Agenda item

The Wales Audit Office (WAO) Report ‘Information Technology – Corporate Assessment Follow-on Review’ was presented.  In doing so, it was noted that this report is on the Monmouthshire County Council website and therefore is available for members of the public to read.

It was concluded in the report that the Council has made progress in some areas, but the overall arrangements for managing IT services are disjointed and do not adequately allow the Council to demonstrate good governance, value for money or impact.  The conclusions were drawn because:

·         the Council has not yet developed a clear enough plan to implement its iCounty Strategy, and oversight arrangements need updating;

·         the Council has made significant efforts to ensure that planned changes to IT service providers do not disrupt provision of its IT services, but the arrangement with the SRS is not underpinned by formal agreements;

·         due to the lack of a Social Care and Health Directorate risk register, the Council cannot be assured that risks to the Flo system are appropriately escalated; and

·         the Council has a number of initiatives to improve the effectiveness of its IT services, but it is unclear how these will help it measure and demonstrate impact.

In response, the following proposals for improvement were made whilst recognising progress made and also to reflect emerging issues:

·         P1 Review and revise the iCounty Business Plan for 2016-2019 by setting out clear and measurable actions to enable senior managers and members to effectively monitor and manage progress of its implementation.

·         P2 Review membership of the Digital Board following changes in software provider to ensure no conflicts of interest.

·         P3 Negotiate and agree commercial grade Service Level Agreements with SRS in advance of new organisations joining the partnership to support sound governance, and to enable the Council to measure service delivery, and assure itself that its IT needs continue to be met.

·         P4 Complete the database of systems used by the Council, identifying information such as contract details, costs, and the comments of the system owners, to support the Council in its strategic management of IT resources.

·         P5 Review the Council’s risk management arrangements to assure itself it manages risks consistently across directorates and identifies, escalates, and addresses risks in a timely and appropriate way.

The Policy and Performance Officer presented the Management Response referring to the Council’s actions to respond to the proposals for improvement and a plan of future actions.  It was added that some are in progress and it is considered that arrangements are already in place for P2 and P4.

The Head of Digital summarised that with regards to:

·         P1, a review and revision of the iCounty business plan is in progress, as planned, and there is acceptance that there is a need to further develop data and indicators.

·         P2, it was confirmed that the County does not have a software provider of choice but has a number of delivery agents.  In particular, it was confirmed that CMC² was engaged for one specific project and that was why they were represented on the Digital Board.  A review of the overall arrangements for the authority’s Programme Boards (People Board, Place Board and Digital Board) is in progress as part of the Future Monmouthshire initiative to ensure that they are fit for purpose. No review of the membership of the Digital Board is considered necessary at this time.  Further details of the work of the Programme Boards was provided.  It was confirmed that Elected and Cabinet Members sit on each of the Programme Boards.

In response to a question, the difference between the Digital Board and the SRS was explained that the SRS is the technology infrastructure provider.  It also is a services provider to other authorities e.g. provides and maintains all equipment/systems.  The Digital Board monitors this authority’s internal digital strategy and SRS involvement.  It was confirmed that there are several partners including Monmouthshire County Council, Torfaen County Borough   Council, Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council and Gwent Police. The SRS is owned by all partners. The Officer confirmed that Monmouthshire CC has its own digital direction which feeds into and aligns with overall SRS strategy.

·         P3, it was confirmed that there is a working party to assess this aspect and it is accepted that a commercial grade SLA is required.  In the interim, performance is measured by a Performance Board attended by all partners.  Performance is measured against an agreed set of standards.

·         P4, this is not accepted.  It was explained that there is already a database of the council’s systems, which includes contract details, costs and system owner comments. The database is used to facilitate collaboration with other local authorities on future digital direction, how to combine systems and to maximise economies of scale to inform future decision making. It was explained that other partners are currently completing a similar database. 

·         P5, it was explained that the Risk Management Policy was last reviewed in March 2015.  There is a risk log in place to identify and manage high and medium level strategic risks.  Lower level strategic and operational risks are managed by Service Improvement Plans or project specific risk registers to identify and manage risks within existing governance arrangements.  Under the provisions of the Wellbeing of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, it is not just risks to services that are monitored but also risks facing communities, countywide and longer term risks.

In answer to the Management Response to P2, a WAO Officer clarified that the purpose of the review regarding membership of Digital Board was to reflect the change that CMC² is no longer involved.  

Regarding P4, it was emphasised that this proposal was based on a snapshot in April 2016.  When the database was demonstrated, it was incomplete as FLO (social care app) wasn’t included.  The recommendation, therefore was to complete the database. This point was accepted as FLO was at project management stage and had only gone live a few weeks previous.  This was the only element that was missing from the database.

It was clarified that the SRS was set up under a Memorandum of Understanding Agreement and is non-profit making.  It is an amalgamation of all participating local authority ICT departments, noting that Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council have recently joined and Newport City Council are in discussions.  The SRS provides the   ICT infrastructure including all Wi-Fi enablement, all equipment, staff and services. It was confirmed that MCC pays for the service provided and monitors performance. It was emphasised that the Council's digital strategy is not driven by the SRS.  The Council manages its strategy in collaboration with other local authority partners, within the governance arrangements in place.  It was added that the SRS is visited by the team on a weekly basis, informal board meetings are held with respective partners and also formal board meetings with Elected Members.

It was queried, if it is a partnership, why MCC is solely implementing iCounty and why the software is not common to all partners.  It was explained that each of the local authorities has its own digital direction with different priorities.  There is a common infrastructure e.g. same Wi-Fi, some use the same telephony systems and all have Microsoft Enterprise agreements managed by SRS and added that more collaboration is welcomed in the future.  It was explained that the SRS assists the establishment of common systems and does not control five sets of completely separate infrastructures.

In response to a question, it was confirmed that the SRS provides the hardware and some common software; each partner also has its own software arrangements. It was emphasised that more collaboration is welcomed to produce efficiencies in the way work is undertaken across the whole partnership.  Additionally, each partner will retain its own priorities as well.

In response to a question, a WAO Officer explained that the 2015 Corporate Assessment formally raised the matter of how IT arrangements were progressing within the authority.  It was explained that the collaboration to form the SRS was initiated with involvement from Welsh Government; the WAO was therefore interested in progress.  It was explained that contractually, SRS is a legal entity with a Memorandum of Understanding. CMC² provided the council with one piece of software (FLO).  In the absence of CMC², FLO is now supported and maintained by SRS. It was clarified that SRS is the Council’s ICT providers and that CMC² provided software not ICT infrastructure.

In response to an enquiry about the need for more scrutiny by elected members in addition to Cabinet Members, the WAO Officer explained that proposal P2 was made to ensure membership of the Digital Board is appropriate.

The Chair clarified that a request for a further reports must be properly submitted as a motion for a future meeting.

The WAO Officers were thanked for their attendance and responses.