Agenda and draft minutes

Venue: County Hall, Usk with Remote Attendance

Media

Items
No. Item

1.

To elect a Chair.

Minutes:

Councillor Jamie Treharne was nominated by Councillor Roden and seconded by Councillor Woodhouse.

 

2.

Declarations of Interest.

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest.

 

3.

Public Open Forum.

Minutes:

No members of the public were present.

 

4.

Regional Collaboration: Gwent Public Services Board pdf icon PDF 721 KB

Purpose: To provide the Select Committee with an update on the proposals that have been developed to move to a Gwent-wide Public Service Board and an update on the process for developing the next Well-being Assessment and Well-being Plan.

 

Authors: Richard Jones, Sharran Lloyd

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Richard Jones and Sharran Lloyd presented the report and answered the members’ questions.

Challenge:

Will the workload for officers increase? How will the work be distributed?

The current programme board has been in place for a long time. It was structured at the same time as the Public Services board, mirroring our local Monmouthshire Public Services board. Representatives at a senior level who have direct control over their service areas can direct and steer the delivery that needs to happen, and how they can best resource delivery against our Wellbeing Plan priorities. We don’t anticipate that workload changing dramatically because the Wellbeing Plan will stay current in Monmouthshire for the remaining two years of that plan. The programme board will retain strategic oversight of that delivery.

Regionalisation, and 5 boards potentially duplicating work, is a fair point to raise, but the programme board for us will retain ‘localism’ as part of this delivery and be the voice to the regional PSB where we have common priorities across the region. Where we have, for example, mental health or climate change that we know are common priorities across Gwent, under a regional PSB we anticipate that they will have more ability to direct the work regionally. Our programme board will then make sense of how that feeds down locally, especially as it pertains to Monmouthshire’s particular circumstances.

Until it starts, will we have an answer to the question of regionalism vs. localism?

We already see some of the tensions, in terms of local and regional delivery, which is partly why the remit of this Select committee was changed – because we wanted to know how effective regionalised agendas were in delivering on behalf of Monmouthshire. The learning from that will help to inform how we need to structure the Regional Public Services Board, regarding its performance management and accountability, and governance framework. We are looking at where public service boards have absolute responsibility for delivery, and where/why things should sit with the PSB going forward. We will have the correct performance management framework, governance and accountability structures in place to ensure that we are delivering effectively at a local level through the regional arrangements; the partnership landscape in appendix 4 illustrates how we will deliver outcomes for citizens in Monmouthshire. It could be argued that there is currently no governance structure overseeing the effectiveness of local delivery. The report also mentions scrutiny arrangements, which are being developed; we feel there is still the need to retain local and regional scrutiny to strengthen this approach.

Will we get additional benefits to ensure that we get good value from this kind of system?

This hasn’t required additional resources so far: we are servicing it through current structures and through cooperation with Gwent partners. At this time, we don’t believe that additional resources will be required. At the moment, officers are working collaboratively across Gwent. It lends itself to having officers who understand the local picture developing the regional approach.

The report says that each  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.

Public Service Board Well-being Plan Annual Report pdf icon PDF 256 KB

Purpose: To provide the Select Committee with the opportunity to scrutinise the draft Public Service Board Annual Report which describes progress made towards delivering the board’s well-being objectives during 2020-21.

 

Authors: Richard Jones, Sharran Lloyd

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Richard Jones and Sharran Lloyd presented the report and answered the members’ questions.

Challenge:

Regarding statistics, there is a comparison from p37 onwards with other authorities and national indicators – why do they change throughout the document?

We thought it was useful not to just compare Monmouthshire’s performance with Wales, but also with comparable authorities. Those are chosen by looking at the particular indicator – which aspect of wellbeing – then using a statistical tool based on different variables (e.g., socio-economic, demographic, geography, etc.) to look at similar authorities. Depending on which indicator it is, we choose which area is most similar to Monmouthshire, statistically. So, the comparison authority will vary between indicators because we use slightly different variables, depending on the indicator. These are national indicators looking at how each area is progressing towards the national wellbeing goals – they are not necessarily, in themselves, a performance indicator of any one individual public body or public service board. Nonetheless, the public service board uses them to look at how they are progressing against those broader wellbeing goals.

What has the effect been of Covid on Monmouthshire’s performance?

Due to a delay in reporting, several indicators will cover periods prior to the pandemic. As more information becomes available, and now there is a lot of data coming through about how the pandemic has affected wellbeing, we will give those areas further consideration. The process discussed in the previous item concerning the wellbeing assessment will be key to that: we will gather data about and views from Monmouthshire residents about how the pandemic has affected their wellbeing, and what might affect it in the future. PSB partner organisations will provide a vital range of evidence to inform the process.

Would it ever be possible to have a synthetic county, in data terms, to compare more accurately with the other counties by extracting the same data from them?

We can try to utilise data in the most effective way possible to help us to understand wellbeing, using the range of data at as low a geography as possible to do that. Through the Wellbeing assessment process and the Public Service Board working both regionally and locally, we will be able to build up our knowledge based on the statistical assessment and qualitative data. We can continue to make progress through the various mechanisms.

What is the Iceberg model referred to on p10?

It is linked to the CAMHS transformation model under the RPB, looking at how we address the mental health and wellbeing and emotional resilience of children and young people. There are several strands of work under that model. Some of that concerns how we push community psychology into the community to understand the behaviour of children and young people, linking very strongly with adverse childhood experiences, keeping children and families well in a community, and that we have intervention at different stages of the inverse pyramid – pushing more resources out of specialist treatment and into the broader community.

How  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

6.

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting held on 19th November 2020. pdf icon PDF 647 KB

Minutes:

The minutes were confirmed and signed as an accurate record. Moved by Councillor Roden and seconded by Councillor Treharne.

 

7.

To consider the Select Committee's forward work programme. pdf icon PDF 470 KB

Minutes:

Due to the merger of PSBs, the forward work programme is very much in the developmental stage. Suggestions for topics to be emailed to Hazel Ilett.

 

8.

To note the date and time of the next meeting: To be confirmed.