Loading
The Health and Care Scrutiny Committee, a group of councillors that checks council services, considered quarter 1 revenue and capital monitoring reports for 2026/27 and an action plan for Children's Services. It recommended to the Cabinet that future budget reports show expected savings and spending for each quarter, and that revenue reports give more detail on climate and nature. Written answers on several questions were agreed.
Apologies for absence were received from Committee Member Councillors Amanda Jenner, Alwyn Evans and Carol Robinson. Cabinet Member County Councillors David Thomas and James Gibson-Watt. Officers Sharon Powell, Sharon Frewin, Jo Harris, Jacqueline Pugh and Marie James.
There were no declarations of interest made relating to any items on the agenda.
The Committee did not receive any disclosures of prohibited party whips which a Member had been given in relation to the meeting in accordance with Section 78(3) of the Local Government Measure 2011.
The minutes of the meetings held on 18 June 2026 and 24 June 2026 were agreed as a correct record, subject to the correction of a typographical date error in the minutes of 24 June 2026.
Committee accepted the Cabinet Response to Scrutiny Recommendations.
Members received the Quarter 1 Revenue Forecast report relating to Health and Care services. Issues Raised by the Committee: Responses Received: Members sought assurance that significant savings and efficiencies shown as "assured" would be achieved by year end, noting that some savings had slipped into future years previously. This related to the cost reductions section of the report and would be addressed in more detail later in the discussion. Members queried the delay in receiving funding contributions from the Powys Teaching Health Board for a jointly funded care package and asked whether this was normal practice. Officers explained that one organisation acted as the lead commissioner and subsequently invoiced the partner organisation for its share of costs. Joint funding arrangements were managed routinely between the Council and Health Board. Billing was normally undertaken through regular invoicing cycles and income would continue to be recovered while the placement remained active. Members asked how much the service spent with third sector organisations, whether spending had changed over recent years and whether the Council was becoming increasingly reliant on such organisations. Third sector organisations were key strategic partners and delivered services through formal commissioning and contractual arrangements. Assurance was given that robust monitoring arrangements were in place to ensure quality, financial sustainability and value for money. Members expressed concern that some performance data tables were unavailable due to implementation of the new finance system and questioned when these reports would be available. The missing data related specifically to purchase order processing and payment performance information, rather than wider service performance. Officers advised that operational performance monitoring continued as normal and acknowledged that the report could have provided greater clarity on this point. Members asked whether there were specific reserves held for Adult and Children's Services. Officers advised that a number of specific reserves existed, including some established from previous underspends, but detailed information was not available at the meeting. The Committee requested that details of relevant reserves be provided to members following the meeting. Members asked whether the Council had sufficient qualified assessors to meet demands associated with DoLS assessments. Officers advised that the authority had an in-house assessor and additional trained staff completing Best Interests Assessor work. Grant funding supported both internal and commissioned assessment activity. Recent legal developments and uncertainty regarding future guidance had created additional complexity in the assessment process. Members raised concerns about the impact of an ageing population and whether the increasing cost of social care would continue to place pressure on other Council services. Demographic pressures were a national issue and the Council, alongside others, continued to lobby for greater recognition of rural service delivery challenges and additional funding support. Measures being taken locally were outlined, including investment in reablement, review of care packages and reductions in double-handed care where appropriate. Officers also highlighted ongoing transformation work, regional and national lobbying activity, investment in fostering and preventative services, efforts to keep people independent at home and successful reductions in agency staffing through "grow our own" workforce initiatives. Members queried the use of the Social Care Workforce Grant, particularly in relation to recruitment, retention and pay uplift arrangements, and asked whether future withdrawal of the grant could create budget pressures. The importance of the grant to service delivery and workforce sustainability was emphasised. Officers were unable to provide a detailed response regarding salary uplifts and agreed to provide further information after the meeting. The Chair suggested that future reports should include profiling information showing expected savings at each quarter, as the current report only showed savings achieved to date. Officers acknowledged the suggestion and agreed to consider whether savings profiling could be incorporated into future corporate monitoring reports, while noting practical difficulties in profiling some savings due to external dependencies and implementation timelines. Concern was expressed that the report did not show the level of savings expected to be achieved by the end of Quarter 1, making it difficult to assess progress against target. Committee suggested future reports include profiling information showing expected savings throughout the year. The Portfolio Holder for a Caring Powys noted that while some savings could be profiled across the year, others would only be realised once implemented. They agreed to explore further profiling opportunities with officers but highlighted that this could be challenging where savings depended on income generation, stakeholder engagement, or discussions with partners such as the Health Board. Officers noted that the recommendation would need to be considered corporately by Finance. Assurance was provided that detailed monitoring of individual savings and efficiencies was already undertaken within services and with portfolio holders, including through regular tracker reviews. Officers provided assurance that four major transformation programmes were underway, focused on decision-making, active prevention, intermediate care, and independence planning. Existing efficiencies had been incorporated into these programmes to strengthen governance, accountability, programme management, and delivery arrangements. It was noted that early progress had been made, with further benefits expected to be reported in future quarters following validation of the results. The importance of robust processes and accurate performance data to support delivery was also highlighted. In relation to Extra Care, assurance was given that the rolled-forward efficiency would be achieved during the financial year. While the efficiency had yet to be realised, detailed cost avoidance analysis demonstrated that Extra Care had avoided approximately £500k of social care expenditure, which was considered a significant benefit. The Portfolio Holder for a Caring Powys advised that significant work was underway to define, quantify and monitor cost avoidance more effectively. It was noted that avoiding costs was becoming increasingly important alongside delivering savings, particularly where preventative services reduced the need for more costly care arrangements. The value of services that help individuals remain independent was emphasised, highlighting their positive impact on both outcomes and financial sustainability. Greater visibility of these benefits would help demonstrate the contribution of officers in managing budgets and limiting financial pressures. Action Lead Officer Timescale Provide members with details of reserves held specifically for Adults and Children's Services. Mari Thomas / Finance Team After the meeting Clarify whether the Social Care Workforce Grant is being used to uplift salaries and advise on any associated future financial risks if the grant ceases. Nina Davies / Finance Officers After the meeting
The Committee made the following recommendations; 1. Future budget monitoring reports should include the profiled savings expected to have been achieved by each quarterly reporting period, alongside the actual savings achieved. 2. Future Revenue reports should include more detailed comment on the climate and nature implications.
The Committee received the report. Issues Raised by the Committee: Responses Received: Members requested an update on progress with the replacement of the WCCIS system, noting that data cleansing and migration work had been underway and that there had been limited updates provided to members. It was also noted that the project was supported through grant funding and assurance was sought regarding progress. Officers advised that test migrations into the new system had been undertaken and some issues had been identified during testing. Additional time was therefore being taken to resolve those issues before progressing with full implementation. The planned implementation date had been revised to ensure data integrity and to avoid introducing a new system during the busiest winter period for Adult Services. It was agreed to provide a written update to Scrutiny members outlining the revised timescales and progress of the project. The Portfolio Holder for a Caring Powys confirmed that he supported the cautious approach being taken and advised that data migration issues had also been experienced by other local authorities moving away from the system. Protecting data integrity and ensuring a smooth transition remained the priority. Members sought clarification regarding the reprofiling of capital funding allocated to closer-to-home accommodation projects. The original capital allocation had been intended to fund the purchase of three properties. The current proposal was to purchase one property initially and evaluate the model before proceeding further. As a result, approximately two-thirds of the budget would need to be reprofiled into the following financial year. It was anticipated that the reprofiling would be completed during Quarter 2. The Chair noted that, similar to the revenue monitoring report, the capital report did not show expected expenditure profiling throughout the year, making it difficult to assess whether spending was on track. Members suggested that future capital monitoring reports should include profiled expenditure information where practicable. The Committee supported this proposal as a recommendation Action Lead Officer Timescale Provide a written briefing to Scrutiny on the replacement of the WCCIS system, including progress, migration issues identified and revised implementation timescales. Nina Davies After the meeting Consider the Committee recommendation to include profiling of capital expenditure throughout the financial year within future capital monitoring reports. Mari Thomas / Finance Officers Future reporting cycle
The Committee made the following recommendation; 1 Future capital monitoring reports should include profiling of capital expenditure across the financial year, to enable members to assess whether expenditure is on track against expectations at each quarter.
Issues Raised by the Committee: Responses Received: It was noted that the report contained evidence of activity, such as training, meetings and engagement exercises, but there was limited evidence demonstrating whether these actions had improved outcomes and experiences for children and families. What outcome measures were being used to assess the impact of the improvement work. Officers acknowledged that future reports should place greater emphasis on impact and outcomes rather than activities completed. Members sought clarification on what qualitative research had been undertaken, who had participated, how information had been collected and analysed, and whether children, young people and families had contributed. Clarification was also requested on how findings from the research had informed the redesign of the Edge of Care service. It was agreed that a written response would be provided. Parental mental health was highlighted as a key factor contributing to children entering care. What additional mental health interventions or support had become available to families and how was the service ensuring that lack of mental health provision was not contributing to avoidable care entries. A detailed written response would be provided. The Portfolio Holder for Future Generations highlighted ongoing trauma-informed training in schools, support available through family centres, and work to increase awareness and understanding of mental health issues across services and communities. Clarification was requested regarding the status of Recommendation 5 (career development of social workers and non-social work practitioners) and Recommendation 12 (opportunities arising from the Coventry approach). Members asked what actions had been taken and whether the recommendations had been completed. Officers confirmed that work was ongoing, and it was agreed that a written response would be provided. Members questioned why one model had already been discounted when the options appraisal was not yet complete. Clarification was sought on the evidence used, the criteria for assessing options, and what safeguards would be implemented during forthcoming system changes to ensure safeguarding performance was maintained. Officers confirmed that work on the Front Door review was ongoing and that a full options appraisal and business case would be produced. Learning had been gathered from other authorities and accepted the need to clearly explain why options were accepted or rejected. The Portfolio Holder for Future Generations added that performance monitoring showed low levels of repeat contacts and indicated that the Front Door service was effectively directing enquiries to the appropriate services. Members noted that Recommendation 10 required feedback from children and families to be considered when reviewing transfer points within Children's Services. It was questioned how feedback had informed the decision to retain the existing structure. Clarification was also sought on how the success of the Edge of Care pilot would be measured and when Scrutiny would receive outcome data. It was agreed that future reports should provide stronger evidence of the voices of children and families. Keeping children safe was the primary objective and it was agreed to strengthen future reporting in this area. The Portfolio Holder for Future Generations explained that the review sought to minimise unnecessary transfers while ensuring children accessed the right service at the right time. It was questioned whether Family Group Conferencing had been ruled out because it was ineffective or simply because resources were unavailable. What evidence supported the conclusion that the current model should remain in place. A detailed written response would be provided and the information requested was available within service performance data and improvement work. The report stated the Special Guardianship Offer policy would be rectified within a month, Committee requested an update on its status. The policy had not yet been completed, assurance was given that active discussions were ongoing between Children's Services and Legal Services but a definitive timescale could not be provided at the meeting. Members requested an update on residential children's homes, including which homes were operational, occupancy levels, and timescales for opening further provision. Relevant performance information was available, and a confidential deep-dive session was suggested if Members wished to explore this issue further. Members requested data on the number of children placed out of county, the associated costs, and how many had plans to return closer to home. It was confirmed that the number of out-of-county placements was reducing and that performance reports contained information on placement costs and trends. Members asked for evidence showing whether fostering improvements had increased the number of in-house foster carers and reduced reliance on independent or out-of-county placements. Information regarding foster carer numbers, recruitment activity, increased applications, children brought back into county, efficiencies achieved and costs avoided in the Annual Transformation Report. Committee asked whether adopting a co-production approach, could strengthen future consultations by ensuring that children, parents and carers were fully involved in future consultation and decision-making processes. Officers accepted this feedback and agreed to strengthen future reporting accordingly. Members asked whether staff surveys had been undertaken in response to the review or as part of regular practice. Clarification was sought on survey response rates and whether staff suggestions had led to service improvements. Staff ideas and suggestions were considered and implemented where appropriate, helping improve morale and reduce sickness absence. Officers highlighted regular communication processes including staff forums, staff conferences, newsletters, engagement sessions and annual staff surveys. Members asked whether care-experienced young people had been given opportunities to provide feedback following the Corporate Parenting Pledge event and how their views would shape future work. The original event had generated significant momentum and engagement from young people. Officers confirmed that invitations had been issued for a follow-up event to review progress against the pledges made. The event would focus on sharing progress, gathering feedback from young people and agreeing future priorities. Clarification was sought on whether a reference in the report should relate to "Ask and Act" training. Officers explained that "Ask and Act" training focused on preventative intervention and may differ from the training referenced in the report. Action Lead Officer Timescale Provide a written response to the above Committee questions, relating to Recommendations 2, 5, 10, 12, 13, 16, 17 and 18.. Holly Gordon After the meeting
The Committee noted the Forward Work Programme.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
The minutes record no declarations of interest.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.