Issue - meetings
Service Level Agreements
Meeting: 17/01/2012 - Cabinet (Item 76)
76 Corporate Review of Service Level Agreements 
PDF 117 KB
(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Barry)
Report of the Head of Community Engagement.
Minutes:
(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Barry)
Cabinet received a report from the Head of Community Engagement to update on progress in relation to the corporate review of Service Level Agreements and to make recommendations for future management arrangements, joint working and commissioning.
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:
|
|
Option 1 Introduce a commissioning framework |
Option 2 Do nothing – retain existing arrangements |
|
Advantages |
Opportunity to use the commissioning approach to reinforce positive engagement with partners Potential for improved value for money Improved opportunity to align council investment with delivery of corporate priorities Increased flexibility to focus funds on current high priority service areas Longer term planning opportunities for delivery partners Development of staff expertise and capacity to take commissioning forward in other areas of work |
Officer time not required to develop commissioning arrangements
|
|
Disadvantages |
Officer time required to develop commissioning arrangements
|
Funding may not be closely aligned to current priorities Current agreements limit the council’s ability to steer funding towards priority activities that offer maximum return Best possible value for money may not be achieved Current arrangements not consistently supported by agreed priorities and transparent criteria for funding Lost opportunity to strengthen engagement with partners via commissioning processes |
|
Risks |
Possible concerns on the part of current delivery organisations – can be mitigated by communications and fair, transparent processes |
Possible risks to high priority services if funding is already fully allocated and flexibility is not available to shift funding priorities over time |
The officer preferred option was Option 1. The Council has supported a number of organisations to deliver services in the district for some years. Funding has been provided as part of Service Level Agreements with the relevant organisations. Over the last year the Council has reviewed these arrangements in detail and, following the review, the report made some recommendations to ensure that the Council’s investment was in line with corporate priorities, that collaboration was supported and other requirements including value for money, quality standards, sustainability were met.
Councillor Barry proposed, seconded by Councillor Hamilton-Cox:-
“(1) That the Council continues to develop joint approaches with other funding partners, where possible, including Lancashire County Council, to achieve efficiencies and maximise impact of funding.
(2) That a request is made to Lancashire County Council that the Council is able to use any Second Homes funding that may be available to support the Council’s agreements with the Arts and Voluntary, Community, Faith sectors.
(3) That the Council continues to develop partnership working arrangements with the Arts and the Voluntary Community, Faith sectors, to support service delivery in the district and to achieve efficiencies.
(4) That the Council works with Arts and Voluntary, Community, Faith sector partners to develop commissioning frameworks to secure important services for the district and to provide robust arrangements for management of the related funding provided by the council.
(5) That the Council’s funding for the Arts and the Voluntary, Community, Faith sectors is aligned ... view the full minutes text for item 76