Agenda item

To receive the report of the Head of Policy & Resources.

8.1      Councillor Norman introduced the report and highlighted key elements. Firstly, she pointed to paragraph 3.5 of the report which outlined that the service quality delivered by Civica remained at high levels. In particular, Civica had continued to deliver a good service to the Council during the COVID-19 pandemic despite the increase in workload as a result of a higher number of claimants and business grants which they had brought online and paid out efficiently. Councillor Norman added that for this, Gloucester City Council had been recognised as one of the most highly performing district councils nationally for its ability to process claims and the percentage of payments made. Furthermore, she outlined that the City Council had worked with Civica since 2011 and in that time had developed a partnership with them beyond a supplier/Council one. This had a positive financial impact enabling the Council to make efficiencies and cost savings in the contract, as well as benefitting from Civica bringing the latest efficiencies and policy with regard to how to process changes in national policy, for example, the introduction of Universal Credit. Referring to the draft budget proposals brought before the Committee in December 2020, Councillor Norman advised that there was a proposed cost saving of £100,000 with Civica per annum throughout the life of the 2021-2026 money plan. She then thanked the Civica team for their hard work particularly during the pandemic during which the team had regularly worked outside their normal working hours.  Councillor Norman also extended her thanks to the Intelligent Client Officer for her hard work also. Lastly, Councillor Norman reiterated that she believed the contract provided a good service, good value for money with a provider who was well respected and willing to innovate.

8.2       Councillor Norman and the Head of Policy & Resources responded to Committee members’ questions as follows. Firstly, in answer to the Chair ‘s question about Hull Framework, the Head of Policy & Resources explained that this was an established single supplier framework which meant that the Council could make a direct award to Civica for procurement purposes. Secondly, on the question of whether a People Impact Assessment (PIA) had been carried out for the new contract, he advised that this was not required as Revenues & Benefits was not a front facing service and the service was not being changed or reduced. However, he would be happy for a PIA to be carried out if Members’ wished. Responding to Councillor Wilson’s query regarding Option 2 which was not being recommended in the report, the Head of Policy & Resources explained that the reason for not going to the open market was not because of the length of time this would take. He added that if the report was rejected by Members, the OJEU process could be done in a shorter timeframe. Nonetheless, awarding the contract to Civica was being recommended rather than this option for the reasons outlined in the report.

8.3      In answer to the Chair ‘s query about KPIs and any benchmarking used to measure performance at Civica, Councillor Norman and the Head of Policy & Resources  outlined that the Council had monthly updates and regular service reviews with the Civica on performance and the KPIs within the contract. Overall, Civica provided a good quality service and even when the City Council ‘s performance was compared to other Councils.  Moreover, there were very low numbers of complaints made regarding the service, and even lower numbers of complaints which were then upheld. Finally, the Head of Policy & Resources reiterated that awarding a new contract to Civica through Option 1 would be more prudent and did not believe that the same level of savings could achieved under Option 2.

8.4       Furthermore, Councillor Norman replied to queries raised by Councillor Stephens as follows. Firstly, she clarified the timeline of this report coming before the Committee. Secondly, she explained that there was an opportunity for career progression within the Civica contract regarding Apprenticeships. The aim was to hire Apprentices from the local area and to then keep then within the company.  Councillor Norman added that this social value element of the contract was welcomed. Thirdly, the Head of Policy & Resources explained that the report had originally been written to take into account EU law, however, this would be adjusted where necessary as the UK had since left the EU. Moreover, further information on Apprenticeships in the Civica contract and a brief outline of the impact of the UK leaving the EU on the contract would be provided to Committee Members. Lastly, on the question of benchmarking, the Head of Policy & Resources outlined that he would try and gain insights from other Councils to better understand how well Gloucester was performing in comparison to them. He also proposed that he could share the latest monthly report from Civica with the Committee further highlighting that there is detailed monitoring of the performance of the contract. The Chair stated that this would be welcome as well as any further information available on benchmarking from other Councils noting that LG Inform available through Local Government Association could be useful for this.

8.5     Councillor Pullen raised a number of points which the Head of Policy & Resources responded to in turn. With respect to whether services and jobs provided under the new contract would remain in Gloucester, he advised that since the Council and Civica entered into a contract in 2011, the aim had always been to protect the jobs and keep them local – the contract with Civica had ensured that this happened, and this would not change under the new contract. He added that an on-demand service was used as required, but overall, the contract and jobs remained in Gloucester. Further, when the on-demand service was used this was costed and agreed beforehand with the level of resource agreed with the Contract Manager and Head of Service. A contract change notification put in place whilst the project was in hand. Under an in-house service the Council would have to procure any on demand services separately and in this regard the contract with Civica was also beneficial.

8.6      The Chair proposed a recommendation.

8.7     RESOLVED that the Overview & Scrutiny Committee RECOMMENDS that:

1.)  A full People Impact Assessment is carried out in respect of the new contract with Civica UK Ltd.  Furthermore, the Committee asks that this PIA is circulated to its Members.