English|
In this section
|
11 June 2008: Trustees MinutesMinutes of the meeting of the Trustees of the Independent Living Fund (2006) held on Wednesday, 11 June 2008.
The meeting commenced at 10.35 am
In attendance: Gary Stephenson (Finance and Corporate Services The Chairman welcomed Jennifer Bullock and Eddie Januszczyk to the meeting. 1 Apologies None. 1.1 Conflicts of Interest and or Loyalty on Agenda Trustees were asked if they had identified any area on the agenda where there was an actual or potential perceived conflict of interest or loyalty. All Trustees confirmed that no issues had been identified.
The minutes of the meeting held on 14 May 2008, with a minor amendment to wording on page 6, were approved by the Trustees and signed by the Chairman at the end of the meeting. 3 Matters Arising 3.1 NI Funding Arrangements A letter had been received from DSD NI confirming DEL funding arrangements. 3.2 Trustees Indemnity Yogi Amin said that progress was being made and the target for DWP to provide a letter of comfort for Trustees was still scheduled for July. 3.3 Supporting People Monies The Chief Executive updated Trustees following the notification to Scottish LAs and that the misunderstanding on the position would be clarified. Further legal advice had been received regarding the English pathfinder sites which would now be considered. Trustees had been sent an e-mail on 10 June regarding issues relating to the longer term preferred approach; once Trustees comments had been received discussions would take place with DWP, DH and CLG. 3.4 User Satisfaction Survey The Chief Executive confirmed that the questionnaire had been E mailed to Trustees Outcome: Information 4 Chairman’s Issues The Chairman said that he had written a note on behalf of Trustees to all staff for their hard work and achievements over the last financial year. Outcome: Information 5 Outstanding Action Points Definition of administration The Chief Executive asked for clarification on the outstanding point regarding a policy to be drafted to cover the definition of administration. She explained that Trustees had agreed policies to support financial management of ILF monies and asked if Trustees required any further action on this point. Outcome: Decision - Trustees agreed this action point should be regarded as cleared. DWP ambit Mick Allen (DWP) confirmed that Lynne Bell was taking forward the DWP action point regarding a presentation on the DWP ambit/ILF remit. Trust Deed changes The Chief Executive commented that, following the meeting arranged on 20 May with DWP to take forward points on the Trust Deed, it had been proposed that a timetable would be prepared for this meeting. Norman Cockett (DWP) explained that there had been a change of lawyers who were now working through the proposed changes to the Trust Deed; however changes were not envisaged to take place until the autumn. The Chief Executive explained that this would impact on some of the policy decisions that Trustees had wanted to introduce in April, for example parenting and ILF had hoped for a Deed change before the autumn. Yogi Amin suggested that further discussions were needed with DWP and their lawyers to draw up a timetable. It was agreed to set up a meeting to take this forward so that a schedule for Trust Deed changes was available for the July meeting.
The Chairman asked DWP how they proposed to take forward the wider strategic discussion on the future of social care. Norman Cockett (DWP) said that he was happy to facilitate a discussion meeting and wanted Trustees ideas for their input to the ILF’s strategic direction. Nick Danagher said that a large part of the positioning debate was whether a local or national arrangement for making payments to disabled people was the better model and it would be useful to address this issue now. In answer to a question the Strategic Policy Director confirmed that the ILF had been invited to the DH green paper events on “Care Support and Independence”. He said that the draft ILF “ Refocus Initiative” discussion paper should be ready for the September meeting and would provide Trustees with relevant background. Outcome: Decision - Trustees agreed to hold a two day meeting in September – one for the strategic discussion and the other for the usual Trustees’ agenda. Outcome: DWP agreed to produce a draft outline for the September strategic discussion at the July Trustees’ meeting. 6 Finance 6.1 Grant In Aid and Benefit Forecast The Finance and Corporate Services Director explained that the number of applications received in May was still low; approximately half of the planned assumption. He said that there were two bank holidays in May and that June’s figures would give a better indication if application rates were recovering. He said that the Customer Services Team had indicated that the surge of applications received in March might contain a high number of applications not able to proceed as eligibility criteria were not met. Caseload analysis showed more cases outstanding with ILFAs and more offers awaiting user acceptance than normal but this was the consequence of the level of claims activity prior to April 2008. The Finance and Corporate Services Director explained that GB load growth was still a close fit with trend assumptions; however the payment growth had been adjusted to show a lower observed growth of 10p per week which was 20p per week previously. This would be discussed with DWP Finance in July. Northern Ireland load and payment trends had both been adjusted slightly to reflect latest actual data more accurately. The Finance and Corporate Services Director updated Trustees on forecast expenditure and explained that there was an uncommitted balance of £10.2m for 2008-09 GB based on the current trends and forecast. He explained that if this continued Trustees would have to make further decisions on budget management and a full report would be provided for the July meeting. The Chief Executive said that it was difficult to identify if the low application rate was due to the changes in Threshold Sum, the financial management policies put in place from April or a mixture of both. However statistics on all stages in the process would be provided for the July meeting. Outcome: Trustees requested a profile of applicants April to June 2008 compared to April to June 2007. The Chief Executive commented on tensions arising with applications from those receiving Youth Incapacity Benefit as they were not a clear priority group. The analysis for the July meeting would look at this implication together with the effects of the changes in priority groups for other groups. The Chief Executive said that Trustees should be aware of timeframes involved should they wish to make changes which might require Trust Deed or COG amendment. The Finance and Corporate Services Director said that there could be an opportunity to re-profile expenditure over three years; however this would need to be discussed with DWP in the autumn when DWP WWEG Finance have to make reports to HM Treasury on latest estimates against original budget forecasts. Norman Cockett (DWP) commented that the Minister had indicated that the number of ILF Users should be reasonably constant with priority given to those with the more costly care packages; any plans which would upwardly revise the overall user caseload would need agreement. The Finance and Corporate Services said that he would provide a range of profiles on case growth for the July meeting. The Chairman said that he would like to see all scenarios to enable Trustees to make informed decisions on financial management. 7 Strategy 7.1 Update on ‘Refocusing the ILF’ initiative The Strategic Policy Director gave an update on the progress made since the last meeting. He explained that the approach was to use PRINCE methodology and papers had been prepared for the first meeting of the Project Board consisting of the Chief Executive, Social Work Director and the Strategic Policy Director. A draft GANTT chart had been prepared showing tasks and timings which would be discussed by the Project Board at their first meeting planned this week. A proposal was made and agreed to amend item 55 on the GANTT chart. He said that recruitment was underway for the additional posts agreed at the last meeting and Trustees would receive regular update reports on the project. He explained that proposals to formulate the advisory panel had been taken on board by Peter Cooke and Nick Danagher and Trustees were invited to agree organisations they wished to be a part of the panel. Nick Danagher gave an overview of the latest draft proposal dated 10 June regarding the advisory panel explaining that it was proposed to leave open the leadership arrangements so that a Chair could be selected by the panel, and that the role of Trustees would act as a conduit between the panel, Trustees and project management board. He said that it was proposed that a panel was formulated first before a decision was made on the Chair, as the priority was to get members involved in the panel. He said he saw the Chair as facilitator role and the purpose of the panel was to provide a quality assurance process to the ILF activity. The panel might also assist with the equality impact assessments of the ILF refocus programme. He explained that the panel would not have executive or decision making powers; however it would need a degree of independence and a conduit through which it could voice views. Nick Danagher commented that potential members might be NCIL, Equality 2025, Shaping our lives, local organisations, organisations with a learning disability focus and SPAEN. It was agreed some further thought should be given as to whether any academic inclusion was appropriate. Discussion took place on meeting locations, compensation for loss of income and expenses and mechanisms for selection of users. Outcome: Chief Executive to circulate the advisory panel proposal dated 10 June by e-mail for Trustees’ comments. 7.2 Strategic Risk Review – Update June 08 The Finance and Corporate Services Director explained that the paper provided a summary of what Trustees discussed at the last meeting along with work carried out by the SMT. He explained that the summary was set out in table format showing a proposed summary risk description and a suggested level of concern. Trustees discussed the summary and made comments. Outcome: Finance and Corporate Services Director to provide a final version of the Strategic Risk Register for 2008-09 at the next Trustees’ meeting.
8.1 Discussion Paper on CRB Check Policy Proposals The Chief Executive explained that the paper provided proposals to help formulate policy and that a steer was needed from Trustees on certain issues. Trustees were asked to consider the following: 1 Whether they wished the policy to extend to those users who engaged on a self employed basis. Trustees discussed extending the policy to users who are engaged on a self employed basis and agreed that it was positive step forward in supporting our users and approved proposals. Outcome: Decision – CRB checks to be offered to those engaging on an employed and self employed basis. In answer to a question the Chief Executive explained that ILF users would need to use the services of an umbrella group to have a CRB check undertaken for a direct employee. A self-employed provider of assistance would need to register with an agency for the agency to facilitate the check. 2 Whether the costs of the policy introduction were acceptable Outcome: Decision - Trustees agreed the cost of implementing the policy. 3 The extra resource that might be required to operate the policy Outcome: Decision – Trustees agreed the extra cost of 1 AO should the Chief Executive consider the level of CRB activity warranted it. 8.2 Discussion Paper on Proposed Policy on Costs associated with Further or Higher Education The Chief Executive presented the paper explaining that it set out issues for consideration for a policy on costs associated with Further or Higher Education as Trustees had indicated that they wished to introduce this ILF Review recommendation. She explained that a COGA amendment would be needed to implement any policy. In answer to a question the Chief Executive said that the policy aim was to ensure that the children of disabled parents were not disadvantaged when accessing further education. Sue Winterburn commented on equality in the education system and said that there were already processes in place to equalise access and help low income families. Trustees discussed the proposals and agreed that it would be very difficult to formulate a policy in an equitable way. Outcome: Decision - Trustees decided not to pursue a policy to allow users a disregard for capital saved for further or higher education any further at this stage. 8.3 Maintaining LA Input The Chief Executive thanked all who attended the recent workshops on Maintaining LA Input for the positive and helpful discussion. She updated Trustees on the discussions in particular on issues surrounding the IB pilots and the flexibility of the Trust Deed. Outcome: Policy Proposals to be presented to Trustees at the July meeting 8.4 Draft Evaluation report on IB Pilots The Strategic Policy Director presented the draft to Trustees. He explained that the ILF had been a committed player in the IB pilots, and that while the Fund was able to make some limited changes, we had known that Trust Deed would restrict what options there were for quick changes. He said that the pilots have led us to conclude that we should seek to develop proposals, working with organisations of disabled people and LAs, which could be offered to DWP as sound proposals for reform of our powers to enable LAs to fund more flexibly. Mick Allen (DWP) said that a submission report was being prepared for the Minister but as yet no date had been set for formal cross Department Ministerial discussion on the IB pilots. The Chief Executive said that it had been confirmed with Chris Booth at a recent meeting that ILF would submit its contribution to the DWP report by the end of June. In answer to a question Norman Cockett (DWP) confirmed that the ILF could submit an additional separate short paper direct to the Minister on the IB pilots. The Chief Executive commented that the ILF’s inability to be more flexible was not understood from the outset and that more might have been done inter departmentally to make this clearer. Margaret McGlade said that the inflexibility of the ILF should not be seen as a criticism but as a positive to get assistance to help the ILF move forward. Nick Danagher commented on the implications of the Trust status saying that a different governance structure might provide more flexibility for the ILF to respond to the development of self-directed support. He said that the ILF had to focus on its positives of consistency and transparency and the ILF should draw on these positives to move forward in the future. Outcome: Information 9 Governance 9.1 Board Effectiveness The Chairman asked Trustees to ensure that the Board Evaluation questionnaires were completed and provided to the Chief Executive at the end of the meeting. Outcome: Decision- Trustees agreed no change to the list of current frequency of papers. 10 AOB 10.1 Date of Next Meeting The date of the next meeting will be Wednesday 9 July 2008. There being no further business the meeting ended at 13:15 hrs. |
 |
