Issue - items at meetings - Brighton and Hove Social Value Framework

Joint Report of the Acting Director of Public Health and Executive Director of Finance and Resources (copy attached)

12.1    The Committee considered a joint report of the Acting Director of Public Health and the Executive Director of Finance and Resources seeking the Committee’s endorsement for a new “Social Value Framework” (Appendix 1 to the report) for the city and a new Social Value Guide” for Commissioners, Procurement Teams and Providers (Appendix 2 to the report). It was noted that the report was also intended to provide an update on work carried out to achieve the recommendations from the scrutiny panel on Social Value which had been completed in January 2015.

12.2    The Social Value Guide for Commissioners, Procurement Teams and Providers would ensure that a practical toolkit was available to commissioners and procurement officers on how they should apply social value in the commissioning and procurement process including measuring and monitoring performance. The Framework and the Guide had been developed by a cross sector citywide steering group as part of a national action learning programme on embedding and increasing social value in health commissioning with the programme itself funded by the Department of Health and independently facilitated by the Institute for Voluntary Action (IVAR) and Social Enterprise UK.

12.3    The Community Engagement Coordinator, and the Category Manager, Corporate Procurement, detailed the work which had been carried out in concert with and with the support of other partners which had resulted in the Framework being put forward for approval by this Committee and to the forthcoming meeting of the Policy, Resources and Growth Committee for approval.

12.4    It was explained that the Social Value Scrutiny Panel had identified that in these times of financial constraints, Social Value needed to be viewed as a tool to facilitate discussion with other organisations in the city on how to provide the best services possible with enhanced benefits for individuals and communities locally. It had been clearly identified that business cases needed to be made and all had been strongly of the view that this did not conflict with social value. It was intended that the framework would provide a toolkit which would give a clear and easily understandable context going forward.

12.5    The Chair, Councillor Daniel, commended the report and the work undertaken place in order to bring it forward, stating that the contribution made by voluntary sector, health partners and others had been valuable in shaping the framework.

12.6    Councillor Simson commented that having sat on the original scrutiny panel she also welcomed the work which had been undertaken in preparing the framework and asked for clarification of some of the terminology used. Councillor Simson stated that the definition of the social framework and guide referred to in recommendation 3 on page 289 of the agenda was in line with that used by the scrutiny panel. This appeared to differ from the explanation used elsewhere in the report. Councillor Simson was also of the view that it was important for the council to use the framework as far as practicable as part of a broader approach when assessing how it provided and delivered its own services, not only in relation to procurement.

12.7    The Community Engagement Manager, responded that the terminology used was not contradictory as in some instances it would be used as part of the broader added value framework to include for example economic and environmental benefits, how it was used/applied could differ and could be complex to define. Examples were given to illustrate this point, for example in the case of volunteering in relating to mental health services different types of volunteering could result in response to differing identified needs, the framework would be used in order to stretch that process. It was further explained that this process was being applied to the council itself when services were being redesigned.

12.8    The Category Manager, Corporate Procurement, explained that in concert with the framework it had been recognised that it was important to look at what data was collected and what use that data was put to in order to ensure that structures and processes were streamlined.

12.9    Joanna Martindale, Hangleton and Knoll Project welcomed the report and the opportunity for the voluntary sector to be involved and to guide the process. It was important to note that long term aims could be achieved by short term funding. The work carried out by the University of Sussex was valuable. It was also important for like to be compared with like and for data and data sharing to be consolidated as within the community and voluntary sector different organisations could have different expectations.

12.10  Councillor Gibson welcomed the report and in particular the fact that the framework would also be used to inform assessment of what we “the council” did as an organisation and how we could do it better. He considered it would be beneficial for training to be provided for members in order that they had a good understanding of how this could work in practice. Councillor Gibson asked whether and to what extent this would come into play when contracts were awarded, for example given issues around supply of affordable housing in relation to low wages in the city, whether consideration could be given to ensuing that “living rent” could be applied to new development(s).

12.11  The Chief Executive, explained in response that whilst all elements were weighted and taken account of when decisions were taken in respect of planning or housing for example, factors such as the capital cost of a scheme and how that would be paid back had also to be considered. All those factors had to be balanced against one another when formulating recommendations and reaching decision(s).

12.11  Councillor Moonan noted Councillor Gibson’s point in respect of the desirability of providing further training for Members, stating that she was happy to bring that suggestion forward at the Member Development Working Group of which she was a member.

12.12  Councillor Penn referred to the examples that had been provided detailing the work carried out by other authorities, referring to the IT assessment which had taken place at the London Borough of Lambeth and asked whether similar work would be put into place in the city. It was explained that now the guidance was in place implementation and examples of best practice elsewhere could and would be looked at.

12.13  Councillor Littman stated that he was pleased that the framework had been brought forward considering that it would become increasingly important over time, asking whether this would be applied to services and goods the council sold, as well as when they were buying in. The Assistant Director, Property and Design explained that when bids were made this was taken into account and there was usually a quality/price split. Councillor Simson asked whether the percentage applied would be different for different contracts and it was confirmed that this was so.

12.14  In moving to the vote, the Chair, Councillor Daniel proposed an additional recommendation that any proposed exceptions be approved by officers following the recommendations of the Procurement Board. This was seconded by Councillor Simson. The proposed additional recommendation was put to the vote and members voted unanimously in support of it.

Recommendations for Neighbourhoods, Communities and Equalities Committee:

12.15  RESOLVED – That the Neighbourhoods and Communities Committee:

(1)Notes the work completed by the Communities, Equality and Third Sector Team and Procurement to progress the recommendations of the Social Value Scrutiny Panel report January 2015 (Appendix 3)

(2)endorses the Social Value Framework and recommends that the Policy, Resources and Growth Committee sign up to the Framework and Pledge on behalf of the city council;

(3)Endorses the Social Value Commissioner, Procurement and Providers Guide and instructs commissioners and procurement officers to use it with immediate effect; and

(4) That any exceptions to the agreed framework be approved by the Procurement Board.

Recommendations for Policy, Resources and Growth Committee:

(1)That the Policy, Resources and Growth Committee sign up to the Framework and Pledge on behalf of the city council; and

(2) That any exceptions to the agreed framework be approved by the officers following the recommendations of the Procurement Board.

            Note: Members voted unanimously that the recommendations including the additional one proposed by the Chair, Councillor Daniel and seconded by Councillor Simson be approved.