Agenda item

The Interim Performance, Evaluation and Programme Development Lead for MonLife and the Business Manager for Tourism, Leisure, Culture and Youth provided a presentation on the Draft Performance and Evaluation Framework for MonLife.  This covers all MonLife plans to measure performance, provide evidence of impact and to drive continuous improvement.  It was explained that there would be one shared framework across MonLife, MonLife Plus and associated trading subsidiaries.  Comments were invited and it was noted that the final framework will be finalised by the Shadow Board and Directors.

Committee Members asked questions as follows:

·         Accreditation: It was queried how soon accreditation will be sought.    It was responded that there is some existing accreditation such as the Green Flag award, Museum accreditation, Visitor Attraction quality assurance scheme and also accreditation in relation to fitness and leisure aligned to business best practice. Some other accreditation is mandatorily required such as License for Outdoor and Dangerous Activities.  Investors in People may be considered in the future.

·         Volunteers: It was also asked how training will be managed to take account of changes within volunteer groups and confirmed that there are role profiles in place with respective training needs attached such as mandatory Level 1 Safeguarding.

·         Assets: In response to questions, it was explained that:

                       i.        The number of times the train ran is one of the current business indicators to capture activity at the site and may be reviewed/enhanced in future; 

                      ii.        Regarding staff surveys, it is intended to develop a performance and development framework for staff to include a level of staff engagement;

                     iii.        Sickness data will continue to be collected; and

                     iv.        The survey of dilapidations is to provide information about condition of assets for the Board.  The boundary between responsibility and action for maintenance was explained.  This point is under negotiation, however it is suggested that Monmouthshire will retain capital maintenance and the majority of revenue maintenance and the budgets to do so.  It was emphasised that negotiations continue. The lease agreement will be presented to Audit Committee and Economic and Development Select Committee in due course.  It is key that the authority is reassured that there are suitable controls in place.  Similarly, MonLife and its Board will also want that assurance.

·         Risk: A Member cautioned regarding what risk elements are being handed over to the MonLife Board, and noted that at the present time it is not known how risks are being assessed.  It was responded that there is a risk register and a scoring process.  Currently, work is being undertaken to separate risks between the authority and MonLife.  This matter will be discussed with the Shadow Board and will be reported back to Audit Committee. The Chief Officer, Resources confirmed that the Audit Committee, Economy and Development Select Committee and Council will have a significant report containing all the legal documentation which will require interpretation when considered.  In terms of risks, key operational and strategic risks will be identified with information on how they have been and will be managed as a result of the negotiations. 

·         ADM Board: It was queried if the ADM Board will be audited by the authority and if periodic reports will be provided.  It was explained that there has to be good governance and a balance struck accordingly to allow the authority to hold both companies to account.

In terms of Audit, the Chief Internal Auditor informed the Committee that Service Level Agreements have been arranged with services across the authority including Internal Audit of MonLife and MonLife Plus.  It is likely that feedback for the audit outcomes for MonLife Plus will be included in the Chief Internal Auditor’s report but the position regarding reporting back on MonLife due to its status as a charity is uncertain at this time and subject to negotiation. The view was expressed that it would be reasonable to hold both boards to account and clarification will be sought.

The Chair queried how to scrutinise the boards and how to ensure Members are kept abreast of responsibilities and developments, and was encouraged by the questions raised about risk.  The Chief Officer, Resources will confirm which Select Committee will have ongoing responsibility in due course noting the important principles of openness and transparency. The Chair was pleased to note the involvement of Internal Audit.

            The Recommendation to review and comment upon the report was noted.