st 2018 and the Jo Cox / Big Lunch Great Get Together events. The report covered the number of applications received, the assessment process, the amount of applications funded, project descriptions and monitoring information amongst other matters issues.

The Sub – Committee also received an overview of the application criteria for the Event Fund and the projects funded per quarter. It was also confirmed that the initiative supported events in all wards across the Borough and some of the projects worked with partners from all over the Borough. The Council had introduced workshops and carried work to reach organisations. However there were variations in terms of the number of events funded per ward due to certain factors. The Council had also revised the monitoring arrangements so that it was now only required to provide essential information. 

The Mayor invited the Chair of GSSC to comment on the report. He indicated that the GSSC sought clarity on the geographical coverage of the events given the slight overrepresentation of events in some wards and a slight underrepresentation in other wards. The GSCC were satisfied with responses and supported the project. The GSSC endorsed the report.

The Mayor then invited GDSC Members to comment on the report. In response to questions, it was confirmed that Officers worked with groups to ensure they engaged with residents from around the Borough and that the projects were benefiting LBTH residents. Officers also encouraged groups to provide projects across the Borough.

RESOLVED

1.         That the contents of the report be noted

The Sub-Committee considered the report relating to the payment of a Historic Buildings Grant of £20,000 to St. Mary and Holy Trinity Church (St. Mary’s), for the first phase of vital repair works to the exterior of the church west tower.   It was noted that the building was currently on Historic England’s Heritage at Risk register and was a Grade 11 building.

In terms of background, it was noted that the Sub - Committee agreed in September 2017 to match fund the repair works. The works had been inspected and the Council were satisfied that they had been completed to a high standard. This report therefore sought the payment of that funding.

The Mayor enquired and it was noted that the GSSC asked questions and received assurances about the completion of the second phase of the project and the quality of the restoration work. The GSSC endorsed the recommendations.

The Mayor then invited GDSC Members to comment on the report. They supported the recommendations.

RESOLVED:

1.         That the grant payment of grant of £20,000 to St. Mary and Holy Trinity, Bow,  be approved as a contribution to vital repair works to the exterior of the west tower.

Dr Somen Banerjee (Public Health) presented the ‘Change Note’ of the ‘Aberfeldy Village Health Centre’ PID of August 2017 regarding changes to the fit out and leaseholder arrangements for the project. He confirmed that there had been no other changes to the nature of the bid.  It was also noted that the GSSC had sought clarity on the location of the new Aberfeldy practice. Officers have circulated a new map showing the location of the health centre. The committee should note that the practice would be in Lansbury.

The Mayor invited the Chair of GSSC to comment on the report. He indicated that the GSSC sought clarity about the amount of CIL funding for the project, gained from planning applications in the Isle of Dogs area, and the amount of CIL funding generally for health provision on the Isle of Dogs. The GSSC also asked questions about the reasonable endeavours to secure a health practice in the Blackwall and Cubitt Town ward, the journey times for the patients, and how quickly the new practice would reach patient capacity.

The Mayor then invited GDSC Members to comment on the report. Members noted the comments in respect of the allocation of the CIL money. Members also discussed the proximity of the new practice to its patient base. Members were satisfied with the proposals.

RESOLVED

1.      That the grant funding of £3,119,421 to NHS Tower Hamlets CCG be approved to deliver increased capacity, access and service provision in primary care and maintain continuity of local GP services. 

The Sub – Committee considered the report, proposing to vary the Maximising Healthcare infrastructure PID, (agreed in 2016) for improvements in health care infrastructure. The Sub – Committee noted that two projects identified in the PID had been withdrawn and the reasons and impact of this. The report proposed that the underspend within the budget be utilised to expand the infrastructure at the Island Medical centre.

The Mayor invited the Chair of GSSC to comment on the report. The GSSC sought clarify about: the use of the first floor, the underspend that had arisen due to the projects within the PID not proceeding and the benefits of the proposed initiatives. The GSSC also noted a number of cost overruns identified in the report and the impact of this in terms of service delivery. The GSSC endorsed the report but requested that these points be clarified

In response, Officers advised that they had since contacted the Island Health Medical Centre. The Practice Manager at Island Health outlined that there had never been any clinical space upstairs; there was only one room which housed the admin team and the Practice Manager. They have now moved downstairs, and the medical records were now stored off-site to free up space. The Practice Manager had also advised that there had been an increase in appointments provided, although there were ongoing issues around recruitment of GPs.

The Mayor then invited GDSC Members to comment on the report. The members noted the comments regarding the allocation of the CIL S106 funding and the wider plans to increase health capacity in the area. The GDSC supported the proposals.

 RESOLVED:

1.         That the change note that grant funds £1,871,948 to NHS Tower Hamlets CCG be approved to deliver increased capacity, access and service provision in primary care and maintain continuity of local GP services. 

Dominic Hinde (Public Health) presented the report regarding the allocation of funding to the NHS Tower Hamlets Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) to deliver ICT infrastructure in primary care and digital access for health services. This included a range of initiatives to enable patients to access services remotely.

The Mayor enquired and it was noted that the GSSC asked questions about  the cost related to the development of a patient access mobile application given so many similar apps already existed.  The GSSC questioned whether an existing one could be adapted for Tower Hamlets and asked if this could be explored. The GSCC also asked about other elements of the project and the plans to share the project with the NHS London Digital Forum. The GSCC also sought and received assurances that the project would assist with the aim of ‘channel shifting’. The GSSC endorsed the recommendations.

In response Officers provided an update on these issues. It was noted that the CCG sought to create a unique, locally centred interface which integrated with existing apps, and targeted issues prevalent to Tower Hamlets. Any apps which were linked to or adapted would have to be accredited by the NHS England framework which takes into account matters of Information Governance and Security. Whilst there was a risk of duplication, every effort would be taken to ensure that the project linked to the NHS London Digital Programme to avoid a duplication of work.

The Mayor then invited GDSC Members to comment on the report. In response to questions, Officers noted the need for the plans to link to the wider health service strategies and confirmed that the new facilities should provide a number of benefits, both for patients and GPs. 

Members also sought reassurances regarding the costs of developing the new mobile phone application and how the Council would ensure that it secured value for money. In response, Officers briefly outlined the results of the tendering process and stated there would be a Tower Hamlets Officer on the project board for the app development.

Members also discussed the issue of ownership of the Intellectual property and whether the Council should explore the possibility of the Council owning a share of the IP. Accordingly, it was agreed that the first tranche of the funding should be released on the basis that the Council explore the possibility of the Council owning a share of the IP for the health app.

Members also asked questions about the continued availability of face to face GP appointments to those who preferred to visit their GP. Officers confirmed that the plans should help free up clinical capacity for such patients, such as the elderly

RESOLVED:

1.         That the grant funding of £1,502,608 be approved to NHS Tower Hamlets CCG to provide digital access for healthcare services and to increase capacity in primary care through ICT infrastructure on the basis that the Council explore the possibility of the Council owning a share of the intellectual property for the health app

Steve Hill (Head of Benefits) presented the report. It was noted that for the period, April to June 2018,two organisations had received red ratings due to premises issues relating to 5 projects as set out in the report. These projects related to the Tower Hamlets Youth Sports Foundation and Family Action. Officers at the Council were liaising with THYSF following their decision to wind down. For the period, Officers were satisfied that they had met all their MSG performance requirements. Officers are continuing to engage with THYSF to ascertain if there are any  more  premises agreements to be submitted to the council and will prepare a report and recommendations for the Mayor regarding the release of  funding in line with the recommendation in the report.

Regarding Family Access, there were also no performance issues and they had expressed a willingness to engage on their  premises agreement. Given this, it was recommended that funding be released via delegated authority in line with the recommendations in the report.

The Mayor enquired and it was noted that the GSSC asked a number of questions and endorsed the recommendations.

The Mayor then invited GDSC Members to comment on the report. Regarding THYSF, it was confirmed that the Council would continue to work with them to resolve the complex issues and would release funding to the organisation subject to the resolution of issues. Officers were also continuing to explore whether funding for the MSG extension could be released to an alternative service provider.

RESOLVED:

1.         That three recommendations relating to the releasing of MSG payments to projects be agreed as set out in section 3.8 and 3.10 of the report, as set out below:

2.         The release of MSG funding due to THYSF for the period April to June 2018, be released with approval via delegated authority of the Corporate Director Resources and/or the Divisional Director, Finance, Procurement and Audit after consultation with the Executive Mayor. These sums will be used to facilitate an orderly close down of THYSF and in settlement of identified priority payments.

3.         That in acknowledgement of Family Action’s willingness to enter into an appropriate property agreement, MSG payments be released for April to June 2018 period subject to satisfactory performance.

4.         That conditional on Asset Management’s confirmation of Family Action’s satisfactory ongoing engagement on premises issues with the council; subject to satisfactory performance, future MSG payments be released to Family Action with approval via delegated authority of the Corporate Director Resources and/or the Divisional Director, Finance, Procurement and Audit.

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

There was no other business