To update members on the progress of internal audit work and to bring to their attention any key internal control issues arising from work recently completed.

SWAP presented the report and highlighted the following: 

·         Eight audits completed since the last report

·         Three audits had received priority 4 findings.  

Social care workforce performance

The interim director for adults and wellbeing reported that the audit covered a small portion of the adults and wellbeing directorate staff.   It was noted that the ability to benchmark had proved difficult and had caused delays in completion.   The priority 4 finding focused on the inconsistency in locality managers ensuring that staff were appropriately supported and skilled.    These actions have been undertaken and will be ongoing. 

Following a query from a member of the committee, it was explained that whilst each locality team had included an average number of substantive pieces of work completed by staff, there were differences in opinion as to what this meant.  Some managers had believed that it was a benchmarking figure; others thought it was a target.      The directorate did not want to set targets as there would be a variety of reasons as to why it would not be met which included the degree of complexity involved; sickness; holiday absence, etc.    It was also confirmed that there was an ongoing training programme for all managers, including the locality managers, within the directorate. 

In answer to a query from a member of the committee, the director for adults and welling confirmed that there were a variety of methods utilised for completing assessments which was proportionate, appropriate and considered on a case by case basis.  

Data quality – decision making reports and corporate budget performance reports

The head of corporate governance explained that the audit had been requested as there had been issues raised about the consistency of data used and the comprehensiveness of key decision reports. 

Following a query from a member of the committee, it was confirmed that the decision making software (mod.gov) was designed to provide a structure to decision making and provides version control.   It was noted that prior to the implementation of mod.gov, reports were circulated via email for comment which was high risk as it meant that comments could be overlooked by report writers. 

The guidance given to report writers and reviewers had been revised following the audit findings which would lead to improved consistency.     Further revisions would be made to guidance in relation to the finance section.  

The head of corporate governance explained that the decision to use the mod.gov system was based on the ability for an end to end process for agenda management, i.e. from the issue being submitted to the forward plan through to decision.    Work was being undertaken with the software manufacturer to develop better version control.   If an additional system was used, then additional steps would be required and there would also be different risks involved. 

It was noted that whilst the priority 4 recommendation had been focused on the system, there were priority 3 recommendations which focused on practice.   Actions on these recommendations were being undertaken. 

Cllr ACR Chappell left at the meeting at 15:18.

Part  ...  view the full minutes text for item 291