Building the local economyegenda.dumgal.gov.uk/aksdumgal/images/att31846.pdfEducation/Planning & Environment 18 Smarter Home to School Transport 280 280 280 Social Work 19 Block Contracts

Building the local economy

Dumfries and Galloway Council’s Labour SNP Administration

2014/15 Draft Budget

savings options

Sum

mar

y of

Sav

ings

Opt

ions

- C

ON

FID

ENTI

AL

Dire

ctor

ate

Tem

plat

e N

o.N

arra

tive

2014

/15

2015

/16

2016

/17

£000

's£0

00's

£000

's

Pla

nnin

g &

Env

ironm

ent

1E

nerg

y E

ffici

ency

Mea

sure

s26

7

614

614

Com

mun

ity &

Cus

tom

er S

ervi

ces

2C

omm

unity

Fac

ilitie

s R

evie

w83

83

83

Com

mun

ity &

Cus

tom

er S

ervi

ces

3M

anag

emen

t/Sta

ffing

Red

uctio

ns (a

nd a

ssoc

iate

d sa

ving

s) th

roug

h re

view

of S

ervi

ce

Act

iviti

es37

5

525

675

Chi

ef E

xecu

tive

Ser

vice

/Cor

pora

te

4E

ffici

ency

Pro

gram

mes

, Pro

cure

men

t, R

evie

w o

f Sup

plie

s &

Ser

vice

s17

5

325

325

Chi

ef E

xecu

tive

Ser

vice

/Cor

pora

te

5M

anag

emen

t/Sta

ffing

Red

uctio

ns (a

nd a

ssoc

iate

d sa

ving

s) th

roug

h re

view

of S

ervi

ce

Act

iviti

es35

0

350

350

Chi

ef E

xecu

tive

Ser

vice

/Cor

pora

te

6C

orpo

rate

Con

trol o

f Sta

ff C

osts

/Sin

gle

Sta

tus

Pha

se 2

200

200

200

Chi

ef E

xecu

tive

Ser

vice

/Cor

pora

te

7N

on-S

choo

ls P

rope

rty R

atio

nalis

atio

n37

5

625

625

Chi

ef E

xecu

tive

Ser

vice

/Cor

pora

te

8C

orpo

rate

Tra

vel S

avin

gs11

9

238

238

1,94

4

2,96

0

3,11

0

New

ly Id

entif

ied

Savi

ngs

Opt

ions

Edu

catio

n9

Add

ition

al S

uppo

rt fo

r Lea

rnin

g Te

achi

ng P

rovi

sion

117

200

200

Edu

catio

n10

Sec

onda

ry -

DS

M A

lloca

tion

(0.5

% R

educ

tion)

250

250

250

Edu

catio

n11

Prim

ary

- Res

erve

d pl

acem

ents

for p

oten

tial c

atch

men

t pup

ils61

105

105

Edu

catio

n12

Cen

tral M

anag

emen

t and

Sup

port

(12.

5% R

educ

tion)

313

313

313

Edu

catio

n13

Prim

ary

- N

on-S

taff

rela

ted

DS

M A

lloca

tion

(12.

5% R

educ

tion)

104

104

104

Edu

catio

n14

Prim

ary

- Red

uctio

n in

Cla

ss C

onta

ct T

ime

(RIC

CT)

13

0

222

222

Edu

catio

n15

Sec

onda

ry -

Offi

ce a

nd c

urric

ular

sup

port

staf

f20

0

238

238

Edu

catio

n16

Det

erm

ined

to S

ucce

ed

200

200

200

Edu

catio

n17

Prim

ary

& S

econ

dary

- P

roba

tione

r Tea

cher

s10

8

185

185

Edu

catio

n/P

lann

ing

& E

nviro

nmen

t18

Sm

arte

r Hom

e to

Sch

ool T

rans

port

280

280

280

Soc

ial W

ork

19B

lock

Con

tract

s C

omm

issi

onin

g15

0

150

150

Soc

ial W

ork

20H

igh

Cos

t Car

e P

acka

ge R

evie

w37

5

830

830

Soc

ial W

ork

21In

tens

ive

fost

erin

g30

0

300

300

Soc

ial W

ork

22S

taffi

ng -

Stru

ctur

al R

eorg

anis

atio

n20

0

200

200

Com

mun

ity &

Cus

tom

er S

ervi

ces

23Th

ird S

ecto

r Fun

ding

103

103

103

Com

mun

ity &

Cus

tom

er S

ervi

ces

24Li

brar

ies,

Cus

tom

er S

ervi

ce C

entre

s &

Reg

istra

tions

Inte

grat

ion

392

392

392

DG

Firs

t25

Sup

port

Ser

vice

s - F

unct

iona

l Rev

iew

151

202

202

Planning

& Enviro

nmen

t (Service Re

view

)26

Staff and

associated costs

389

389

389

Planning

& Enviro

nmen

t (Service Re

view

)27

Econ

omic Develop

men

t30

3030

Planning

& Enviro

nmen

t (Service Re

view

)28

Planning

& Regulatory

5555

55Planning

& Enviro

nmen

t (Service Re

view

)29

Commissions ‐ Groun

ds & Pub

lic Ope

n Space Mainten

ance

200

200

200

Planning

& Enviro

nmen

t (Service Re

view

)30

Commissions ‐ Fleet M

anagem

ent

3030

30Planning

& Enviro

nmen

t (Service Re

view

)31

Capitalisation of Surface Dressing Works

500

500

500

Com

mun

ity &

Cus

tom

er S

ervi

ces

(Ser

vice

Rev

iew

)32

Leisu

re & Spo

rt/Cultural Services ‐ M

axim

ise Reven

ue70

7070

Com

mun

ity &

Cus

tom

er S

ervi

ces

(Ser

vice

Rev

iew

)33

Leisu

re & Spo

rt ‐ Education & Com

mun

ity Spo

rts H

ubs

6316

116

14,77

1

5,70

9

5,70

9

TOTA

L Sa

ving

s O

ptio

ns

6,71

5

8,66

9

8,81

9

TOTA

L Pr

evio

usly

Indi

cate

d Sa

ving

s O

ptio

ns

(cum

ulat

ive)

Prev

ious

ly In

dica

ted

Savi

ngs

Opt

ions

01

Budget Development Process 2013/14 -2015/16 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Energy Efficiency Measures

Directorate Planning and Environment Services

Service Area & ABB Link All Council Services

Narrative Description of Savings Option

The development of the Council’s renewable energy portfolio has been agreed by Members through the report Investment in Renewable Technologies including Solar Photovoltaic, Biomass, Wind Turbines and Micro-Hydro approved by the Policy and Resources Committee on 17 January 2012. The first phase of a programme to install Solar PV panels on a range of Council buildings has been completed with 966 Kwp of panels installed on 19 Council buildings by August 2012. Individual business cases have been developed for each technology and installation which also identifies a saving amount that can be annually accrued taking account of Feed-In Tariff (FIT)/Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) and fuel cost savings net of management and maintenance and borrowing costs. More recently, the Policy and Resources Committee received a further report on Wind Energy Generation for Street Lighting. The recommendations to that report included securing technical support to explore in detail investment in wind turbine(s).All of the options around renewable energy installations are ongoing developments of programmes started previously. The programme would explore a range of renewable technologies including solar PV, biomass heating and hydro. The exact proposals will be developed on a site by site basis and details of any installation proposed taken forward for Member approval subject to their ability meet business case requirements. As a result, anticipated savings are very much based on cost and income estimates rather than actual cost post construction. However, the estimated savings are considered to be prudent.

Savings/Income Generation Option Amounts 2014/15: £267,000 2015/16: £614,000 2016/17: £614,000

Details on the Calculation of Savings Option Amounts

Summary of savings amounts:- 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Solar PV Panels £32k £32k £32k Wind Turbine £136k £272k £272k Biomass £77k £154k £154k Hydro £22k £156k £156k Total £267k £614k £614k

01

New Solar PV Panels Whilst the feed in tariff (FIT) rates have reduced for solar PV the cost of the installations have also dropped by a similar amount. The resultant return on investment will remain in the region of 5% per annum and an investment of around £600k should yield the anticipated £32k/annum after loan and maintenance costs. That would equate to 15 installations averaging 33kwp Wind Wind power saving is based on an example of 18 x 20kw turbines on a range of sites with allowance for operation and management costs with half installed 2014/15 and balance 2015/16 (includes loan costs and maintenance allowance and shows 14% return on investment (ROI)). The actual size and number of turbines will inevitably vary from this subject to the results of the ongoing consultancy study of the wind potential of our land. As details emerge a detailed programme with anticipated outputs will be presented. It is anticipated that the initial wind turbine proposals will be available for the end of October 2013. Biomass Biomass saving is based on a notional 10 installations of 175kw biomass boilers over each of the two years 2014/15 and 2015/16, with an allowance of 30% of Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) payments to cover external operation and maintenance contract costs (includes loan costs and shows 7% ROI). The cost of investment would be in the order of £1.5 million but actual individual site cost will be very site specific. Hydro Hydro saving is based on one installation of 50kw at Mill on the Fleet securing FIT payments and electricity savings in 2014/15 and one of 250kw on the Nith in 2015/16 (includes loan costs and maintenance allowance with 6-10% ROI respectively). Income in this respect will be a combination of building power savings, FIT income and export tariff payments. The outline budget estimate costs could be in the region of £1.8 million for the two sites but particularly in respect of Mill on the Fleet would be subject to a formal output/design assessment by technical specialists. Further savings for 2014/15 going forward are based on a range of technology installations including wind, biomass and hydro. However, these figures will be subject to refinement as the detailed development and deployment opportunities for each technology is assessed accurately and business cases confirmed. It is considered that the estimated further savings are prudent estimates at this stage but will obviously be subject to further review.The range of potential buildings with potential for investment in renewables suggests that where problems are identified at an early stage, suitable alternatives will be readily available to ensure that installation targets can be met.

Details on Staffing Implications and how this will be managed

The management of all projects will be led by the Sustainable Development Team within PES as part of their current work programme and as such there should be no staffing implications regarding the commissioning of these projects.

Issues/Concerns Regarding Deliverability of Indicated Savings

The projected savings may vary dependent on weather conditions year on year but are anticipated to be a prudent estimate and as such reliable for future projections. The level of savings available from future measures will obviously be dependent on Member approval of further capital expenditure/investment on a ‘spend to save’ basis.

01

Impact Assessment Potential Effect Effect on Service User 1

No impact anticipated

Effect on Staff 1

No impact anticipated.

Effect on Other Council Services 1

The measures proposed will support all services to meet their carbon emission reduction targets

Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1

Will help to reduce energy cost in schools and through this help to encourage young people in an understanding of climate change issues

Council Priority 2 – Preparing our Young People for Adulthood and Employment 1

No impact anticipated.

Council Priority 3 – Care for our Older and Vulnerable People 1


Council Priority 4 – Support and Stimulate our Local Economy 1

The initial phase of works went to a local company through a tender process and as such has helped support a number of local businesses. It is anticipated that this will continue in the future.

Council Priority 5 – Maintain the safety and security of our region (including social sustainability) 1


Council Priority 6 – Protect and Sustain the Environment 1

The projects will help our Council to reduce it energy costs and carbon emissions and help deliver targets in the Carbon Management Plan.

Effect on ability to attract External Funding 1

The measures attract Feed in Tariff income which provides the foundation to the business cases.

Total Potential Effect 10

The projects on balance provide a positive impact overall in a cost and leadership basis.

Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts

The delivery of these projects involves minimal negative impact. The risks to delivery are: not securing further investment resources, appropriate sites and planning permissions for wind and hydro power.

02 Budget Development Process 2014/15 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Community Facilities Review

Directorate Community & Customer Services

Service Area & ABB Link Community Facilities/Leisure & Sport


Community facilities are made up of town halls, village halls and community centres which provide space for groups of individuals and community groups to meet and undertake group activities. These opportunities can be provided through the facilities available in other council buildings such as local schools out with school hours. Many of the council’s community facilities are run by community based management committees. The arrangements under which these management committees operate are historical and vary widely across the region. The basis of the community facilities review is to reduce the cost of community facilities to the Council by transferring the responsibility for managing a facility to a local management committee facility under a standardised management agreement. The standardised management agreement means that the management committee would be responsible for the running of the facility including lets, collection of income, cleaning, utilities and the day to day maintenance and repair of the interior of the buildings. The Council’s sole liability would be for ‘wind and watertight’, electrical/central heating repairs and for health and safety related maintenance. The Council would retain a proportion of the revenue budget for each facility to cover the Council’s liabilities for maintenance. This ‘management agreement’ arrangement differs from a long lease (usually 25 years) where the community organisation has responsibility for meeting the full running costs of the building. The standardised management agreement is set up as a vehicle to allow management committees to become sustainable over two or three years with a view to purchasing the property through the Councils Asset Transfer Policy. In 2013/14, the Council agreed savings of £200k. This is being delivered through staff savings and through management agreement or closure of the following facilities:-

• Drummore Village Hall • Stoneykirk Village Hall • Whauphill Village Hall • Sorbie Village Hall • Newton Stewart Community Centre • Waverley Hall, Creetown • Kirkcudbright Community Centre • Glenkens Community Centre, Dalry • Stakeford Community Centre, Dumfries • Noblehill Community Centre, Dumfries • Hutton Hall, Dumfries • Johnstone Hall, Annandale North • Lockerbie youth Centre • Annan Community Centre

Delays have been experienced during 2013/2014 due to the very short lead in time to this exercise which has included the setting up and standardising of the management

02 agreement/service level agreement, capacity building with communities, staffing implications and Human Resources policies and timelines which have had to be adhered to. Consultation with other directorates within the Council in particular Education and DG First has been paramount during 2013/2014 to ensure that joint decisions are being made and associated impacts being managed. This partnership working approach will continue throughout the 2014-2015 process. Discussions are also on-going with the Estates Management team and the legal team to ensure the title deeds of properties and to determine whether the transfer from long term leases onto the standardised management agreement is possible. The second phase of the Community Facilities review for 2014/15 shows potential further one year’s savings. This proposal can deliver £83k savings in 2014/2015. Detailed information regarding each facility is provided in Appendix 1 and a breakdown of individual budgets for each facility is provided in Appendix 2.


The above amounts are over and above those agreed for 2013/14 and are based on the indicative levels detailed in the 2013/14 saving template with some amendment.

Details on the Calculation of Savings

The total current community facilities budget for 2013/14 is £973k (ABB analysis 2013/14). Budget against the listed community facilities not including repairs, maintenance and health and safety equates to £507k. The calculation for the potential savings for 2014/2015 is £83k and is based on the Council’s agreement to proceed as noted in Appendix 1. A breakdown of the specific costs associated with each property can be noted in Appendix 2.


Where a community takes over a community facility through a management agreement, there may be an impact to cleaning staff (CCS and DG First). Normal course and early retirements, the deletion of vacant posts and redeployment may present opportunities to manage facilities differently. In some cases, employment contracts may transfer from the Council to a management committee.

02 Issues/Concerns Regarding Deliverability of Indicated Savings

It is anticipated that the communities who use the facilities listed in Appendix 1 have the interest and capacity, with support from CCS staff, to enter into a management agreement. However, there can be significant lead in times to engage with groups and bring groups to a point where they will sign the management agreements. An early decision would therefore maximise the savings achievable within 2014/15. The rationalisation of community facilities would be managed as a change programme with departmental resources applied for co-ordination including establishing a programme plan/ milestones, alterations to buildings, service delivery issues, HR issues, staff and trade union communications and community and customer engagement.

Impact Assessment Potential Effect Effect on Service User 1 Where a facility transfers to a management committee then there is likely to little or no impact to the service users as the facility will remain open. There is potential benefit to private/3rd Sector facilities in increased usage and income. Effect on Staff 1

Effects anticipated to be minimal

Effect on Other Council Services 1 May have some impact on DGFirst income where they no longer provide cleaning services to a property. However, financial amounts are low. Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1

None anticipated

Council Priority 2 – Preparing our Young People for Adulthood and Employment

1

None anticipated Council Priority 3 – Care for our Older and Vulnerable People 1 None anticipated Council Priority 4 – Support and Stimulate our Local Economy 1

None anticipated

Council Priority 5 – Maintain the safety and security of our region (including social sustainability)

1

None anticipated Council Priority 6 – Protect and Sustain the Environment 1

None anticipated


No negative effect. Where community groups take on community facilities through a management agreement or asset transfer, there is considerable potential for additional external funding to be attracted to Dumfries and Galloway.


02


Risk that communities are unable or unwilling to enter into a management agreement resulting in no saving for that facility Treat

1. Early and extensive community engagement 2. Communications plan to ensure communities are well aware of proposals 3. Marketing of benefits to users by providing higher quality venues for community use

02

2014

/201

5 –

Prop

ertie

s w

here

neg

otia

tions

for a

sset

tran

sfer

or m

anag

emen

t agr

eem

ent a

re u

nder

way

or p

oten

tial f

or m

anag

emen

t agr

eem

ent i

s st

rong

. The

se

savi

ngs

are

real

istic

to a

chie

ve in

201

4/15

. If c

omm

uniti

es a

re u

nabl

e or

unw

illing

to e

nter

into

a m

anag

emen

t agr

eem

ent t

his

will

resu

lt in

no

savi

ng b

eing

mad

e fo

r tha

t fac

ility.

The

re m

ay b

e a

requ

irem

ent f

or s

mal

l-sca

le c

apita

l inv

estm

ent t

o fu

nd a

ny n

eces

sary

wor

ks p

rior t

o co

mm

unity

faci

litie

s be

ing

trans

ferr

ed to

a

com

mun

ity.

Faci

lity

W

ard

Net

B

udge

t sa

ving

Rec

omm

enda

tion

Staf

fing

Impl

icat

ions

(C

CS

& D

G

Firs

t)

Publ

ic

Toile

t C

omm

ents

Lang

holm

M

issi

on H

all

Anna

ndal

e E

ast

and

Eskd

ale

£27,

502

Ret

urn

to o

wne

r to

leas

e di

rect

ly to

m

anag

emen

t co

mm

ittee

use

r gr

oup

CC

S C

aret

aker

D

G F

irst

Cle

aner

No

The

leas

e ex

pire

d in

31

Dec

embe

r 201

1. N

o no

tice

was

ser

ved

by th

e C

ounc

il or

the

Land

lord

–

ther

efor

e th

e le

ase

is c

ontin

uing

on

“taci

t rel

ocat

ion”

–

that

is o

n a

year

to y

ear b

asis

on

the

sam

e te

rms

as a

t the

exp

iry, u

ntil

prop

er n

otic

e is

ser

ved.

W

ork

is u

nder

way

to d

iscu

ss w

ith th

e ow

ner (

Chu

rch

of S

cotla

nd) a

nd th

e m

anag

emen

t com

mitt

ee.

Ec

clef

echa

n H

all

Anna

ndal

e E

ast

and

Eskd

ale

£7,4

38

Man

agem

ent

agre

emen

t D

G F

irst

Cle

aner

N

o Th

ere

is a

Day

Cen

tre, C

risis

Cen

tre a

nd te

mpo

rary

po

st o

ffice

with

in th

e bu

ildin

g. If

the

man

agem

ent

com

mitt

ee a

gree

d th

en a

ll se

rvic

es c

ould

con

tinue

. N

o di

scus

sion

s ha

ve c

omm

ence

d to

dat

e.

C

anon

bie

Hal

l (B

owho

m)

Anna

ndal

e E

ast

and

Eskd

ale

£0

Man

agem

ent

agre

emen

t N

o N

o Th

ere

has

been

rece

nt E

U c

apita

l inv

estm

ent

ther

efor

e re

stric

tions

may

app

ly.

No

disc

ussi

ons

have

com

men

ced

to d

ate.

Nel

son

Hou

se

Anna

ndal

e S

outh

£3

,562

M

anag

emen

t ag

reem

ent

No

No

Ther

e is

a D

ay C

entre

, pla

y ca

re, l

unch

clu

b an

d ev

enin

g ac

tiviti

es. I

f the

man

agem

ent c

omm

ittee

ag

reed

then

all

serv

ices

cou

ld c

ontin

ue.

No

disc

ussi

ons

have

com

men

ced

to d

ate.

Sanq

uhar

CC

M

id a

nd U

pper

N

ithsd

ale

£12,

239

Man

agem

ent

agre

emen

t D

G F

irst

Cle

aner

N

o C

CS

staf

f bas

e, p

oten

tial m

ove

to H

illvi

ew L

eisu

re

Cen

tre. L

imite

d or

no

alte

rnat

e pr

ovis

ion

avai

labl

e.

02

N

o di

scus

sion

s ha

ve c

omm

ence

d ye

t. Fa

cilit

y

War

d B

udge

t sa

ving

£0

00’s

Rec

omm

enda

tion

Staf

fing

Impl

icat

ions

(C

CS

& D

G

Firs

t)

Publ

ic

Toile

t C

omm

ents

Thor

nhill

CC

M

id a

nd U

pper

N

ithsd

ale

£11,

769

Man

agem

ent

agre

emen

t D

G F

irst

Cle

aner

N

o W

ell u

tilis

ed fa

cilit

y.

No

disc

ussi

ons

have

com

men

ced

yet.

Gle

nloc

har C

C

Dee

£3

,448

M

anag

emen

t ag

reem

ent

No

No

This

man

agem

ent c

omm

ittee

are

kee

n to

take

ove

r th

e ru

nnin

g of

the

build

ing

with

a v

iew

to a

n as

set

trans

fer.

Ther

e is

a d

ay c

entre

whi

ch c

ould

con

tinue

to

ope

rate

. D

iscu

ssio

ns u

nder

way

. N

ew G

allo

way

To

wn

Hal

l C

astle

Dou

glas

and

G

lenk

ens

£1,9

99

Man

agem

ent

agre

emen

t C

CS

staf

f m

embe

r N

o Th

is m

anag

emen

t com

mitt

ee a

re k

een

to ta

ke o

ver

the

runn

ing

of th

e bu

ildin

g w

ith a

vie

w to

a p

ossi

ble

asse

t tra

nsfe

r.

Dis

cuss

ions

und

erw

ay.

New

Luc

e H

all

Wig

tow

n W

est

£12,

425

Man

agem

ent

agre

emen

t N

o Ye

s Th

is m

anag

emen

t com

mitt

ee a

re d

edic

ated

to

runn

ing

this

faci

lity,

how

ever

may

take

tim

e an

d co

mm

itmen

t fro

m th

e C

ounc

il in

ord

er to

cap

acity

bu

ild a

nd e

nabl

e th

em to

bec

ome

sust

aina

ble

and

to

deve

lop

reve

nue

to m

eet t

he c

osts

of r

unni

ng th

e fa

cilit

y.

No

disc

ussi

ons

have

com

men

ced

yet.

Port

patr

ick

Hal

l St

ranr

aer a

nd N

orth

R

hins

£3

,044

As

set t

rans

fer

CC

S H

all

Keep

er

No

This

com

mun

ity a

re v

ery

activ

e an

d ha

ve

appr

oach

ed th

e C

ounc

il to

take

this

faci

lity

on

thro

ugh

an a

sset

tran

sfer

for t

he b

enef

it of

the

loca

l co

mm

unity

. No

deci

sion

has

bee

n m

ade

with

rega

rds

to th

e ha

ll ke

eper

. D

iscu

ssio

ns u

nder

way

. TO

TAL

£8

3,42

6

02

App

endi

x 2

Com

mun

ity F

acili

ties

Bud

gets

201

4/20

15 –

The

Mai

nten

ance

and

Hea

lth a

nd S

afet

y el

emen

ts o

f rev

enue

bud

get h

ave

been

reta

ined

for e

ach

faci

lity

to c

over

th

e C

ounc

il’s li

abilit

ies

for ‘

win

d an

d w

ater

tight

’, el

ectri

cal/c

entra

l hea

ting

repa

irs a

nd fo

r hea

lth a

nd s

afet

y re

late

d m

aint

enan

ce.

Faci

lity

W

ard

CC

S St

affin

g C

osts

D

G F

irst

Staf

fing

Cos

ts

Rat

es,

Util

ities

, In

sura

nce

Cle

anin

g M

ater

ials

&

Was

te

Supp

lies,

Se

rvic

es

and

Adm

in

**

Inco

me

Tota

l Net

bu

dget

Le

ts/F

ees

Lang

holm

Mis

sion

H

all

Anna

ndal

e E

ast a

nd

Eskd

ale

£9, 5

47

£12,

702

£6,0

32

£909

£0

-£

1,68

8 £2

7,50

2

Eccl

efec

han

Hal

l An

nand

ale

Eas

t and

Es

kdal

e £0

£2

,853

£4

,373

£8

17

£0

-£60

5 £7

,438

Can

onbi

e H

all

(Bow

hom

) An

nand

ale

Eas

t and

Es

kdal

e £0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

Nel

son

Hou

se

Anna

ndal

e S

outh

£0

£0

£3,9

35

£0

£0

-£37

3 £3

562

Sanq

uhar

CC

M

id a

nd U

pper

N

ithsd

ale

£0

£7,3

59

£4,9

35

£104

7 £0

-£

1,10

2 £1

2,23

9

Thor

nhill

CC

M

id a

nd U

pper

N

ithsd

ale

£0

£5,1

06

£6,4

16

£744

£0

-£

497

£11,

769

Gle

nloc

har C

C

Dee

£0

£0

£4,2

76

£186

£0

-£

1,01

4 £3

,448

New

Gal

low

ay

Tow

n H

all

Cas

tle D

ougl

as a

nd

Gle

nken

s £2

,429

£0

£2

,095

£0

£5

76

-£3,

101

£1,9

99

New

Luc

e H

all

Wig

tow

n W

est

£1

,832

£0

£9

,912

£6

81

£0

£0

£12,

425

Port

patr

ick

Hal

l St

ranr

aer a

nd N

orth

R

hins

£3

,173

£0

£2

,602

£3

93

£0

-£3,

124

£3,0

44

TOTA

L

£16,

981

£28,

020

£44,

576

£4,7

77

£576

-£

11,5

04

£83,

426

**S

uppl

ies,

Ser

vice

s an

d A

dmin

– C

osts

allo

cate

d ag

ains

t thi

s he

adin

g ar

e sp

ecifi

cally

for f

urni

ture

exp

endi

ture

.

02

The

follo

win

g is

a b

reak

dow

n of

Rat

es a

nd U

tiliti

es fo

r eac

h fa

cilit

y:

Fa

cilit

y

War

d N

on D

omes

tic

Wat

er &

Se

wag

e C

harg

es

Rat

es –

M

eter

ed

Wat

er

Ener

gy -

Elec

tric

ity

Ener

gy –

Fu

el O

il En

ergy

- G

as

Rat

es,

Util

ities

, In

sura

nce

Tota

ls

Lang

holm

Mis

sion

H

all

Anna

ndal

e E

ast a

nd

Eskd

ale

£0

£1,8

41

£2,7

25

£0

£1,4

66

£6,0

32

Eccl

efec

han

Hal

l An

nand

ale

Eas

t and

Es

kdal

e £0

£5

41

£3,4

74

£0

£358

£4

,373

Can

onbi

e H

all

(Bow

hom

) An

nand

ale

Eas

t and

Es

kdal

e £0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

Nel

son

Hou

se

Anna

ndal

e S

outh

£0

£0

£1,3

63

£0

£2,5

72

£3,9

35

Sanq

uhar

CC

M

id a

nd U

pper

N

ithsd

ale

£0

£589

£1

,363

£0

£2

,983

£4

,935

Thor

nhill

CC

M

id a

nd U

pper

N

ithsd

ale

£0

£0

£4,3

76

£2,0

40

£0

£6,4

16

Gle

nloc

har C

C

Dee

£0

£832

£3

,444

£0

£0

£4

,276

New

Gal

low

ay T

own

Hal

l C

astle

Dou

glas

and

G

lenk

ens

£0

£578

£4

06

£1,1

11

£0

£2,0

95

New

Luc

e H

all

Wig

tow

n W

est

£0

£1

82

£9,7

30

£0

£0

£9,9

12

Port

patr

ick

Hal

l St

ranr

aer a

nd N

orth

R

hins

£7

02

£0

£1,9

00

£0

£0

£2,6

02

TOTA

L

£702

£4

,563

£2

8,78

1 £3

,151

£7

379

£44,

576

03

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options

Savings Option Management/Staffing Reductions (and associated savings) through review of Service Activities


Service Area & ABB Link Whole Service in particular Directorate, Area Framework, Strategic Improvement and Engagement, Strategic Planning and Resource Planning


CCS has achieved considerable efficiency savings over the past three years through streamlining management and through service integration/ staff reductions. Whilst it is not achievable to continue to make efficiency savings at the same rate, there is scope to achieve further year on year efficiency savings at a lesser rate. These savings would fall into the following areas: • Further streamlining of management - through fine-tuning of CCS management structure • Other staffing efficiencies as opportunities associated with vacancy management • Opportunities to restructure identified in consequence of other savings measures (these

are expected to have knock-on effects allowing further efficiencies to be identified such as reducing management or support requirements)


The above amounts are over and above those agreed for 2013/14 and include indicative the indicative savings detailed in the 2013/14 saving template.


The total controllable budget for CCS Directorate, Area Framework, Strategic Improvement and Engagement/ Strategic Planning and Resource Planning in 2013/14 is £2.063m (ABB analysis 2013/14). This does not include supplies and services, which are subject to corporate efficiencies in relation to procurement, or payments to other bodies which is subject to a separate template. Potential savings for each year (figures are minimum amounts and may be exceeded).

Source 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 Total £375,000 £525,000 £675,000

Potentially over the 3 years: Management: 6-8 FTE’s saving around £360k Staffing: 8-10 FTE’s saving around £190k

03


These reductions will be achieved through normal course and early retirements, deletion of vacant posts and redeployment. Increasingly, reduced staffing levels, and the resultant re-allocation of work, will require teams to be re-structured and develop new ways of working.


No issues/ concerns. Services can be sustained and risks managed with reduced staffing levels.

03


Savings will be achieved through integration and other efficiencies to minimise the impact to service users

Effect on Staff 3

Staff reductions. Redeployment is likely to mean change in job location for some staff. Increasing workloads will be carefully managed to ensure the impacts of this, and change in general, are monitored and controlled. Change and restructure will also provide development opportunities for some staff, although the challenges remain.


None


None


1

None


None


None


1

None


None


None


Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts Treat: • Staff communication • Review of work priorities • Quality of direct management • Staff training and development

04

Budget Development Process 2014/15 - 2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Efficiency Programs, Procurement, Review of Supplies &

Services Directorate Chief Executive Service/Corporate

Service Area & ABB Li k

All Services Narrative Description of Savings Option

Opportunities for cost savings are being reviewed by the Council Procurement Team by analysing annual spend data within our Council and comparing with the public sector across Scotland. This will identify areas where Procurement efforts should be concentrated and will be progressed with services. Rigorous monitoring and scrutiny of Council spend will take place across all services. Ongoing savings can be achieved by the following:

• Regular reviews of detailed spend information with senior managers • Procurement officer dedicated to departments • Implementing contract and supplier management Council wide ( better contract

management should lead to contracts being delivered for the procured sums without significant extra payments)

• Monitoring predicted contract spend against actual ( this will identify increases in amounts purchased as well as additional services/specification being added to competitively tendered contracts )

• Considering options available for in-house delivery of services or external provision • Reviewing specifications for services to ensure only purchasing what is required,

and reduce service costs paid to external organisations • Identifying services purchased which are available elsewhere or are already funded

by other parts of public sector • Closer working with Finance officers to identify and realise benefits • Reducing unnecessary external spend • Spending effectively by tendering where appropriate • Embedding e-procurement in all departments • Collaboration with partner organisations

Savings will be delivered by continued use of the measures introduced in 13/14 and by adopting additional points in this paper. For this and future years, clear departmental procurement targets will be set by reference to controllable procurement budgets ( not total departmental budgets) and based on analysis of possibilities for savings based on previous procurement activity, procurement spend and areas ready for competitive tendering and/or specification redesign. Please note that significant procurement resource is deployed on capital projects, from which savings also result.

Savings/Income Generation Option Amounts 2014/15: 175,000 2015/16: 325,000 2016/17: 325,000

04


The procurement team have recently commenced an exercise looking at detailed spend information by service which will identify areas where contracts need to be established and inform decisions on priority areas where savings are deemed possible. It is anticipated that a budget saving will be achievable by using this methodology to identify opportunities for competition and reduction in spend on goods and services


None


Savings will be deliverable but require 100% buy in from stakeholders/departments. Some savings will be easy to achieve – which are in the category of “don’t buy”;” tender and get a cheaper price for same or similar goods/service”; review specification of goods and services that are purely for internal use by Council staff and services. As time goes by, there will be more difficult issues to address that will require Member discussion and approval. For example where the procurement relates to the purchase of service provision for the public from external organisations, and specifications need to be changed and contract sums reduced to achieve savings. Similarly when we stop purchasing a service from an organisation because other parts of the public sector are already doing so there will undoubtedly be negative publicity to deal with. Accordingly, actions require to be based on sound evidence and we need to be consistent; reports concerning procurement savings in this category will be brought forward to Members.


Year 1 savings are not expected to impact on service users.

Effect on Staff 1

None


None


None


None


None

04


None


None Council Priority 6 – Protect and Sustain the Environment 1 None Effect on ability to attract External Funding 1 None Total Potential Effect Range 10 to 13

Impacts for most procurements will be neutral.


Risks are minimal. Negative impacts will be reduced through communication and consultation with providers and elected Members.

05

Budget Development Process 2014/15 - 2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options

Savings Option Management and Staffing Reductions (and associated savings) through Review of Service Activities

Directorate Chief Executive Service

Service Area & ABB Link Across All Areas Chief Executive Service


During 2011/12 the Chief Executive Service carried out a refocusing review to ensure that CES could demonstrate value for money in the professional and support services provided and secure continuous improvement. The aim of the review was to allow CES to build capacity and capability across the service to better support Members and Other Departments in the delivery of the Council’s priorities. As part of the review initial savings of £625k were delivered within 2012/13, with a further £550k agreed as part of the 2013/14 Budget Development Process. Significant progress has already been made in relation to the delivery of these savings and it is anticipated that further savings of £350k in 2014/15 will be able to be delivered through challenging existing spending levels and a range of additional approaches including new ways of working, joint working, service re-configuration, structural change and opportunities for improved business processes and efficiencies, through better use of IT. It is anticipated this saving will be achieved through the workforce strategy utilising the ERVS scheme, vacancy management and redeployment.

Savings/Income Generation Option Amounts 2014/15 £ 350,000 2015/16 £ 350,000 2016/17 £ 350,000


The net controllable budget of the CES for 2013/14 is £19.4 Million. The savings target in 2014/15 represents 1.8% of the overall budget. As a significant part of the savings will be realised from efficiencies and business process improvements, savings are most likely to be realised from staff reductions. The staff costs in the service budget for 2013/14 are £13.23 Million, with savings representing a reduction in staff costs of a further 2.6% based on current budgets, bringing the total reduction in staff costs since 2011/12 to £2.325 Million or 17.56 % of current staff costs.


Within the principles of the workforce strategy we are supporting job enrichment and opportunities for career development through improved use of technology and business processes as part of the refocusing. There is regular discussion with joint trades unions on CES refocusing and ongoing staff engagement through meetings and dissemination of information and briefings.

05


The CES has demonstrated in the last two years that this approach delivers the required savings and has a positive impact on working arrangements, with no impact on frontline service delivery. All reductions have been identified through the refocusing review and have been based on individual business cases considered by the Pensions Panel. There is no anticipated impact on other Services.


None anticipated.

Effect on Staff 2 Staff are directly involved in the development of savings and alongside this there are two communication arrangements with staff. These ensure any potential issues that may arise are considered with appropriate solutions put in place. Staff roles will be subject to change but this will be progressed positively with staff engagement in the change being a key part of the process. Effect on Other Council Services 2 While a reduction in resources could have an initial impact on support to Services, the end outcome will be to ensure that the CES is able to better support Members and Other Services, within the context of reduced overall funding for Council services. The main impact on Services will be the need for them to take greater responsibility for the operational management of activities such as Risk Management, Business Continuity and Data Protection.

Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1 n/a Council Priority 2 – Preparing our Young People for Adulthood and Employment 1

n/a Council Priority 3 – Care for our Older and Vulnerable People 1 n/a Council Priority 4 – Support and Stimulate our Local Economy 1 n/a Council Priority 5 – Maintain the safety and security of our region (including social sustainability) 1

n/a Council Priority 6 – Protect and Sustain the Environment 1 n/a Effect on ability to attract External Funding 1 None Anticipated Total Potential Effect 12 Impact Assessment complete – no negative or positive impacts identified. Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts No material negative impacts anticipated.

06

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Corporate Control of Staff Costs/Single Status Phase 2

Directorate Chief Executive Service

Service Area & ABB Link Staff Costs Across the Council


A range of opportunities are currently being reviewed to reduce the Council’s staff costs including:-. Changes to Terms and Conditions of Service – An Equality Impact Assessment of terms and Conditions has been undertaken and work is underway to review the outcome of that process. The review process has identified savings through the consistent application of the Collective Agreement across the various staff groups. It is anticipated that these will be around £115k. Going forward the outcomes of this review will be progressed in consultation with the Joint Trade Unions. The Cost of Higher Paid Duties/Acting Up Supplements – Approximately £340k within the 2012 calendar year was applied to individual employee salaries in the form of Higher Paid Duties/Acting Up Supplements. Although reductions in the level of HPD’s applied across the Council has been reduced over the last few years, it is projected that further reductions in the region of 10 % per annum will be achieved. Overtime Costs – During the 2012 calendar year the Council currently incurred £1.224 Million on overtime at time and half or Double Time (i.e. excluding plain rate). Although it is important to recognise that much of this overtime is unbudgeted (eg. to cover other vacancies etc) a reduction of 5% in overtime costs is considered achievable and will be subject to further review with the relevant Services. In addition savings are being sought though Maximising Attendance. It is important to recognise that these amounts are high level estimates at this stage and that to some extent these savings will be brought forward by other Council Services as part of specific savings proposals rather than being viewed as “corporate savings”.

Savings/Income Generation Option Amounts 2014/15 £ 200,000 2015/16 £ 200,000 2016/17 £ 200,000


The savings amounts reflected above are initial estimates based on a realistic assessment of the extent and timing of the savings that can be achieved through a review of the areas outlined in the Narrative Description of Savings Option above. While there is confidence that the amounts indicated are realistic, firmer indications of the level and source of achievable savings will be presented as reviews are undertaken.

06


These projected savings will be achieved through reducing staff costs rather than staff numbers. Although there will be impact on staff pay/allowances/supplements this will be done within the framework of the Council’s agreed, equality assessed pay and grading structure. Consultations with the Trade Unions will be required to agree the implementation of the 36hour working week within Roads and Neighbourhood services.


The savings options identified require to be further developed before savings amounts can be clarified/confirmed.

Impact Assessment

Potential Effect Effect on Service User 1

None Anticipated

Effect on Staff 2 Other elements of staff pay will be affected although this will be within the framework of the Council’s agreed, equality assessed pay and grading structure. Effect on Other Council Services 1 None Anticipated Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1 n/a Council Priority 2 – Preparing our Young People for Adulthood and Employment 1

n/a Council Priority 3 – Care for our Older and Vulnerable People 1 n/a Council Priority 4 – Support and Stimulate our Local Economy 1 n/a Council Priority 5 – Maintain the safety and security of our region (including social sustainability) 1

n/a Council Priority 6 – Protect and Sustain the Environment 1 n/a Effect on ability to attract External Funding 1

None Anticipated

Total Potential Effect 11 Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts

The trade unions will be fully involved in progressing these opportunities.

07

Budget Development Process 2014/15 - 2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Non-Schools Property Rationalisation

Directorate Corporate

Service Area & ABB Link Corporate


Savings will be sought through a rationalisation of the Council’s non-schools property estate. This rationalisation programme will generate savings in rents, rates, water, energy consumption, cleaning, maintenance costs etc., in addition to generating capital receipts and ensuring the improved utilisation of the retained estate. The savings noted are in addition to the £375k which will be achieved in the 2013/14 Financial Year. In order to achieve maximum benefits from property rationalisation in the longer term, it is important to identify properties within a framework which is clearly linked to strategic vision and identified service needs, as well as longer term investment needs. To ensure that the process is as effective as possible in the medium to long term, it is important that a formal strategy for Corporate Asset Management Planning be established. This will commence with work on an Asset Plan for Dumfries from November 2013, to ensure that property rationalisation is in line with:-

• Council Priorities • Strategic vision of how and where services will be delivered • Critical up-to-date information on existing assets

This work will involve input from all Council Departments and Community Planning Partners, and will be supported in the first instance by the Scottish Futures Trust’s Smarter Office Programme. Strategic Asset Board will be updated on progress and it is anticipated that a detailed plan will be brought before members early in the 2014/15 Financial Year. The template for the Dumfries Asset Plan will then inform Asset Plans in other areas, although property rationalisation in all areas will continue to be progressed where appropriate as the Corporate Asset Management Plan is being developed.



These savings are in addition to the £375k savings achieved in the current and previous financial year. These savings have been largely focussed on the Council’s office estate; there is now a need to extend this into other areas, but clearly this needs to be driven by service needs and will depend on budget savings agreed in other areas where delivery of services from a particular property may have an impact.

07

The assessment of future savings is based on earlier, high-level work carried out by Strategic Property Services (now part of Property & Architectural Services). Property Potential

Saving

Queensberry Street Office, Dumfries £54,700 (Council-owned/occupied) Crichton Hall, Dumfries £77,200 (Council as tenant) Woodbank, Dumfries £68,500 (Council-owned/occupied) Ailsa House, Stranraer £12,500 (Council-owned/occupied) Marchmount House £158,000 (Leased/tenanted) Loreburn Hall Offices £ 21,600 (To transfer to Community Trust) 1 Cresswell Gardens, Dumfries £ 8,300 (Council-owned/occupied) Kirkconnel Resource Base 37a Main St £ 5,400 (Council-owned/occupied) Full Year Saving £406,200 Allowance for Delay (£31,200) 2014/15 Saving £375,000

It must be noted that which of these properties will be vacated is subject to further, more detailed work, as is the programme for relocations to other offices. * The individual amounts shown above are full year budgets and are therefore dependant on these properties being vacated by 1st April 2014. While Property and Architectural Services have indicated that this can be achieved, it is considered prudent to reduce the projected saving to £375,000 to allow for delay.


No direct impact on staffing numbers. However, Council employees will require to be re-located to other Council properties. This will be progressed in consultation with the relevant staff and service management teams, to ensure moves are adequately planned and disruption to people, work and services is minimised.


It is intended that, where the vacated properties are Council-owned, these will be declared surplus and disposed of in line with the Council’s Property Disposal Policy. Costs will be incurred in the maintenance/security of these buildings prior to disposal. To address these costs (and those associated with other property rationalisation savings) it is proposed that the £100k fund allocated from the Corporate Change Fund in 12/13 should have a further £100k contribution in 13/14 to meet the costs to support the rationalisation process.


All changes and service moves will be undertaken in close consultation with the relevant Service(s) and will be clearly communicated in advance to service users

Effect on Staff 2

07

Council employees will require to be re-located to other Council properties. This will be progressed in consultation with the relevant staff and service management teams, to ensure moves are adequately planned and disruption to people, work and services is minimised.


As above


No Impact


No Impact


No Impact


No Impact


No Impact


No Impact


No Impact

Total Potential Effect 12 Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts Establishment of a formal strategy for Corporate Asset Management Planning, commencing with work on an Asset Plan for Dumfries from November 2013, to ensure that property rationalisation is in line with:

• Council Priorities • Strategic vision of how and where services will be delivered • Critical up-to-date information on existing assets

Detailed planning, consultation and communication in advance of proposed moves from individual properties. In addition, the Property Disposal Policy will also be reviewed with a view to recommending an updated policy early in 2014 which will seek to maximise property disposal opportunities and establish a more efficient and effective process.

08

Budget Development Process 2014/15 - 2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Corporate Transport

Directorate Corporate Measures

Service Area & ABB Link Integrated Transport & Commissioning


A range of co-ordinated measures aimed at maximising efficiency in the Council’s management of transport and travel costs including:-

• Increase in Size of the Corporate Car Pool; • Absorption of Service-Managed Cars into the Corporate Car Pool • Buy-out of remaining Essential Car Users, and transfer of remaining Essential and

Casual Users to HMRC rates. • Generate further savings on the basis of reduced mileage costs, and reduced

journeys • Reduce number of operational vehicles where service delivery requirements permit. • General sustainable travel awareness including reducing the need for travel,

promotion of greater use of tele- and video-conferencing, greater promotion of active and sustainable travel, particularly within the towns.

The Corporate Pool has been increased by 30 cars in 2013/14, orders will be placed for an additional 10 vehicles prior to the start of the next two financial years to achieve additional savings in 2014/15 and 2015/16. Fleet management has reduced lease costs on a number of vehicles through re-procurement, and there has also been a further reduction in the operational fleet. Revised guidance on sustainable and active travel for staff, and means of reducing journeys will be issued prior to the start of 2014/15.



Increase in Corporate Car Pool Cost differential for pool car vs travel allowances for 12,700 miles estimated at £1,900 per vehicle, therefore further savings of £19,000 in 2014/15 are anticipated from the increase in Car Pool. Other Measures Savings of £100k from other measures will require reduction in grey fleet mileage of c. 220,000 per annum (6.5% of 2012/13 total), or less if other initiatives such as terminating lump sum allowances, or reducing vehicle holdings are achieved. The total figure will be achievable through a combination of the above measures. It is important to recognise that these amounts are high level estimates at this stage based on a realistic assessment of the extent and timing of the savings that can be achieved through review of the areas outlined in the Narrative Description of Savings Options above.

08

While there is confidence that the amounts indicated are realistic, firmer indications of the level and source of achievable savings will be available as reviews are undertaken.


No staffing implications anticipated.


As this is a corporate saving, requiring implementation across all departments, it is essential that all directorates address the management of travel consistently as far as service requirements permit.

Impact Assessment Potential Effect Effect on Service User 2 May impact on staff ability to provide immediate physical response Effect on Staff 2 Some impact on gross payments, and pre-planning of travel requirements Effect on Other Council Services 1 Could increase / reduce DGFirst’s Vehicle Maintenance income generation Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1 Council Priority 2 – Preparing our Young People for Adulthood and Employment 1

Council Priority 3 – Care for our Older and Vulnerable People 1 Council Priority 4 – Support and Stimulate our Local Economy 1 Council Priority 5 – Maintain the safety and security of our region (including social sustainability) 1

Council Priority 6 – Protect and Sustain the Environment 1 Pool cars generally at lower CO2 emission levels than grey fleet; other environmental benefits through encouraging other sustainable transport for staff travel. Effect on ability to attract External Funding 1 Total Potential Effect 12


As suggested above, the saving measure would require engagement with and cooperation of service departments, and a corporate willingness to implement a more sustainable approach to travel across the Council. The main risk (of reduced responsiveness) is addressed through the expansion of the Pool fleet. Some flexibility in staff ability to respond to emergency situation remains available.

09


Savings Option Additional Support for Learning Primary Teaching Provision

Directorate Education Services

Service Area & ABB Link Education Services / Other ASL


Additional Support for Learning (ASfL) teachers in Primary Schools have five core roles, these being:-

• identification and assessment of additional support needs ; • planning learning and teaching, including cooperative teaching ; • consultation ; • partnership with specialist services and; • contributing to professional development.

Hitherto, emphasis has been on direct teaching of individual children / groups of children. Development of the other four roles would help however equip mainstream staff to better understand the Additional Support Needs of children and young people and how to help meet these. Therefore there is an important role in building capacity with mainstream staff. A reduction in number of ASfL teachers would be achieved by offering access to ERVS for 5 FTE, following an invitation for expressions of interest. ASfL teachers will continue to be allocated to schools further to an annual audit of need, to ensure that support is targeted towards the children and young people with greatest need.

Savings/Income Generation Option Amounts 2014/15: £117,000 2015/16 £200,000 2016/17 £200,000


There are currently 75 FTE ASfL teachers across the authority. This saving is based on a reduction of 5 FTE staff with an average staff cost each of £40k, including on-costs. 5 FTE @ £40k = £200k. Assuming the reduction is made from August 14, the 2014/15 saving would need to be part year. Part Year Saving = £200,000/12 months x 7 months =£117,000.


This would be achieved by offering access to ERVS for 5 FTE, following an invitation for expressions of interest. It is anticipated that 5FTE of the 75FTE of ASL Teaching Staff

09

would be achievable through this method.


Previously received expressions of interest would indicate that the number of potential reductions proposed would be met.


Will reduce capacity for support to schools for direct work with pupils with Additional Support Needs.

Effect on Staff 2

Will require remaining staff to re-prioritise work.


Possible reduced capacity for partnership working.


Will impact on capacity for early intervention and direct support for vulnerable children.


Possible impact on the development of skills for life.


N / A ( though see 1 above ).


Impact of reduced staff employment levels.


N / A


N / A


N / A


Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts Tolerate

• Re-allocation of staff across the Authority, in accordance with the Additional Support Needs of pupils, as identified in the annual audit of need.

• Re-focusing work of remaining ASfL teachers, to develop other parts of their core functions to develop greater knowledge / skills amongst mainstream staff.

10

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Secondary – DSM Allocation (0.5% Reduction) Directorate Education Services Service Area & ABB Link Education – Secondary Education Narrative Description of Savings Option

The policy and direction of the service has been to provide additional flexibility to Head Teachers in determining how their budget is prioritised. This saving proposes a further 0.5% reduction from Secondary DSM Budgets from 2014/15. This is in addition to the 1.5% that had previously been agreed by members as part of the 2013/14 Budget Development Process. This would bring the total saving taken in this area to £1M (2%). The additional saving target for 2014/15 equates to an average of 0.4FTE staff per secondary but may be delivered through reduction in projects/other items of expenditure in combination with reallocation of teachers around timetabling commitments. The following items are included within a Secondary Headteacher’s controllable budget:

• Property Costs • Supplies and Services • Transport Costs • Administration Costs • Staffing Costs

Control of these costs is fully delegated to the Head Teachers and the way this saving is delivered will be at their discretion. It is anticipated that reduction to Teaching staff would be a last resort. Savings/Income Generation Option Amounts 2014/15:: £250,000 2015/16: £250,000 2016/17 £250,000

This is in addition to the £150K already agreed as part of 1314 Budget Setting.

10


Straightforward percentage of controllable budget. Each school will deliver this in a different way. The controllable budget for each school and indicative savings requirement per school is detailed below:

School Budget (£000)

Reduction Required

(£000) Annan Academy 4,693 24

Castle Douglas High School 2,989 16

Dalbeattie High School 2,256 12

Dalry Secondary School 807 4

Douglas Ewart High School 3,505 18

Dumfries Academy 3,513 18

Dumfries High School 4,167 22

Kirkcudbright Academy 2,551 13

Langholm Academy 1,707 9

Lockerbie Academy 3,813 20

Maxwelltown High School 2,331 12

Moffat Academy 1,939 10

St Joseph's College 3,808 20

Sanquhar Academy 2,158 12

Stranraer Academy 4,977 24

Wallace Hall Academy 3,061 16

48,275 250 Details on Staffing Implications and how this will be managed

Although schools may choose differing methods to accommodate reduction there may be reductions in staffing as a last resort. Therefore revisiting ERVS and/or teacher Refresh may be required. Issues/Concerns Regarding Deliverability of Indicated Savings

May be difficult for Schools to deliver if Scottish Government stipulates limits to reductions in teacher numbers.

10

Impact Assessment Potential Effect Effect on Service User 2 Will not have a major effect on curricular delivery but may see some reduction in minority subjects or additional projects. Effect on Staff 2

May require small reduction to staffing numbers depending on HT approach.


Negligible

Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1 The savings main focus is on Secondary Schools. Flexibility given to the Head Teacher to manage this to best meet the needs of the school and pupils.


Secondary school focus


Minimal


Minimal


Minimal


Minimal


None


Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts Flexibility offered to HT to adopt approach which will have least impact on the school and best meet the needs of Pupils.

11

Budget Development Process 2013/14 -2015/16 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Primary - Reserved placements for potential catchment

pupils Directorate Education Services

Service Area & ABB Link Primary Education / Core


To reserve places in identified primary schools* for children who likely to become resident in the catchment/ zone of those schools during the school year. *Schools that are on the cusp of requiring an additional teacher should their numbers then exceed the maximum class size. For example, a school which has an average roll (based on the last three year’s data) of between 45 to 50, we would wish to reserve two places (one in each classroom) to accommodate a family who may move into the catchment/ zone after the staffing for the school has been set. The projected saving is based on the data from 2012/13 where three schools were affected by ‘late’ enrolments therefore three teachers were required to cover the additional classes.


It is predicted that these figures are conservative.


The projected saving is based on the data from 2012/13 where three schools were affected by ‘late’ enrolments therefore three teachers were required to cover the additional classes. The savings are based on a non-requirement of three teachers with an average cost of £35k, including on costs. i.e. 3 x £35k = £105k. The part year saving of this would be: £105k / 12 x 7 = £61K


The projected number of posts, based on recent history, is approximately three. It is recognised that this is a conservative estimate. There is no need for redundancy and the savings are based on not requiring to employ circa 3 additional temporary teachers to cover increases in classes across the authority per academic session.


This potential saving is very difficult to quantify as it is impossible to predict patterns due to parental choice. However as 3 is hoped to be a conservative estimate of the likely teachers this policy would save, the risk is therefore minimal. The only ‘barrier’ to achieve the potential saving is if parents do not exercise their right to move their children in the academic session.

11

Impact Assessment


Places available for catchment pupils who may move into the area.

Effect on Staff 1

Staff would continue to operate within agreed National Conditions of Service.


Maximise existing resources ensuring we are not paying for additional teachers.


Continues to meet this Priority.


N/A


N/A


Ensures capacity for growth within local communities.


N/A


N/A



The potential effect would be savings in the region of £105,000. There would be no impact to business continuity and would ensure more efficient use of our resources. An added benefit would be that more teaching staff would be available to cover supply shortages. Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts N/A

12

Budget Development Process 2014/15 - 2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Central Management and Support (12.5% reduction)


Service Area & ABB Link Education Services/School Management & Support/Directorate


This option looks to reorganise the Education Directorate. Savings will be made through a reduction/reorganisation of staff including Quality Improvement Managers, Quality Improvement Officers, Education Officers as well as administrative staff. This option is to reduce 12.5% from the Central Support Staff Budget. This saving is in addition to the £670K staff saving already taken in this area over the past 3 years. Currently, Education Services works from 5 bases (Brewery House, Aird, Woodbank, St Teresa’s and Lochside Education Centre) The continued reduction in central support and direction gives greater autonomy and responsibility to clusters of schools. Increasingly, schools work collegiately to develop policy and share resources. This will continue, with the added expectation for allocation of resources, curricular support and quality assurance. Currently the budget is £2.5M, or 53 FTE. This is made up of Education Officers, Quality Improvement Officers, School Support Officers and various Administrative Support Staff. Roughly this saving equates to 6 or 7 FTE, although may be higher/lower than this amount depending on grade. Currently within Education Services Central Support there are:-

1 FTE Director 2 FTE Heads of Service 2 FTE Quality Improvement Managers 3 FTE Teaching Support Officers (Pupil Support) 9 FTE Education Officers 36 FTE SJC Support/Admin Staff


12


Current School Support Staff Budget - £2.5M, 12.5% cut = £313K. This saving is dependent on ERVS applications, therefore, detailed costing will not be available until expressions of interest have been received. For example, this would equate to approx. 5 FTEs Quality Improvement Managers/Education Officers or approx. 12FTE SJC Support Staff but most likely a combination of the two.


It is anticipated that any savings could be achieved by ERVS applications. Although there is likely to be a detrimental impact on remaining staff as central staff have already been significantly reduced. This saving would ultimately result in a redistribution of work and may reduce the support given to schools. Schools will be encouraged to work together within their clusters to offer peer support in relation to quality assurance etc. Recent Inspections and partner working with Education Scotland have highlighted pressure on capacity to deliver the statutory function of quality assurance and continuous improvement


It is anticipated that any savings could be achieved by ERVS applications. Concern regarding increased workload for remaining members of staff.

12


This would potentially result in reduced support being given to schools

Effect on Staff 2

Work would have to be redistributed. Significant staff reductions were taken in this area over the past 3 years, therefore, staff are already experiencing increased workload. This saving would increase these workloads further and result in increased pressure on remaining staff


Reduced staff to work on Council specific projects.


Recent Inspections and partner working with Education Scotland have highlighted pressure on capacity to deliver the statutory function of quality assurance and continuous improvement


2

Recent Inspections and partner working with Education Scotland have highlighted pressure on capacity to deliver the statutory function of quality assurance and continuous improvement


Minimal


Minimal


1

Minimal


Minimal


Less staff to work on Education Scotland projects etc.



Work will be redistributed with a closer focus on expectations of cluster and school management. Increasingly, school management teams will be expected to manage resources and develop peer approaches for quality assurance at a local level. There have been significant developments in capacity building for the past 2 years to prepare schools and clusters for this responsibility.

13


Savings Option Primary–Non-staff related DSM Allocation (12.5% Reduction)


Service Area & ABB Link Education Services/Pre-school/Core Education Services/Primary /Core


This saving proposes a 12.5% reduction to the Complete Discretion DSM budget provided to each primary school. This has no direct impact on staff, however does reduce the money available for the running of the school. With the development of partner headteachers and increasing expectations on clusters working together, the reduction in DSM per primary school can be mitigated by sharing / efficient use of resources. Details of the changes to allocations are detailed below: Nursery Allocations

Nursery Roll Current Proposed 1 – 5 £105 £92

6 – 10 £521 £456 11 – 20 £780 £683 21 – 30 £1,040 £910 31 – 50 £1,300 £1,138 51 – 70 £1,561 £1,366 71 – 90 £1,873 £1,639

Primary Allocations

Current Proposed Lump Sum £2,330 £2,039

Staff Alloc (Per FTE) £105 £92

Support Staff Alloc (Per FTE) £51 £45

Pupil Alloc £51 £45

Mileage Alloc £10 £9

NB. PPP Schools receive less as they do not receive any allowance for property related allocations (mainly in lump sum) To give an overview of the impact on an individual school here are some examples: Primary

School Roll

Approx Current Allocation

Approx New Allocation

30 £4,500 £4,000 140 £10,800 £9,500 250 £17,700 £15,800

Clear guidance will be provided to all primary schools on the approach to the application of these savings. That guidance will advise schools that budgets supporting the purchase of classroom materials should be protected where possible.

13



By using the revised figures above in the 2013/14 allocation models the allocation changes are as follows:

Current Proposed Change

Nursery £60,034 £52,530 £7,503 Primary £864,522 £767,979 £96,543

£924,556 £820,509 £104,047


No direct staffing implications, this saving reduces the amount schools have for running costs.


Amount will be deducted from the DSM allocation given to each school. It will be the responsibility of the Head Teacher to ensure that costs are reduced accordingly to ensure they remain within budget.


Possibly longer cycle in terms of renewing furniture, furnishings or major purchases on new schemes of work although mitigated by improved sharing of learning and teaching resources within the cluster and greater use of ICT.

Effect on Staff 1

Minimal


Minimal


Possibly longer cycle in terms of renewing furniture, furnishings or major purchases on new schemes of work although mitigated by improved sharing of learning and teaching resources within the cluster and greater use of ICT


NA


13

NA


NA


NA


Interior fabric of buildings may suffer


NA



Head teachers would be asked to plan more strategically over time and to minimise any inefficiencies in order to minimise any impact. Thresholds for carry forwards could be increased to allow for longer term planning. Primary school attainment will be monitored within and throughout the implementation of the Cluster Working Review to ensure no detrimental impacts on learning and teaching. Clusters will be planning for improvement together and this allows better sharing of resources.

14

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Primary – Reduction in Class Contact Time (RICCT)


Service Area & ABB Link Education Services/Primary Schools/Core


A proposed change to the way in which specialist teachers are allocated to Primary Schools in order to work towards adherence to RICCT requirements Currently there is an entitlement for 2.5hrs Reduction in Class Contact Time (RICCT) per full time class teacher (pro-rata for part-time staff) In Primary Schools, Art, Music and PE specialists provide 1 hr RICCT cover per class teacher (allocated and timetabled centrally) and 1.5 hrs is arranged by individual schools and delivered by class teachers. The current budget for specialist teachers of Art, Music and PE is 37.0 FTE. The actual entitlement required by schools is 21.03 FTE. Currently there is an over provision to schools of 16 FTE. This proposal is to work towards ensuring adherence to RICCT requirements in the allocation of specialist teachers This needs some flexibility in the allocation to take account of:-

• School day ( lunch/ break times) • Travel between schools • Specialist entitlement to RICCT • Fluctuation of school rolls

Flexibility for this proposal would require approx. 4 FTE. Therefore, we could expect this change in allocation to work towards reducing to 25 FTE, a saving of 12 FTE. However, due to the need to adopt to new systems and ways of working in clusters, it is proposed that only a reduction of 6 FTE is taken at this stage. This will also allow time for the cluster working review to be fully implemented and the new allocation method piloted before any consideration of full removal. Adherence to RICCT requirements will still enable schools and pupils to receive specialist input. This reduction will allow us to look at new methods of timetabling to allow schools and clusters more choice and flexibility in timetabling. Cluster working will ensure flexibility in the working arrangements.


14


Specialist staff providing RICCT cover, based on a 6 FTE reduction the saving would be: 6FTE*£37,000= £222,000 As this would be implemented August 2014 the year 1 part saving equates to: £222,000/12 x 7 months = £129,500


The combination of ending temporary contracts and opening up of ERVS to specialist teachers is likely to be sufficient to bring about the savings required.


Anticipate that sufficient ERVS applications will be received


This is working towards adherence to RICCT requirements. Pupils will continue to receive quality input from specialist staff. Schools will continue to be responsible for some delivery of expressive arts and PE. There is an expectation that all schools deliver 2hrs of Physical Education in line with National requirement. The 2hrs can be delivered by both class teachers and specialist teachers.

Effect on Staff 2

Resistance to change and reduction of travel due to staffing being contained within a cluster


NA


This is working towards adherence to RICCT requirements. Pupils will continue to receive quality input from specialist staff. Schools will continue to be responsible for some delivery of expressive arts and PE. There is an expectation that all schools deliver 2hrs of Physical Education in line with National requirement. The 2hrs can be delivered by both class teachers and specialist teachers.


1

NA


14


NA


1

NA


NA


NA


The overall impact on young people is likely to be minimal. There will be a reorganisation around learning and a reduction in provision. They will still receive Art, Music and PE specialist input.


Operational measures Ensure balance of Art, PE and Music staff requesting ERVS in year 1 Increase management time to clusters for timetabling, staffing, absence management, PDRs, day to day issues Organisation of professional learning for specialist staff Ensure specialism is delivered in all schools Transfer Under the new arrangement each cluster would be allocated Specialist teachers to cover their RICCT requirement. There will be additional flexibility to allow for travel, fluctuation of school rolls, specialist entitlement to RICCT, and school day). It would then be up to the cluster to timetable staff between the schools to meet requirements. This arrangement would allow reduced central function of allocation, contracts, line management Schools have requested more autonomy in allocation of specialists staff and this would allow for this. Treat Maintain a core staff to fulfil 1 hr RICCT entitlement Ensure clusters have training in timetabling and managing specialist staff Facilitating the management of specialist whole team meetings to ensure professional learning

15

Budget Development Process 2014/15 - 2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Secondary - Office and curricular support staff


Service Area & ABB Link Education Services/Secondary School


This option is to reduce the core allocation formula to schools for clerical, technical, general assistants and librarians/library assistants. This option reduces the Secondary School Support Staff Budget by £200K. Currently the budget is £3.4M. This is a central budget to cover salary costs for the staff groups highlighted above. This saving equates to 15 posts, although may be higher/lower than this amount depending on grade. School Support Managers and network administrators are not included in the reduction to allocation. The current formula for support staff is as follows (the proposed reduction is given in brackets):-

• Core Allocation from 60 hours (to 40 hours) per week • Pupil allocation from 0.32 per pupil (to 0.30 per pupil) per week

Savings will be made through a reduction/reorganisation of staff, adherence to formula and recognition of reducing pupil roll. Previous savings in the secondary sector have led to reductions in devolved costs and teaching staff.



Current Secondary School Support Staff Budget £3.4M with 111.46 FTE across 16 secondary schools. Current formula for support staff is as follows (with proposed reduction):

• Core Allocation from 60 hours (to 40 hours) • Pupil allocation from 0.32 per pupil (to 0.30 per pupil)

Reductions to school formula will result in an overall reduction of 13.96 FTE, on average, reductions per secondary school of 0.75 FTE. This saving is dependent on ERVS applications; therefore detailed costing will not be available until expressions of interest have been received. 14 FTE x £17K = £238K The year 1 proposal projects a £200K saving due the appreciation that it may take some time to ensure that all schools are reduced to formula level. Details on Staffing Implications and how this will be managed

15

It is anticipated that any savings will be achieved through ERVS applications.


It is anticipated that any savings will be achieved through ERVS applications and redeployment. Concern regarding increased workload for remaining members of staff.


The reduced allocation would potentially result in a reduced levels of support for specific practical areas ( Home Economics, technical, IT or science) and in the library function in schools. Headteachers would identify areas for the reduction with limited curricular impact.

Effect on Staff 3

It will reduce the allocation for support being given to teaching staff and school management, depending upon the areas identified by the school for reduction.


Reduced office staff to liaise with partners in school (meals/transport/janitors)


This saving is targeted at secondary schools.


Support staff in secondary schools provide important roles in the life and work of the school; smooth and efficient running of the organisation, support for teaching


Minimal


Minimal


Minimal


Minimal


None



Headteachers will be expected to manage the available support staff resource. This saving would ultimately result in a review of work practice; there may be opportunities to consider alternative approaches through partnership working for supporting literacy in schools

16

Budget Development Process 2014/15 - 2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Determined to Succeed


Service Area & ABB Link Education Services/School Management & Support/ Determined to Succeed


Determined to Succeed was a ring fenced grant provided by the Scottish Government. From 2011/12 the ring fencing of this grant was removed. Dumfries & Galloway Council has, over the past 3 years been using part of this funding to support schools take forward innovative projects, linked to our priorities to enhance the educational experiences for children and young people. Schools/clusters are given the opportunity to bid for funding and, if granted, are required to evaluate the impact of the project. Projects recently supported include the Queensberry Initiative at Wallace Hall Academy; joint venture between Castle Douglas and Dalbeattie High Schools to progress joint vocational opportunities and Dumfries High School cluster’s development of a tracking and monitoring tool, On Track with Learning. This saving proposal proposes to remove the £200,000 innovation fund and therefore the specific bid related financial support provided to schools in relation to innovation projects. Schools will continue to have access to cluster and DSM funding for innovation and developments in curriculum. Funding could also be sought on key initiatives through external sources. Although this saving is proposed, innovation and creativity will still be encouraged within our schools and clusters despite this reduction in central funding.



Straight forward removal of £200K funding available to schools


No impact on Council Staff


None

16

Impact Assessment


Minimal, potential for less innovation in schools

Effect on Staff 1

Minimal, staff would need to combine resources/bid for external funding to take projects forward.


No impact


No impact


No impact


No impact


No impact


No impact


No impact


No impact


Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts Staff will use their initiative, expertise, skills and contacts to secure funding from outside bodies, if required, to enable the projects to progress. Schools can also be involved in pulling resources collegially, within and across clusters to implement innovative ideas. School management teams should consider the councils external funding strategy with support from the external grants unit, CCS.

17

Budget Development Process 2014/15 - 2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Primary & Secondary – Probationer Teachers


Service Area & ABB Link Education Services/Primary Schools/Core Education Services/Secondary Schools/Core


More targeted placement of Trainees (probationer teachers) to meet service requirements. Dumfries and Galloway probationer teacher induction year is considered gold standard and our programme has a national reputation for excellence. The core programme will continue these high standards. Currently, we allocate trainees a place approximately 1 month prior to the summer holidays so that the trainee can visit the school prior to the beginning of term. This saving proposes that probationer teachers continue to be offered their placement in early June but not finally confirmed until Mid July. The service would make sure probationer teachers know that they could be reallocated, depending upon the needs of the service. This means that if any natural vacancies arise, trainees can be placed to the vacancy rather than being considered surplus. Previous years practice indicates that this would save 5 FTE per year.



Targeted Placement of Trainees: 5 FTE * £37,000 (average teacher, incl on-costs) £185,000 As this saving could not be implemented until August 14 a part year saving would be required in year 1. Part Year Saving - £185,000/12*7months = £108,000


More Targeted Allocation: Trainees would not know placement prior to School Holidays. This could be particularly difficult for trainees from outwith the area. Completion of the staffing exercise may be delayed, However amendments and changes to circumstances can already occur over the summer period and these will dealt with through normal arrangements


Targeted Placement Requests

17

Impact Assessment


Staff moves throughout the year; the school is responsible for managing effective transitions and ensuring continuity of learning when teaching staff move post.

Effect on Staff 1

There will be a small amount of impact on central staff in managing trainee placement but this is within the overall staffing exercise which is considerable. This does offer greater flexibility for the use of trainee teachers.


None




None


None


None


None


None



Staff move throughout the year; the school is responsible for managing effective transitions and ensuring continuity of learning when teaching staff move post.

18


Savings Option P&ES Service Review / Smarter Home to School Transport

Directorate Planning & Environment Services / Education Services

Service Area & ABB Link P&ES / Transport & Commissioning / Education Transport


At Full Council 12 May 2011, Members agreed to initiate a strategic review of Council provided transport to identify sustainable and affordable solutions to transport pressures facing the Authority in the delivery of its functions. Education Services / Planning and Environment Services have been the focus of Part 1 of this Strategic Review, which was an assessment of school transport. This work has provided a complete review of the work process to administer school transport and the calculation of the most optimal means of providing school transport services. This template considers the implementation of recommendations from this Strategic Service Review of home-school transport with GIS optimisation of eligibility with options for grace and favour capacities. The detail will be guided by the outcome of the review of zoning and cluster provision.

Savings/Income Generation Option Amounts 2014/15: £279,700 2015/16 £279,700 2016/17 £279,700


The annual costs for the provision of school transport by Education Services and PES is approx £4M. Efficiency savings of £300,000 and £400,000 (in 2012-13 and 2013-14 respectively, £700k in total) have been secured over the past 2 years through increased use of technology to plan routes and improved integration of school transport functions. It is estimated that a further saving of £279k through implementation of the outcome of the review; specifically referring to the full review of pupil eligibility for assistance with travel in addition to further savings in costs related to school transport highlighted within the review, will be achievable in 2014/15 resulting in an overall saving of £979k over the 3 years, through most effective deployment of internal provision and external bus operators. It is anticipated that £250k of this saving will be achieved through reduced payments to bus contractors with the remaining £29,700 relating to reductions in the fuel & maintenance costs of the internal (yellow bus) fleet.


Requires effective management of service provision with training and support in the use of the integrated transport management information system. This is ongoing.

18


Transport is provided collectively through Education Services and Planning and Environment Services. Some 90 routes are procured from external suppliers through competitive tendering under the EU procurement process with a further 35 routes provided by DGC Buses. Therefore, any savings will be across both departments, this has been taken into account in the saving being predicted. Primary concern over deliverability would arise if there was a significant increase in demand, or if there was a change in external operator capacity.


This will be mitigated by good and timely communication to ensure parents have information.

Effect on Staff 2

Increased workloads dealing with information about transport


May affect other ‘safe routes to schools’ functions



1




1



Not applicable


Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts Recommendations from national guidance on Safe Routes to School will be used to mitigate impact.

19

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Block Contracts Commissioning

Directorate Social Work Services

Service Area & ABB Link Social Care Contracts


In delivering services, social work use a variety of contractual arrangements, most of which can be classified as either ‘block purchase’ or ‘spot contract’. In block purchase arrangements we pay a fixed amount regardless of use, whereas in spot purchase contracts our payments reflect our volume of use. This saving option relates to our use of block contracts is contained within the area of the previous Supported People budget (an annual spend of £4million) with providers including Key Housing, Leonard Cheshire, and Richmond Fellowship. As part of our focus on achieving efficiencies in the Social Work budget in 2013/14, we have commenced a review of our services use of block contracts. During 2013/14 we have generated significant efficiencies through this work, by adopting a rigorous approach to ensuring that hours were meeting identified needs and drawing back funding that was not being used. This work will continue in 2014/15, together with work to harmonise hourly rates across Support and Care and develop more personalised ‘Lifestyle’ contracts. Efficiencies in management and delivery of a number of current contracts can be achieved through a focus on management costs, without any impact on frontline services or service users. This will be achieved through direct work with provider agencies.



During 2013/14, a savings target of £244,000 was in place in respect of block contracts. Our actual savings achieved to date are £323,000. The over-delivery in 2013/14 of £79,000 will be used towards the savings target established for 2014/15 and beyond. In respect of the remainder of the saving target, we will achieve this through:

• provider re-structuring and consideration of management costs (commercially sensitive);

• a re-negotiation of hourly rates (commercially sensitive). Through this work we are developing a rigorous approach to contract management that will be embedded into our routine processes going forward.


No staffing implications for the Council.

19


Savings have been made against adult care block contracts year on year for 3 years. Future savings beyond this would be likely to impact service users. Therefore to increase future years savings beyond the £150,000 presently committed to, we will require to widen this approach to other areas of our spend. This is actively being pursued as we continue to develop our information and systems for future years.


As these are ‘back office’ savings there is likely to be no impact on service users.

Effect on Staff 1

No effect in relation to Council staff. Some re-balancing of posts in external providers.


There will be no effect on other council services as a direct result of this review.


Not applicable – adult services.


Not applicable – adult services.


This is not a proposal to change frontline services to people. Savings achieved through management efficiencies.


This is a generally low wage sector and further reducing funding in contracts may impact people coming into these roles, and impact people’s income.


Service user services will be maintained as per assessed need.


Potential for changes to reduce travel costs in provider organisations.


Not applicable in this instance.



Social Work assessment of needs will ensure service user needs and outcomes are being met. Ongoing contract and quality monitoring will ensure that there is no decrease in the quality of provision or achievement of agreed outcomes.

20 Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options

Savings Option High Cost Care Package Review


Service Area & ABB Link Adult Care


There are around 525 people in care packages, financed by Social Work Services, which cost in excess of £500 per week each. 135 cases cost us £1,000 and over per week (with some packages ranging to as high as £4,000 per week), with the remaining 390 costing us between £500 and £1000. Annually, these packages of care cost the Council in the region of £20.4 million. These packages are typically provided to adults with physical and/or learning disabilities, although our population of £1,000+ per week cases includes 22 young adults, in the 18 to 25 age range, who have recently transitioned from children’s to adult’s care, and 10 young adults in our population of £500 - £1000 cases. Many of these placements or packages have not been routinely reviewed with a view to providing the same or an improved level of care in a more personalised way at a lower cost closer to home. Some of these placements are many miles from Dumfries and Galloway. It would be advantageous to provide care closer to home where at all possible, to allow contact with families, to monitor the care and progress of the people in the placements, and to facilitate staff supervision of the placements. Local provider services have shown an interest in developing the range of provision to meet the needs of this vulnerable group of people. Savings will also be made from reviewing how service users needs have changed over time and how those needs can be met through both a personalised approach and the use of assistive technology (telecare). In some cases telecare investment is necessary to deliver the savings. Where development in our telecare service is required, this is being developed in conjunction with DGFirst and Business and Technology Solutions. A small number of placements are jointly funded with NHS Dumfries and Galloway – these will also be reviewed jointly with NHS staff. This proposal is a continuation of the work started in January 2013.

Gross Savings Agency Staff Net Savings 2014/15: £630,000 -£255,000 £375,000 2015/16: £830,000 £0 £830,000 2016/17: £830,000 £0 £830,000


The total budget for all placements identified is over £20 million pounds. Once reviews are completed the annual saving is calculated as 52 x the weekly saving amount. Due to the timing of the review being completed, savings achieved typically straddle two financial years. The review completed to date has identified gross savings of £641k. Due to timing of the review, £311k will be achieved in 2013/14, with the full year impact deliverable in 2014/15. Based on our findings to date, and considering the packages that are still to be reviewed, we calculate that additional gross savings which are available will be £500k. Again, due to the timing of the review it is anticipated that savings of £300k will be achievable in 2014/15, with the full year impact deliverable in 2015/16 To achieve this saving we require to invest in 4 agency staff during 2014/15, at an estimated cost of

20 £255k. The overall savings available can be summarised as follows:-

2014/15 £

2015/16 £

2016/17 £

Full Year Impact of 2013/14 Review 330,000 330,000 330,000 Savings from further review in 2014/15 300,000 500,000 500,000 Investment in Agency Staff (255,000) 0 0 TOTAL Saving 375,000 830,000 830,000

Specific investment is also required in telecare technology to support the delivery of these on going savings. We are currently assuming that such technology costs will be met by the Corporate Change Fund, and in this respect a bid for this funding will be reported to a future meeting of the Social Work Committee. The gross savings will, however, recur in future years – so savings in future years would be over £800,000 per annum, with no required costs in respect of agency staff / telecare equipment.


There should not be any effect on staffing within council services. Negotiation with provider agencies would ensure that any effects on staffing in local providers is minimal. Agency staff are currently being used to assist Council staff with this work and that will continue.


Service users and their families must be fully informed of any review and /or proposed changes to care arrangements. To date, however, this has not been a barrier to achieving the savings – as the savings are in effect a by-product of providing better care more locally to home. Our experience so far is that these reviews are being met positively by service users and their carers / families. New developments with or by Provider agencies should also be consulted on fully.

Impact Assessment Potential Effect Effect on Service User 1 Services should be provided on a more personalised and individual basis. Contact with families will be easier. Effect on Staff 1 Staff travel time will be reduced. Staff will therefore have more time to spend with service users. Reviews will be embedded in SW jobs.

Effect on Other Council Services 1 There may be a slight change to that element of the Care at Home Service provided by DG First (CASS). Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1

The provision of more varied and more local services will allow people to stay closer to their families.

20 Council Priority 2 – Preparing our young people for adulthood and employment 1

The transition from childhood to adulthood should be more straightforward if needs can be met locally.

Council Priority 3 – Care for our Older and Vulnerable People 1 The provision of more varied and more local services will enable people to stay closer to their families. The culture of reviewing care packages once in place will spread to older people to ensure care offered is meeting changing need. Council Priority 4 – Support and Stimulate our Local Economy 1

The provision of more local services will be able people to stay closer to their families. Local providers will, over time, be encouraged to increase their service offerings to meet changing demands.


Returning people to local provision will enhance employment opportunities for local people. Local providers and RSL’s will need to recruit staff to provide the services


Reduction in travel from moving nearer to Dumfries and through telecare will be enabled for families and staff.


NHS Dumfries and Galloway are keen to be involved in the process of commissioning and delivering more services locally. Future joint funding opportunities may be enhanced.


Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts This initiative will ensure that the care provided by the Council remains the most appropriate to the individual’s need. Quality of care and management of risk is as the forefront of the reviews.

21

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 – Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Intensive fostering


Service Area & ABB Link Children & Families


The use of intensive fostering placements rather than Residential Care is held to be best practice wherever possible. The Educational Outcomes for Scotland’s Looked After Children 2011/12 shows that young people who are fostered achieve a tariff score on average double that of young people in Residential Care Intensive fostering placements were introduced to Dumfries and Galloway three years ago and have been judged a success by young people and their families as well as by Children’s Hearings Scotland and the Department. An increase in the number of such placements which would require recruitment, training, registration and support of more such carers should result in fewer children and young people being placed in residential child care. Not only would this be better for the young people and their families but it would also result in significant savings to our Council.



An agency placement costs between £2750 and £5,300 per bed per week. An intensive fostering placement cost £525.00 per bed per week plus Boarding Out payment of between £130 and £225 per week dependent on age of child). In total between £675 and £750 per week. At present, we have 23 children in out of region placements. Being prudent, if we assume that we can move a young person from the lower cost agency placement to an intensive fostering arrangement this would generate a saving of £2250 (£3000 - £750) per individual per week. The potential full year effect for 4 intensive fostering arrangements is therefore: 4 placements x £2,250 per week x 52 weeks = £468k It is considered unlikely that this saving can be realised in full in 2014/15. We therefore believe that a target savings of £300k in 2014/15 is appropriate. Once this is achieved we will be better placed to judge our ability to further increase this in 2015/16 and beyond. It is in nature of Intensive Fostering that it cannot run at 100% capacity as success depends upon careful matching and broader supports particularly from colleagues in Education and

21

Health being in place. Moreover the strain of such intensive relationships means that families often need “down time” to refresh and replenish their commitment between placements. It is our intention to recruit additional Intensive Foster Carers. The recruitment process which is in place identifies if individuals have the following skills and knowledge: • Experience as either a foster carer preferably working with challenging young people 12-17 years or direct work with young people. • Experience of working with adolescents into adulthood through volunteering, work or parenting. • An understanding of Looked After children’s needs and safe crisis management. • The skills and ability to work as part of a professional care team within their own home. • The capacity to provide one full-time placement with their own bedroom. Based on the Foster Carer complement we currently have within the region, four Intensive Foster Carers can be identified.


Additional training capacity and on-going professional support from the Adoption, Fostering and Kinship Team can be provided within existing resources.


Most placements are made at the discretion of the Children’s Hearing and are out with the direct control of the Social Work Department. The service change will only result in a saving if the admission criteria are strictly adhered to. Social Work Department would have to carefully manage the children in their care through children’s plans, fully utilising these resources. We are currently working on our data to better understand the trends and to determine the potential additional pressure likely to be encountered in our 2014/15 budget.

Impact Assessment

Potential Effect Effect on Service User 1 The Education outcomes for Scotland’s Looked After Children 2011/12 published by the Scottish Government showed young people leaving foster placements out performed those leaving residential care by a factor of at least 57 tariff points. Young People using these placements have better outcomes in terms of reduced offending behaviours and improved social and family relationships, better preparing them to be responsible citizens. Effect on Staff 2 An increase in staffing in the Fostering, Adoption and Kinship Team may be necessary in future years, However social workers are committed to achieving the best outcomes for the children and young people in their care and would much rather support them in their own communities and in family settings wherever possible.


Additional Education and Health provision may be required locally.

21


Positive


Positive; unfortunately there is a high correlation between residential placement as a young person and imprisonment as an adult.


N/A

Council Priority 4 – Support and Stimulate our Local Economy 1 Positive; Professional intensive fostering is a career option for local residents. Dumfries and Galloway is already a net importer of Accommodated children and young people and we ought to be assisting local people to improve their skill base and consequently their employability Council Priority 5 – Maintain the safety and security of our region (including social sustainability) 1

Positive; The young people sent to residential placements usually return to our area with increased negative behaviour and an increased hostility towards support services.


N/A

Effect on ability to attract External Funding 1 Whilst not specifically covered in the current draft of the Children and Young People’s Bill Intensive Fostering does fit with the Scottish Government’s vision for Children’s Services.


The expansion of intensive fostering should have a positive effect both on the experience and outcomes for young people and result in a reduction in spending on residential provision


22

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 – Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Staffing – Structural Reorganisation


Service Area & ABB Link Staffing


A restructuring of Social Work Services is underway driven by the need to improve leadership of the service and also to respond to national legislative changes and an associated range of policy initiatives. The initial plan for this restructuring will result in reduced numbers of senior and a reconfiguration of middle management and frontline management posts. It aims to provide greater clarity between strategic, tactical and operational responsibilities as well as sharpen managerial, professional and business leadership. The following specific national drivers have been taken into account:

• Changing Lives: Report of the 21st Century Social Work Review; • Public Bodies (Joint Working) (Scotland) Bill; • Children and Young People’s (Scotland)Bill; and • Criminal Justice redesign.

The intention behind the restructuring is to:

• Provide clear, easily understood leadership and management to staff; • Ensure accountability to the public; • Maintain the integrity, values and identity of social work; • Define clear strategic, tactical and operational responsibilities; • Ensure the Council will deliver and continuously improve its statutory social work

responsibilities; • Have sufficient flexibility in order to adapt to immediate changing governance

structures and those anticipated in the future; • Enhance capacity for business processes, financial monitoring and planning; • Sustain performance and quality management, training and organisational

development; • Be positioned to reconfigure and integrate front line services with partners through

engagement with local people and communities; and • Deliver best value for money.

Savings/Income Generation Option Amounts 2014/15: £200k 2015/16: £200k 2016/17: £200k Current expenditure on senior and middle management totals £1.92m.

22

It is expected to reduce this by at least £200k but precise figures are unavailable until the final shape of the structure is known, roles and functions defined, and posts evaluated. High level proposals are that the revised senior structure will be reduced by one Director (£125k) and one Senior Manager (£75k), which if implemented will achieve the level of saving outlined. A report will be presented to the December meeting of the Social Work committee outlining the new structure. There will be further changes through the structure that will further impact the overall savings proposal, although these details are not yet known.

Details on the Calculation of Savings Option Amounts Senior management expenditure totals £618k and middle management is £1.3m. Plans are being considered to replace the current Director of Social Work Services and 4 locality Senior Social Work Managers with a reduced number of Heads of Service. There are further plans to reconfigure middle management, which are dependent on redesigning the middle management tier with a number of Service Manager posts. Day to day operational management will continue to be provided locally by retaining the current tier of Senior Social Workers.

Details on Staffing Implications and how this will be managed Staff engagement sessions have been arranged and plans for the restructure are being presented for discussion and feedback. These will be followed up with focus group discussions with particular groups of staff. There will be wide consultation with key partners and all stakeholders. The option and savings is subject to discussion with the Council’s Joint Trades Union representatives and the implementation of Council policies applicable to job evaluations and restructuring. A Working Group is being convened to implement and oversee this change. This will include Human Resources, Trade Unions and others judged to be best placed to assist.

Issues/Concerns Regarding Deliverability of Indicated Savings The savings will depend on decisions about integration with Health and the management of arrangements for the new Integrated Body. Negotiating job descriptions, person specifications and undertaking job evaluations will be critical. The achievement of this saving will involve staff working in new ways and taking on new, although appropriate, roles and responsibilities including front line professionals having greater discretion in delivering services.

22

Impact Assessment


The restructure is being undertaken to ensure that the service is fit for purpose, based on specific national initiatives. The needs of the service user is intrinsic to this restructure.

Effect on Staff 2 Any restructure will impact on staff; precise details are not yet known, although plans are in place to ensure that the restructure is conducted in accordance with good practice and is delivered in partnership with our stakeholders.


Our restructure will have no negative impact on other services within the Council.

Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1 The revised service structure will ensure that our service is fit for purpose in delivering services to all of our care groups.


The revised service structure will ensure that our service is fit for purpose in delivering services to all of our care groups. Council Priority 3 – Care for our Older and Vulnerable People 1

The revised service structure will ensure that our service is fit for purpose in delivering services to all of our care groups.


Not applicable


Not applicable


Not applicable


Not applicable


A full impact assessment will be undertaken prior to implementing these changes. This will be based on consultations within the Council, with partner agencies, third sector providers and representatives of service users. The impact on staff will also be assessed and they will be fully engaged in the change

22

process.


An action plan based on identified emerging risks will be developed as the process unfolds.

23

Budget Development Process 2014/15 - 2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Third Sector Funding


Service Area & ABB Link Directorate, Area Framework, Strategic Improvement and Engagement, Strategic Planning and Resource Planning


The controllable budget for 2013/14 under consideration for this saving is £1,764,430 of which £103,167 has been ring fenced to enhance the Third Sector commissioning process that was intended. This has not currently been committed to any specific projects.



The saving is the full amount of the, currently, un-allocated budget.


No staffing implications.


The saving can be delivered in full,


No Effect

Effect on Staff 1

No Effect.


23

No Effect.


No Effect.


1

No Effect.


No Effect.


No Effect.


1

No Effect.


No Effect.


No Effect.


Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts Tolerate – No particular measures required

24


Savings Option Integration of Libraries, Customer Service Centres & Registrations


Service Area & ABB Link Libraries, Customer Service Centres & Registration


This template covers phase 2 of the integration to complete the programme that was started in 2013/14. In 2013/14 integration of libraries, customer services and registration is in progress and will be completed in the following locations: Central Dumfries; Stranraer; Newton Stewart; Dalbeattie; Thornhill; and Lockerbie. Agreed savings of £126,000 will be achieved. In 2014/15, integration would be undertaken in the eight remaining towns/villages where there are existing customer service centres (CSC’s), libraries and registration facilities including completing Lochmaben which has been moved to year 2 due to delays in the capital works: Langholm Service base in secondary school or alternative building to be agreed Lochmaben Integrated services base in refurbished Town Hall Sanquhar Service base in Library or Customer Service Centre. Kirkcudbright Service base to be agreed through Kirkcudbright Charter project Castle Douglas Integrated services base on refurbished site at Market Hill Annan Integrated service base in Victoria Halls Kirkconnel Service base in Hillview Leisure Centre Moffat Service base in Town Hall with in partnership with Development Trust

In addition to this, there are nine communities which have libraries but do not have access to a Customer Service Centre. Since Integration is intended to provide equitable, proportionate delivery of services, it is logical to consider options for these settlements as well. It is proposed that we improve the service to these communities by offering integrated library, registration and customer services. There would be a reduction in the opening hours of the facilities; however these proposals would allow us to greatly improve the offer to the customer by increasing the number of services available to include Council Tax and Benefit enquiries, fault reporting and registration of events. The communities affected by these proposals are:

Georgetown Lochthorn Lochside Wigtown Whithorn Port William Dalry Gatehouse Eastriggs

24

The current/future service profile at the proposed locations is set out in the table below:-

Location Current Library (hrs per wk)

Current Registration (hrs per wk)

Current CSC’s (hrs per wk)

Future Integrated (hrs per wk)

Langholm 16 35 35 17 Lochmaben 12 0 35 12 Sanquhar 13 5 35 17 Kirkcudbright 46 35 35 36 Castle Douglas 52 35 35 36 Annan 48 35 40 45 Kirkconnel 17 5 35 17 Moffat 17 35 35 17 Georgetown 47 36 Lochthorn 47 36 Lochside 32 17 Wigtown 40.5 3 17 Whithorn 12 2 12 Eastriggs 12 12 Port William 10.25 9 Dalry 9 9 Gatehouse 11.5 9

An Indicative Population Model has been used to propose service provision based on the size of the population. Statistical evidence has also been checked which shows us the dropping usage rates in both Libraries and Customer Service Centres. We know that Libraries are not busy on Saturday afternoons and that one evening per week would be sufficient based on low use rates. As is the national trend, Library use is decreasing in terms of physical visits with virtual use on the increase. For the Dumfries facilities, the Ewart will remain open on a Saturday afternoon and will also open 2 evenings. This would be taken into consideration when creating the opening period options for Georgetown, Lochthorn and Lochside so that one facility would be open each evening in Dumfries and there would be availability on a Saturday all day. Transaction rates in CSCs have been falling for the last 5 years with the drive towards Direct Debit and the introduction of both telephone and internet payment options. In addition the introduction of the Council Tax Payment card in 2012 has seen an even greater drop in the use of CSCs for Council Tax and Rent payments, particularly in rural areas where customers can now pay locally in the village shop or post office instead of having to travel to their nearest large town. Although there is a £199 transaction limit at PayPoint stores, the limit at Post Office is £999.99, and there is no limit to the number of transactions that a customer can make in one visit. From 1st April to 31st October 2013, there have been 31,524 cash transactions made through Customer Service Centres, and of these 725 were between £200 and £1000 and 25 were over £1000. Registration use is fairly static, however this is an appointment based service and need obviously varies dependant on the population size. Details in terms of the number of events registered are available for every registration office and these have been taken into consideration when assessing the opening hour and staffing requirements. Our staff have a wealth of knowledge and experience in their individual services and by bringing this knowledge pool together in one facility, and training all staff in all areas, we can provide job enrichment and sustainability of services going forward. A standard set of opening hours does not make sense across the region; the IPM gives us a tailored option appropriate to the size of the community, adjusting the range of hours to

24

include morning, lunchtime, evening and Saturday morning improves the range of hours available allowing greater choice of access times for all members of the community.

INDICATIVE POPULATION MODEL (IPM)

Location Population Potential Model Opening Sessions IPM

Level

1

Dumfries town centre 30K+ 50 hours per week

5 x morning 5 x lunch (2hrs) 5 x afternoon 2 x evening (2hrs) 1 x Saturday

IPM

Level

2

Stranraer 10K+

45 hours per week

4 x morning 5 x lunch (2) 5 x afternoon 2 x evening (2) 1 x Saturday morning

Annan 8k+

IPM

Level 3

Castle Douglas

3 – 5K 36 hours per week

4 x morning 2 x lunch (2) 5 x afternoon 1 x evening (2) 1 x Saturday morning

Dalbeattie Georgetown Lochthorn Lockerbie Kirkcudbright Newton Stewart

IPM

Level

4

Gretna *


2 x morning 2 x afternoon 1 x evening (2) 1 x Saturday morning

Kirkconnel Langholm Lochside Moffat Sanquhar

IPM

Level

5

Lochmaben


1 x morning 1 x afternoon 1 x evening (2) 1 x Saturday morning

Eastriggs Thornhill

IPM

Level

6

Port William

>1K 9 hours per week 1 x morning or afternoon 1 x evening 1 x Saturday morning

Gatehouse Whithorn Wigtown*

*Gretna integrated facility falls under IPM level 4 in population terms; however this facility is part of the Gretna Registration office which is extremely busy. The opening period for Gretna is therefore increased at 24 hours per week. *Wigtown library falls into the IPM level 6 in terms of population size, however the facility is part of Wigtown County Buildings. This premises were refurbished in 2003 and offer a

24

community facility incorporating RSPB visitor centre, museum and meeting rooms as well as the library which is currently open 40.5 hours per week. To reflect this well used building the open hours for the facility are suggested at IPM level 4. This savings option would contribute to fast-tracking the rationalisation of the Council’s property portfolio. It would result in fewer but better facilities. It would also achieve service improvements as follows: • Customers being able to access all three services from one location. The integrated

facilities would focus on providing access to council services, information provision, registration and library services, and would be able to receive payments for council services/ licences etc.

• Changes as a result of welfare reform mean that more customers will require access to computers and the internet for making online applications. In Dumfries and Galloway at present, Libraries are some of the few places where this is available free of charge. Customer Service Centre staff already provide support and assistance to benefit customers. Bringing the two services together means that we would have trained staff able to support customers both with basic IT skills and in completing online benefit application using the facilities available on site thus improving services for the customer.

• In addition, having Registration services on site means that our staff would be able to access the National Records for Scotland, this together with the wealth of local information held through libraries and customer service centres would mean that customers researching family and local history would have access to the widest range of information sources and would be supported in doing so by trained, skilled staff.

• Greater range of opening hours; including at least one evening per week as well as Saturday morning opening at all locations gives the community convenient access to our services. Increasing the range of opening hours gives access to all three services for the whole community including those who work themselves. As an example, we will now be able to offer couples who want to get married at the weekend the option to do so in our own facilities

• Options for opening periods would be produced on an evidence basis to take account of current usage trends in each location and communities would be consulted on their preferred option.

• Customers who pay their Council Tax and DGHP rents through Customer Service Centres would be encouraged to pay these charges through alternative existing facilities, local post offices and shops via Pay Point. These alternatives are available for longer opening hour periods than council facilities; often early morning until late evening and weekends, they are also available in a greater number of communities giving the customer the option to pay through their local store or post office, thus supporting local businesses. Cost per transaction for the council is higher through CSCs and we could also reduce the amount the council pays for secure cash uplift.

• Savings in running costs (staff and buildings) by locating all three services at one site and adjusting the number of opening hours.

Savings/Income Generation Option Amounts 2014/15: £391,872.00 2015/16: £391,872.00 2016/17: £391,872.00 The above amounts are over and above the £126,000 agreed for 2013/14. It should also be noted that around £190,000 of the 2014/15 saving has already been secured.

24


The total controllable budget for Libraries and Customer Service Centres subject to integration; the central Library support team and Registration services in 2013/14 is £1.3m (ABB analysis 2013/14). This does not include supplies and services which are subject to the corporate procurement efficiencies.

Community Staff costs saving

Property costs saving

Total Saving

Langholm £ 13,400 £8,300 £21,700 Lochmaben £17,000 £9,300 £26,300 Sanquhar £ 8,000 £5,100 £13,100 Kirkcudbright £ 22,275 £0 £22,275 Castle Douglas £10,000 £12,900 £22,900 Annan £ 60,000 £ 15,700 £75,700 Kirkconnel £0 £0 £0 Moffat £ 15,000 £0 £15,000 Georgetown £2,185 £10,870 £13,055 Lochthorn £7,157 £9,180 £16,337 Lochside -£250 £4,890 £4,640 Wigtown £16,295 £0 £16,295 Whithorn £ 687 £6,740 £7,427 Port William -£ 821 £ 900 £79 Dalry - £547 £0 (£547) Gatehouse £866 £2,235 £3,101 Eastriggs -£875 £385 (£490) TOTALS £170,372.00 £86,500.00 £256,872.00

2014/15 The saving of £391,872.00 is based on the following:- Description Saving Savings already achieved in addition to Year 1 target (£126K) £190,000.00 Staff savings from 2014/15 integration outlined above £170,372.00 Reduction in cash uplift services £25,000.00 ‘Fewer but better’ assets savings £86,500.00 Contingency funding -80,000.00 TOTAL £391,872.00

The potential saving has been reduced by £80,000 to allow for unforeseen issues and flexibility in the detailed changes required which will be the subject of regular reports and member scrutiny.

24

Details on Staffing Implications and how this will be managed Implementation of these changes will reduce the staffing complement in libraries, registration offices and customer service centres by 10.05 FTE. This reduction will be achieved through normal course and early retirements, deletion of vacant posts and redeployment. In addition, ring fenced recruitment opportunities through bumped ERVS and vacancies both within CCS and the wider Council have been made available to those staff affected by integration in 2013/14. This has taken 7 staff (5.31FTE) out of the affected pools. It is anticipated that this practice would continue for 2014/15.

Community Current FTE Proposed FTE Reduction Langholm 1.34 0.94 0.40 Lochmaben 1.40 0.70 0.70 Sanquhar 1.90 1.44 0.46 Kirkcudbright 3.43 2.00 1.43 Castle Douglas 3.55 3.00 0.55 Annan 9.00 5.75 3.25 Kirkconnel 1.94 1.94 0.00 Moffat 2.97 1.94 1.03 Georgetown 2.32 2 0.32 Lochthorn 2.59 2 0.59 Lochside 1 0.94 0.06 Wigtown 1.88 0.94 0.94 Whithorn 0.41 0.33 0.08 Port William 0.29 0.25 0.04 Dalry 0.28 0.25 0.03 Gatehouse 0.35 0.25 0.10 Eastriggs 0.40 0.33 0.07 TOTAL 35.05 25 10.05


The integration would be managed as a change programme with departmental resources applied for co-ordination of service delivery issues, alterations to buildings, HR issues, staff and trade union communications and community and customer engagement. Staff training would be required in order to facilitate delivery of the three services. This would be programmed into the delivery schedule and specialist staff already working in each area would be available to support this programme. There will be a requirement for capital investment to fund any necessary alterations to buildings where integrated services are located. This investment will form part of the Property (Non-Schools) Asset Class capital programme. Disposal of properties surplus to requirements may take some time. This will not prevent savings in property running costs being achievable prior to sale although there are likely to remain some running costs for buildings that have been moth-balled which may result in delay in achieving property savings. Funding to deal with any residual property costs will be required from the Corporate Change Fund, to support the delivery of this saving. This has been taken into account within the overall Change Fund target considered by Members of the Policy & Resources Committee on 5th November.

24

Impact Assessment Potential Effect Effect on Service User 2 Service users will take time to accustom themselves to changes but services will continue to be available in their community. The impact of these changes would be mitigated through marketing and by providing enhancing accessibility to services through the Contact Centre and Web. In many communities there will be additions to services available which will benefit the community. Effect on Staff 3 Staff reductions. Redeployment is likely to mean change in job location for some staff. This is mitigated through ring fenced recruitment opportunities being made available to affected staff. The additional training provided to those staff working in the new facilities means job enrichment and sustainability going forward. Effect on Other Council Services 2

Impact on DG First. Less buildings requiring cleaning services Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1 All services will continue to be available Council Priority 2 – Preparing our Young People for Adulthood and Employment

1

All services will continue to be available Council Priority 3 – Care for our Older and Vulnerable People 2 All services will continue to be available and in some locations there will be additional services offered. However there will be changes to opening times which older and vulnerable people will need to adapt to, these changes will take in to account the current usage information and will be more tailored to the needs of the community. Accessing all services in the one location makes a more convenient offer. Council Priority 4 – Support and Stimulate our Local Economy 1 No perceived impact Council Priority 5 – Maintain the safety and security of our region (including social sustainability)

1

No perceived impact Council Priority 6 – Protect and Sustain the Environment 1

Very limited effect expected. Any reduction to energy usage through reducing the estate will have a positive environmental impact.


No perceived impact

Total Potential Effect 15 Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts

• Establishment of programme plan • Widespread marketing/ promotion of changes • Staff training and development programme • Performance monitoring against milestones • Monitoring of customer satisfaction levels baseline information is available from

2012/13 Customer Satisfaction Survey undertaken in all facilities.

25

Budget Development Process 2014/15 - 2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Support Services – Functional Review

Directorate DGFirst

Service Area & ABB Link DGFirst Support Services – ABB Business Support


Through a functional review standardise administration functions, by modernising Support Service activities into two business hubs. This also includes the burial management and administration function. Support Services has 72 staff (65.4 FTE) located in DGFirst offices at Castle Douglas, Stranraer, Lockerbie and Dumfries. The savings will be realised through better use of technology by fully implementing the new burial management system and increased use of mobile working in service delivery using smart-phone and tablet technology. This will modernise the business activities in Support Services into two main business hubs at DGFirst offices in Dumfries and Stranraer. The revised structure will provide improved access to burial information and further efficiencies in the way Support Services carry out business activities.


2014/15 £151,125 (75% of full saving depending on speed of EVRS/Redeployment) 2015/16 £201,500 2016/17 £201,500


The saving is based on a reduction of 8.4 FTE staff including on-costs and 2 vacant posts reducing to a lower grade through job re-evaluation and competitive recruitment.

FTE Band Budget Saving 4.60 Band 2 £17.0k £ 78.2k 1.00 Band 3 £18.5k £ 18.5k 1.00 Band 5 £ 23.2k £ 23.2k 0.80 Band 7 £ 22.8k £ 22.8k 1.00 Band 12 £ 53.0k £ 53.0k

Replace a Band 4 with a Band 2 £4.6k Replace a Band 3 with a Band 2 £1.2k GRAND TOTAL* £201.5k

* (75% of full saving depending on speed of EVRS/Redeployment)

25


Reduction in staff numbers by 8.40 FTE through removal of 2.00 FTE vacancies and 6.40 FTE EVRS/Redeployment with an additional 2 vacant posts being reduced to a lower grade through Job Evaluation. This will be managed through the Support Service functional review and consultation with Support Service staff, DGFirst services and unions.

Removal of Vacancies EVRS/Redeployment 1.00 FTE at Band 2 3.60 FTE at Band 2 1.00 FTE at Band 3 1.00 FTE at Band 5 0.80 FTE at Band 7 1.00 FTE at Band 12


It is anticipated that staff reductions will be identified through a combination of natural wastage, early retirements and redeployment opportunities.


Increased automation will provide enhanced and easier access for Support Services staff to respond to service users.

Effect on Staff 2

Increased automation will provide staff with up to date information and better access to systems, there may be an increase to the workload of remaining staff.


Limited effect on other DGFirst services staff in responding to customer enquiries at local offices.


No impact is anticipated









25






Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts The functional review and standardisation of business functions is a low risk (priority 3) which is well within the Council’s risk appetite and therefore poses no real threat of occurrence or impact. To minimise any negative impacts further we should treat the risk, particularly the impact on staff and clients/customers through consultation and engagement in the functional review process and communicating the improvements to the relevant groups affected.

26

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 – Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Service Review - Staff and Associated Costs


Service Area & ABB Link

Planning and Environment Services: • Directorate and Business Services • Economic Development • Planning and Regulatory Services • Infrastructure and Commissioning • Integrated Transport and Commissioning


These savings relate to staff cost reductions associated with the service review process, details of which were reported to the Planning, Housing and Environment Committee at its meeting of 12 November 2013. These details can be summarised as follows:- Staff savings through a mixture of reduced working hours, vacancy management and voluntary early retirement, balanced with service redesign. During 2011/12 and continuing into early 2012/13, Planning and Environment Services underwent a major change process following a downsizing of some 15% in the establishment resource across the Department. When presenting the Planning and Environment Services Business Plan 2012/15 to Planning, Housing and Environment Services Committee on 18 October 2012, Members were advised that Service Reviews would be carried out for each of the four services within Planning and Environment Services to inform the 2014/15 budget development process and beyond. The Planning, Housing and Environment Services Committee approved the scope of the Service Reviews at its meeting on 9 July 2013. Members considered the options identified from the Service Reviews at the Planning, Housing and Environment Services Committee meeting on 20 November 2013.


26

Details on the Calculation of Savings Option Amounts Directorate and Business Services • 1 VER £20,000 Economic Development • Vacancy Management: 1FTE Access Officer Post £37,500 Planning and Regulatory Services • Reduced Working Hours £60,000 • Development Management – 3 VERs 110,000 • Development Planning and Environment – 2.2 VERS 65,194 • Energy/Sustainable Development – 1 VER 11,409 • Environmental Health – 1 VER 55,490 302,093 • Service Redesign -110,512 £191,581 Total Infrastructure and Commissioning • Network Strategy – 1 VER £47,000 • Infrastructure Vacancy Management 31,000 £78,000 Integrated Transport and Commissioning • Reduced Working Hours £7,689 • Vacancy Management Fleet Management 10,216 • DGC Buses Vacancy Management 44,800 £62,705 TOTAL £389,786 Note: equivalent staff reduction is 17.7FTEs. Service redesign builds 5.5FTEs back into services. Net reduction 12.2FTEs. Details on Staffing Implications and how this will be managed The Planning, Housing and Environment Services Committee considered the Department’s four Service Reviews at its meeting on 20 November 2013. These staff and associated savings are deliverable for 2014/15 and are balanced across the Department.

Issues/Concerns Regarding Deliverability of Indicated Savings The outcomes of the service reviews clearly identify the resulting implications of the above savings and conclude that they are manageable with the minimum disruption to service delivery.

Impact Assessment


There may be an impact on service users due to the reduction in staff resource leading to more time being taken to deal with customer issues/requests. Every effort will be made to address any impact through agile working, use of technology and service re-engineering.

Effect on Staff 2

It is recognised that this proposal has potential to impact on staff. Managers will work with remaining staff to confirm priorities and re-prioritise existing workloads. Minor effect due to bedding in of new management structures and settling in of staff teams where there has been a reduction and redesign.

26


Effects will be minor and will require active management to minimise impact.


Will require active management to minimise this impact.



Council Priority 3 – Care for our Older and Vulnerable People 1 Will require active management to minimise this impact.




Will require active management to minimise this impact. Council Priority 6 – Protect and Sustain the Environment 1


Effect on ability to attract External Funding 1 Attracting external funding is carried out mainly by teams – the ability to apply is unlikely to be affected.


The loss of a further net 12FTE establishment posts from the PES establishment will have a minimal effect on service delivery and will be managed with great care. Service Reviews clearly set out the changes to be made and the service delivery plans will be amended and achieved. Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts Service Reviews were completed by all services within PES and considered by Planning, Housing and Environment Services Committee on 20 November 2013. Effects on service users and staff will be addressed through the Service Review Action Plans including management and team restructuring, assessing priorities for managers, staff training and development and communication with staff and service users.

27

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 – Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Service Review – Economic Development


Service Area & ABB Link Economic Development


These savings relate to reductions against Economic Development budgets identified through the service review process, details of which were reported to the Planning, Housing and Environment Committee at its meeting of 12 November 2013. These details can be summarised as follows:- Option 1 Business and Enterprise Re-design Food & Drink Initiative £24,000 The main focus of the team is to support the region’s small to medium sized enterprises (SME’s) which form the majority of the Dumfries & Galloway business base. The service operates support programmes such as Business Gateway and Financial Assistance to Small Business (FASB) grant schemes. A key focus for the service is to support the development of key economic sectors such as tourism and food and drink, and working with the private sector. A review of the food & drink sector support has resulted in an opportunity to reduce the level of externally commissioned activity from £50,000 per year to £26,000 - thus providing a savings option of £24,000. The review highlighted the opportunity to provide a level of service from existing council services which would mitigate against any loss of service through a reduced commission. Option 2 Employability and Skills Re-design Employer Engagement Delivery £6,000 The team focuses service delivery on three strands; direct employability support for young people and adults, strategic planning for employability and employer engagement. The development of the Employability Partnership for Dumfries and Galloway is also being taken forward through the team. The team provides these services on a region-wide basis but also recognises that each area within the region needs locally tailored solutions. A review of a one year pilot project to deliver employer engagement for employability support to micro, small and medium sized businesses has resulted in an opportunity to redesign the way in which this is delivered. Currently this an external contract to the value of £40,000 per year. Through creating a new post within the Economic Development Service structure at a total cost of £34,000 would provide a savings option of £6,000.


27

Details on the Calculation of Savings Option Amounts Re-design Food and Drink Initiative Re-design Employer Engagement Contract Total

£24,000 £6,000 £30,000

Details on Staffing Implications and how this will be managed Savings Option 2 (Employer Engagement) requires a new post to be created.

Issues/Concerns Regarding Deliverability of Indicated Savings No issues regarding deliverability.


The savings options will not result in a reduction in the level of service provided.

Effect on Staff 1

The savings options will not impact on staff.


The savings options will not impact negatively on other services.

Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1 Council Priority 2 – Preparing our Young People for Adulthood and Employment 1

Savings Option 2 (Employer Engagement) will strengthen the services provided to address youth sand adult unemployment. The role will promote opportunities to employers to create new employment opportunities. Council Priority 3 – Care for our Older and Vulnerable People 1

Council Priority 4 – Support and Stimulate our Local Economy 1 The options presented will continue support for a key economic sector (food & drink) and enhance the overall promotion and support in place for micro, small and medium size business to benefit from training and employability initiatives. Council Priority 5 – Maintain the safety and security of our region (including social sustainability) 1

Not applicable Council Priority 6 – Protect and Sustain the Environment 1

Not applicable

Effect on ability to attract External Funding 1 There will be no negative impact on the Council’s ability to attract external funding. Securing the Employer Engagement post will have a positive impact on the ability to attract increased levels of external funding to support youth and adult employment.

27


Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts The impact of the reduction for Savings Option One (Food & Drink Commission) has been mitigated by a reprioritisation of workplan activities across the Service to ensure any potential gaps in delivery are covered.

28

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Service Review Planning and Regulatory Services


Service Area & ABB Link Planning and Regulatory Services


These savings relate to reductions against Planning and Regulatory Services budgets identified through the service review process, details of which were reported to the Planning, Housing and Environment Committee at its meeting of 12 November 2013. These details can be summarised as follows:- Operational Budget Reductions £25,000 can be removed from the non staff costs budget lines by reducing expenditure and achieving efficiencies in a number of operational areas across the service within the supplies and services budget heading. Review Fees & Charges £30,000 can be raised by increasing non statutory fees and charges in relation to the provision of copy certificates, copy notices, provision of letters of comfort, inspections of unauthorised works, the provision of pest control services and a range of other minor fees and charges. Most of these charges relate to Building Standards or Planning. These have been benchmarked against other Councils and it is proposed to increase where possible to bring us into line with average charges being applied elsewhere taking into account the cost of the service. Full details of the proposed increases are shown on the attached appendices. The breakdown of increased income is as follows- Planning and Building Standards (see attached sheet with 15% volume reduction assumption applied) £25,000 Environmental Health (see attached sheet for details) £4000 New legislation- High Hedges- application fee level still to be determined £1000 (minimal assumption)


Details on the Calculation of Savings Option Amounts Operational Budget Reductions (as outlined above) £25,000 Review Fees and Charges (as outlined above – see Appendix) £30,000 Details on Staffing Implications and how this will be managed none

Issues/Concerns Regarding Deliverability of Indicated Savings The revised fees and charges would be introduced with effect from 01/04/14. There will need to be a lead in period to update and revise schedules of fees and charges and to advise customers of impending changes. The anticipated total increase in income is based on a

28

conservative estimate allowing for a small element of drop off in demand. The non staff budget reductions would be applied to the 2014/15 revenue budget estimates. The supplies and services budget would be reduced by £25k.

Impact Assessment


Higher levels of non statutory fees and charges would be payable for example to obtain copies of certificates, notices etc.

Effect on Staff 1

None

Effect on Other Council Services 1 Higher charges would apply to internal as well as external customers for example in relation to HMO or licensing inspections. Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1 Council Priority 2 – Preparing our Young People for Adulthood and Employment 1







Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts Tolerate- most of the increased charges relate to circumstances in which property is being bought, sold or built and as such these charges form a minor cost element. Such charges allow us to maintain service at current levels and that can explained to customers through some of our ongoing communication channels including our Agents forums.

Environmental Health revised fees and charges 2014/15

Type Current fee

Proposed fee

Increase Numbers Additional income

Property Enquiries

£58.20 £63.50 £5.30 70 £371

Private Pest Control Contracts

Variable (depends on size of premises)

Av £240 Additional 10 contracts

£2400

Licensing Scotland Act Certs

£116.40 £150 £33.60 10 £336

Food Export Certificates

£63.50 + £27.50 if visit required

£68 + £29 if visit required

£4.50 & £1.50

220 £990

Num

ber

reci

eved

12-

13 C

urre

nt

Cost

To

tals

Pro

pose

d Co

sts

Pro

pose

d To

tals

Cu

rren

t To

tal

Inco

me

Diff

renc

e

Prop

erty

Insp

ectio

ns

7022

0.00

£

15

,400

.00

£

312.

00£

21,8

40.0

0£

15

,400

.00

£

6,44

0.00

£

Co

nfirm

atio

n of

Com

plet

ion

5122

0.00

£

11

,220

.00

£

312.

00£

15,9

12.0

0£

11

,220

.00

£

4,69

2.00

£

W

indo

w In

spec

tion

Appr

aisa

l 0

132.

00£

-£

-

£

-

£

-£

-

£

Conf

irmat

ion

Layo

ut A

ccor

ds w

ith fo

rmer

app

rova

l 0

132.

00£

-£

17

5.00

£

-

£

-£

-

£

Conf

irmat

ion

Deve

lopm

ent e

xem

pt

1966

.00

£

1,

254.

00£

175.

00£

3,32

5.00

£

1,

254.

00£

2,07

1.00

£

Le

tter

Pro

vidi

ng B

uild

ing

Stan

dard

s or P

lann

ing

Info

in

resp

ect o

f pre

viou

s Wor

ks

073

.00

£

-

£

125.

00£

-£

-

£

-£

Copi

es o

f dec

ision

Not

ices

(Bui

ldin

g St

anda

rds o

r Pl

anni

ng)

200

49.0

0£

9,80

0.00

£

10

0.00

£

20

,000

.00

£

9,80

0.00

£

10

,200

.00

£

Perm

it to

Occ

upy

Tem

pora

ry R

aise

d St

ruct

ure

1213

2.00

£

1,

584.

00£

200.

00£

2,40

0.00

£

1,

584.

00£

816.

00£

Sa

fety

at S

port

s Gro

und

Cert

ifica

te

582

1.00

£

4,

105.

00£

900.

00£

4,50

0.00

£

4,

105.

00£

395.

00£

Am

endm

ent t

o Sa

fety

at S

port

s Gro

und

Cert

1

412.

00£

412.

00£

45

0.00

£

45

0.00

£

412.

00£

38

.00

£

Desig

nate

d Gr

ands

tand

Saf

ety

Cert

0

821.

00£

-£

90

0.00

£

-

£

-£

-

£

Lice

nsin

g Sc

otla

nd S

ect.

50 C

ert

1458

.00

£

81

2.00

£

150.

00£

2,10

0.00

£

81

2.00

£

1,28

8.00

£

HM

O39

46.0

0£

1,79

4.00

£

15

0.00

£

5,

850.

00£

1,79

4.00

£

4,

056.

00£

TOTA

L46

,381

.00

£

76,3

77.0

0£

29

,996

.00

£

Less

: Ass

umed

15%

Red

uctio

n in

Vol

ume

4,49

9.00

£

Tota

l Net

Sav

ing

25,4

97.0

0£

29 Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Commission – Grounds and Public Open Space Maintenance

Directorate DGFirst

Service Area & ABB Link Neighbourhood Services

Narrative Description of Savings Option Across Dumfries and Galloway the Council manages and maintains 1200 areas of ground and open space plus areas that receive planting and floral displays The current grounds maintenance budget is £2,835,320. This saving relates to cost reductions of £200,000 through reducing maintenance in burial grounds with less than 2% use and through maintaining less open space. In terms of efficiency APSE's Performance Networks benchmarking data identifies that 56% of parks and grounds maintenance costs relate to staff, 16.5% to premises, 12.5% to vehicles, with the rest made up of equipment and materials, sub-contractors, administration and central establishment charges. However Dumfries and Galloway proportion is split 61% staff, 3% property and 19.5% for vehicles plant and equipment. APSE performance networks also show the cost of maintaining a hectare of open space for Dumfries and Galloway as being £1,790 which is the lowest within our family group the average for this family group is £4,062 more than twice as much. They also show cost per household for provision of open space which is £68 for Dumfries and Galloway compared with a group average of £59. APSE also benchmark playgrounds provision - Dumfries and Galloway have 12.78/1000 children compared with the group average of 4.18. Saving Options – The detailed application of the following savings will be determined by the DGFirst Management Committee and an allowance of £60,000 has been retained to allow Members some flexibility in determining the details of these changes. 1. Burial Grounds could be maintained on the basis of the amount of use they receive, with the lowest usage having the maintenance reduced to a minimum of three cuts per year. This reduction would not be applied where there is a known tourist attraction (eg St Michaels Dumfries). With a 2% usage rate set this would result in 65 Burial Grounds having a reduced maintenance regime (see attached Appendix). This model would provide a saving of up to £66,000. 2. Reduction in grass cutting. The development of a commissioned service for Public Open Space maintenance together with a Parks and Open Space Strategy will identify further savings by prioritisation of our Council’s open space. Whilst it is essential that robust criteria are used to identify areas for reduced or no maintenance, it is likely that all major parks will be maintained and in smaller community parks access to and the areas immediately surrounding play equipment will be maintained, general amenity grass areas without any facilities, equipment or sports pitches will not be maintained, except where there is a road safety issue. Land out with the criteria could be turned into allotments, maintained by the community with initiatives around community support led projects to develop and grow their own plants and food, or left as wildlife habitats and wild areas. Some areas may also be eligible for sale redevelopment and/or capital receipts could then be received. 3. Neighbourhood Services currently has its own grounds mechanics who carry out minor repairs and

29 maintenance to mowers and other small items of equipment. It would be proposed for operational efficiency to transfer this workforce into Technical Services Vehicle Maintenance to maximise capacity and work basis.

Savings/Income Generation Option Amounts 2014/15: £200,000(including £60k to allow flexibility in delivery of saving) 2015/16: £200,000 2016/17: £ 200,000

Details on the Calculation of Savings Option Amounts Saving Options - 1. Burial Grounds. This saving is based on reducing the frequency from 15 cuts per year to a minimum of 3 cuts per year for locations identified as 'closed' Burial Grounds and where usage is less than 2% (see appendix 1). Burial Grounds Costing - Summary Current Contract Value Value reducing grass to 3 visits Saving Annandale 143,198.85 120,699.93 22,498.92 Nithsdale 152,369.08 131,103.55 21,265.53 Stewartry 104,462.20 95,263.36 9,198.84 Wigtown 106,392.06 93,262.86 13,129.20 66,092.49 The saving of £66,000 would require a reduction of the equivalent of 2.25FTE at an average cost of £22,500 per year plus two vehicles at an average cost of £7,500 per year. 2. Reduction in open space maintenance. There are 800 small areas of open space which receive grass cutting across Dumfries and Galloway based on the confirmed data for grounds maintenance. Cessation of grass cutting to 155 areas, approximately 20% of the small areas of open space would achieve a saving of £139,000. This equates to 8 FTE plus 3 vehicles, this could be achieved through VERS. The current establishment has 17 people aged 60+ and a further 20 aged 55+. The areas of open space that would not receive grass cutting will be subject to further consideration by the DGFirst Management Committee and an allowance of £60,000 has been retained to allow Members some flexibility in determining the details of these changes. 3. Neighbourhood Services currently has budget for three grounds mechanics who carry out minor repairs and maintenance to mowers and other small items of equipment. It would be proposed to transfer these operatives into the vehicle & plant maintenance service within Technical Services. Repairs would then only be charged to the service as and when work is carried out rather than absorbing the full cost of employment. This would equate to a saving of £55,000. Summary Burial Grounds - Reduced Frequency of Cuts in Low Usage locations £66,000 Reduction in Open Space Maintenance £139,000 Reduction in Grounds Mechanics Costs £ 55,000 Less Allowance for Flexibility (£60,000) Net Saving £200,000

29 Details on Staffing Implications and how this will be managed These savings would require the deletion of 8 permanent posts during 2014/15 this could be achieved through VER as we currently have 17 people in the service over 60 years of age. The actual reductions may be lower than these levels depending on how the £60,000 provision for flexibility is utilised.

Reduction in work FTE lost

Burial grounds 2.25

Reduction in grass cutting 6.00

Total 8.25

Issues/Concerns Regarding Deliverability of Indicated Savings This option involves a considerable amount of redesign of the service and a report will be brought forward to the DGFirst Management Committee before the end of the current financial year. Staff and union consultation will also be required so an early decision on the details of the revised arrangements will be necessary to ensure that the 2014/15 savings are fully achieved.

Impact Assessment Potential Effect Effect on Service User 2 There will be a minor impact on service users due to the reduction in staff resources and a the new Parks and Open Space Strategy and the integrated service team plan will clearly set out the revised service arrangements to ensure that service levels are achieved Effect on Staff 3 It is recognised that this proposal will impact on staff. Managers will work with colleagues to confirm priorities and re priorities workloads in line with the service integration. Service management arrangements will be carefully monitored to ensure service levels and standards can be achieved Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1

No impact to any other Council service is anticipated.






Limited although the loss of employment of 8 staff from the service will be a factor and area will look unkempt.


Limited


No Impact or some improved bio-diversity


It would be anticipated that effects would be negligible

29 Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities 1

Will require proactive management to minimise impacts

Effect on ability to attract External Funding 1 Attracting external funding is primarily carried out by teams within the service and can be project specific. The ability to apply is unlikely to be affected. Total Potential Effect 15 The loss of some 8 permanent posts from within DGFirst Neighbourhood Service establishment will affect the service delivery and will have to be managed with great care. Key priorities for service delivery will have to be included in the DGFirst business plan, linking into the commissioned service once developed and with the a New Parks and Open Space Strategy and the integrated service team plan and will have to clearly set out the changes to be made and the service levels to be achieved. Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts Effects on service users and staff will be addressed through management and team restructuring, assessing priorities for managers, staff training and development and communication with staff and service users

29 Appendix 1 Burial Grounds with less than 2% usage. Burial Ground Name Location % use over last 5 Years Kirkmichael Nithsdale 0% St Josephs Nithsdale 0.04% Staplegordon Annandale and Eskdale 0.05% Kirkdale Wigtown 0.06% Clachan of Penninghame Wigtown 0.06% Wauchope Annandale and Eskdale 0.10% Kirkcolm Wigtown 0.13% Minnigaff churchyard Wigtown 0.13% Portpatrick New Wigtown 0.19% Minnigaff Wigtown 0.19% Sheuchan Wigtown 0.25% Sorbie Kirk yard Wigtown 0.25% Tyron Nithsdale 0.30% Bargrennan Wigtown 0.31% Tongland Stewatry 0.36% Tundergarth Annandale and Eskdale 0.42% Eskdalemuir Annandale and Eskdale 0.42% Carruthers Annandale and Eskdale 0.42% Wanlockhead Nithsdale 0.47% Carsphairn Stewatry 0.54% Kirkmahoe Nithsdale 0.55% Keir Nithsdale 0.55% Ewe’s Annandale and Eskdale 0.57% Wamphray Annandale and Eskdale 0.57% Half-Morton Annandale and Eskdale 0.68% Cairnryan Wigtown 0.69% Kirkandrews Stewatry 0.72% Corsock Stewatry 0.72% Kirkbean Nithsdale 0.76% Hutton and Corrie Annandale and Eskdale 0.78% Lochrutton Stewatry 0.81% St Mungo Annandale and Eskdale 0.89% Terregles Nithsdale 0.97% Ruthwell Nithsdale 0.97% Challoch Wigtown 1% Mouswald Nithsdale 1.02% Gamerigg Nithsdale 1.06% Parton Stewatry 1.08% Westerkirk Annandale and Eskdale 1.09% Glebe extension Wigtown 1.13% Kikgunzeon Stewatry 1.17% New Luce Wigtown 1.19% Johnstonebridge Annandale and Eskdale 1.20% Dalton Annandale and Eskdale 1.20% Applegarth Annandale and Eskdale 1.25% Buittle Stewatry 1.26%

29 Burial Ground Name Location % use over last 5 Years Torthorwald Nithsdale 1.31% Rerrick Stewatry 1.35% Cummertrees Annandale and Eskdale 1.46% Durisdeer Nithsdale 1.48% Hollywood Nithsdale 1.52% Balmaclellan Stewatry 1.53% Caerlaverock Nithsdale 1.57% Penpont Nithsdale 1.57% Closeburn Nithsdale 1.61% Sorbie Wigtown 1.63% Irongray Nithsdale 1.65% Glenluce Wigtown 1.69% Glasserton Wigtown 1.76% Kirkpatrick-Juxta Annandale and Eskdale 1.77% Dunscore Nithsdale 1.78% Tinwald Nithsdale 1.78% Borgue Stewatry 1.80% Wigtown top Wigtown 1.82% Balmaghie Stewatry 1.98% Southwick Stewatry 2.07% Kirkinner Wigtown 2.07% Kell Stewatry 2.16% Kirkcowan Wigtown 2.19% Kirkpatrick Fleming Annandale and Eskdale 2.24% Twynholm Stewatry 2.34% Leswalt Wigtown 2.38%

30

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 – Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Commission – Fleet Management


Service Area & ABB Link Integrated Transport and Commissioning – Fleet Management


These savings relate to reductions against the Fleet Management commission with DGFirst as identified through the service review process, details of which were reported to the Planning, Housing and Environment Committee at its meeting of 12 November 2013. These details can be summarised as follows:- 2014/15 The current inspection interval for light fleet (< 3,500Tonnes) in D&G is 17 weeks. This increased from 13 weeks in 2011/12 without any adjustment. Benchmarking shows most Scottish authorities are inspecting either annually (52 weeks) or twice annually (26 weeks). Adjusting the inspection frequency to annually would therefore bring potential savings of between 2 and 3 hours per vehicle. Existing rate is £30 per hour plus on-costs. There are 474 light vehicles, therefore saving estimated at between £28,440 and £42,660. This would equate to 1 FTE member of staff within Fleet Management, saving £30k per annum. Future Years Further review of the Commission can be undertaken in 2013/14 to bring forward savings for future years. For example, inspection of plant items is also scheduled at 17 weeks, which could again be reduced to annual inspection. There are 301 plant items on fleet, indicating a further saving of between £23,478 and £35,217.


Details on the Calculation of Savings Option Amounts Reduction of 1 FTE member of staff @ £30k per annum

Details on Staffing Implications and how this will be managed Reduction in inspection frequencies would require less staff input from DGFirst vehicle Maintenance, equivalent to 1 x FTE member of staff. DGFirst is currently at its full staffing complement, therefore the saving will require either non-filling of vacancies as they arise, or securing additional work from external parties. The same requirement would apply to savings in future years. Deferring additional savings until 2015/16 would give DGFirst the opportunity to seek and secure additional workload from 3rd party clients, or to establish their MOT facility. Following the reduction in workload from the loss of Fire & Rescue Service maintenance work, and allied to a reduced inspection frequency, there should be sufficient capacity within the workshops to fulfil additional workload. The template suggests savings of £30,000 in 2015/16 and 2016/17, but Fleet

30

management will engage with DGFirst to clarify the fair cost of the Commission at reduced frequencies and opportunities for bringing budgeted costs / income in line with this.

Issues/Concerns Regarding Deliverability of Indicated Savings Reduced inspection frequencies would carry some risk of work not being identified at an early stage, therefore increasing the cost of repairs. Service drivers are required to carry out daily checks on vehicles, and therefore most issues affecting legality of vehicles should be identified outwith the inspection process. Continued and increased emphasis on compliance with daily checks is being promoted through distribution of the revised Driver’s Handbook, and liaison with service management.

Impact Assessment

Potential Effect Effect on Service User 1 Effect on Staff 2

Reduction in establishment or increase in external work.


Whilst there is increased emphasis on service dept’s responsibility in terms of vehicle checks, departments will also benefit from increased availability of vehicles. Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1 Council Priority 2 – Preparing our Young People for Adulthood and Employment 1




Council Priority 6 – Protect and Sustain the Environment 1 Effect on ability to attract External Funding 2 Creates potential capacity for increased external work and funding.


Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts Detailed discussion with DGFirst Vehicle Maintenance management on implementation of reduced frequencies, and on any impacts arising.

31

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 – Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Capitalisation of Surface Dressing Works


Service Area & ABB Link Infrastructure and Commissioning - Strategic Commissions – Roads Maintenance Management Service


Capitalisation of £0.5m funding for the Surface Dressing Programme. The proposal is that £0.5 Million of works currently funded from the Roads Maintenance revenue budget are transferred to be funded through the Capital Investment Programme. The key issue is that these costs will now require to be funded through the monies currently available to support the Council’s Capital Investment Strategy. Accommodating these costs within the Capital Investment Strategy will therefore reduce (by £500k per annum) the funding available to support other emerging capital investment priorities. In order for this approach to be appropriate it is essential that the works to be funded from capital meet the criteria for capitalisation as defined by the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom. Surface Dressing involves the even spray application of an emulsion bituminous binder through a purpose built spray tanker onto the existing road surface followed immediately by the even application of aggregate chippings to ‘dress' the binder. Surface dressing offers many advantages:

• Seals the road surface against ingress of water which is known to be one of the major causes of asphalt pavement deterioration.

• Arrests the deterioration of the road surface and underlying road pavement structure.

• Restores the necessary level of skid resistance to the road surface with the resultant benefits of reduction in skid related traffic accidents.

• Timely intervention will enable worn out road surfaces to last longer thereby increasing the time to when surfacing is required.

• Can help to reduce spray caused by vehicles travelling on wet road surfaces. Proper attention to design and execution has provided surface dressing lifetimes in excess of 10 years. As these works prolong the useful life of the treated road surface, a key test for the capitalisation of expenditure is met.


31

Details on the Calculation of Savings Option Amounts The Surface Dressing Programme of £2.1m is currently funded from revenue and it is proposed that £0.5m of these works are transferred from revenue to be funded through the Capital Programme (through an equivalent increase in the funding available to the Infrastructure Asset Class Programme). The amount of £0.5 Million is a prudent estimate of the value of surface dressing works that meet the criteria for capitalisation. Further work will now be undertaken with colleagues in Finance, and with the Council’s External Auditors, to assess the extent to which further capitalisation could be undertaken. The results of this work will be assessed as part of subsequent budget processes although it is important to recognise that further capitalisation of works will either further restrict the funding available to support other capital investment priorities or require increased borrowing which would result in increased loan charges to be met through the revenue account over the longer term. Loan Charges of approximately £65k per annum for 10 years would be incurred for each £0.5 Million of additional borrowing undertaken. Details on Staffing Implications and how this will be managed There are no impacts on staff as these works will now be funded through the capital programme.

Issues/Concerns Regarding Deliverability of Indicated Savings Limiting the extent of works to be capitalised to £0.5 Million at this stage is designed to ensure that the works now to be funded from the capital programme meet the criteria capitalisation as defined by the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom. Surface dressing does improve the lifespan of the asset, often significantly. In terms of improving the Road Condition Index (RCI), the primary key performance indicator for this Commission, surface dressing is a cost-effective method. It is evident that other authorities including Aberdeenshire, Scottish Borders, Moray, Perth & Kinross and Argyll & Bute are using capital funding for their surface dressing programmes.

Impact Assessment

Potential Effect Effect on Service User 1 No adverse effect.

Effect on Staff 1

No adverse effect.

Effect on Other Council Services 2 Potential effect on other Council services through the reduction in funding available to support other capital investment priorities. Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1

No adverse effect.

31


No adverse effect.

Council Priority 3 – Care for our Older and Vulnerable People 1 No noticeable adverse effect.

Council Priority 4 – Support and Stimulate our Local Economy 1 No adverse effect.


No noticeable effect. Council Priority 6 – Protect and Sustain the Environment 1 No noticeable effect. Effect on ability to attract External Funding 1 No adverse effect.


Measures to Reduce/Address Risks and Minimise Any Negative Impacts Any impact will be managed through appropriate balancing of the revenue and capital funding elements of the Roads Maintenance Management Service Commission. This will include seeking to adjust the Infrastructure Asset Class Programme funding for the 2014/15 financial year, previously agreed in outline by PHES Committee on 15 Jan 13, to include the re-allocation of some Surfacing capital project funding to additional Surface Dressing and Planned Structural Overlay projects.

32

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options Savings Option Maximising Revenue

Directorate Community and Customer Services

Service Area & ABB Link Leisure Facilities and Arts & Museums


This option is made up of the following three elements:- i To Lease/sell three caravan sites to the private sector. ii To cease the operation of the staff easy access scheme across all leisure centres iii To increase Fees and Charges for activities that are below national average prices over and above the inflationary increases. iv To increase ticket prices at Robert Burns Centre Film Theatre and Ryan Centre Theatre.


I. Lease of Caravan parks to Private sector = £30,000 II. Staff Easy Access = £13,000

III. Fees and charges = £22,000 IV. Cinema Tickets = £5,675


Leasing Caravan Parks Silvercraigs, Lochside and Lochmaben Caravan Parks would be leased to the private sector for an annual rental fee. The savings based on 2012/13 net controllable budget plus rental value for the 3 sites would amount to £30,000 Staff Easy Access Deleting/withdrawing the current staff Easy Access Scheme to leisure facilities would result in increased income of around £13,000 based on retaining the same level of customer usage. (Leisure and Sport currently generate 14,000 staff easy access attendances per annum). Increase Fees and Charges Leisure and Sport fees and charges were mapped out against the national Average (ref: Sportscotland, Charges for Sports facilities 2012/13). The following activities are currently below national average charges Profiles Active & Style packages - 7.3% to 18.6% Grass pitches – 40.3% General swimming – 5.4% Gym and fitness classes – 7.2%

32

% Increase

Current Charge

Proposed Charge Additional Income

Profiles membership (Active & style pacakge) 5 – 8%

* *

£ 18,000* Grass Pitches w/out change 10%

£10.05 £11.40 £ 320

Grass Pitches with change 10% £19.45 £22.00 £ 630 General Swimming (adult) 3% £3.35 £3.60 £ 2,000 General Swimming (junior) 3% £2.05 £2.25 £ 390 Casual Gym 3% £3.70 £3.90 £ 300 Fitness class 3% £4.20 £4.45 £ 350 TOTAL £ 22,000**

*There are 4 payment options Direct Debit (single and couple) and annual fee (single and couple) that combined will achieve £18,000 savings. **A 2% drop in attendances factored into savings. Increase Film Theatre tickets Ticket charges at Robert Burns Centre Film Theatre and Ryan Centre have been reviewed against charges by private cinema operators within the region. To bring charges up to the level of private sector full price (adult) charges would need to be increased by 9.5% and concession (children) charges would need to increase by 22%. A flat increase of only 9.5% is proposed so concession rates would still remain below private sector charges.

Current Charge

Proposed Charge

Increase Additional income

Full price £6.30 £6.90 9.5% £3,150 Concessions £4.70 £5.15 9.5% £2,525


There would be no staffing implications to any of the savings identified above


Lease or Sale of Caravan Parks Income from caravan sites is seasonal. It is anticipated that any new operator would wish to be in position to commence operation by the start of the season (April) and so an early decision on this saving is needed to engage with potential private operators. Staff Easy Access: At present staff at DGC and NHS currently receive a 25% discount on swim and gym activities. The easy access scheme has contributed to the council recently gaining the Silver standard in the SHAW award. The risk associated with achieving the target amount will depend on usage being retained at existing levels for those who currently use the Staff Easy access card. Fees and Charges: There is an agreed 3% annual inflationary increase for Fees and Charges across CCS, this forms part of the annual agreed budget. Any additional increases above that rate may have the greatest impact on low income customers resulting in a reduction of usage and would impact on achievability of this saving. However it is important to note that none of the proposed charges are above the national average. Increase Film Theatre tickets The greatest impact will be on low income customers resulting in a reduction of usage and would impact on achievability of this saving. 65% cinema sales were concessions. Concessions in Stranraer are largely children.

32

Impact Assessment

Potential Effect Effect on Service User 2 The service will remain the same for the service user albeit the cost to access certain activities for the service user will increase.

Effect on Staff 2

There will be no disruption to the service however seasonal staff at caravan parks may be impacted. The cost increase to staff through deletion of the staff easy access would be no different to the general public resulting in the service operating more equitably.

Effect on Other Council Services 1 None anticipated. Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1 Increased charges may slightly reduce accessibility to participation in some activities at Council operated facilities.


No direct effects identified Council Priority 3 – Care for our Older and Vulnerable People 2

Low negative impact. This relates to young people or older people being able to access services particularly the film theatre.

Council Priority 4 – Support and Stimulate our Local Economy 1 Neutral. The increases mean the Council’s leisure rates are similar in comparison to other local private sector providers resulting in customers migrating to the private sector. Council Priority 5 – Maintain the safety and security of our region (including social sustainability) 1

No direct effects identified



Effect on ability to attract External Funding 1 There will be no effect on external funding



Caravan Sites – The Risk that a private operator cannot be found. Treat: Advice from Procurement to ensure that opportunity is marketed robustly to find a suitable operator. Staff Easy Access – Risk of decreased usage. Tolerate: Ensure staff users are aware of changes and promote additional ways of purchasing gym and swim sessions for regular users (profiles plus) Fees and Charges Increase – Risk of decreased usage. Tolerate: Notification of price changes / increases in same mechanisms as used previously

33

Budget Development Process 2014/15 -2016/17 Savings/Income Generation Options

Savings Option Leisure and Sport - Education and Community Sports Hubs

Directorate Community and Customer Services

Service Area & ABB Link Leisure Facilities


Maximising the potential of our facilities in partnership with Education as a 2014/15 saving and the Community as a 2015/16 saving to promote and improve physical and mental health and well-being. This would ensure that services can still be delivered but being managed in a different way 2014/15 - School lets Dual use facilities with the exception of those with swimming pools (Merrick Leisure centre and Annan Pool) will be managed in partnership with education through the school lets process /promoted and developed through Active Schools and Community Sport officers. The following sites would transfer to education and savings would be primarily achieved through reduced staffing costs.

• Castle Douglas Sport Centre • Kirkcudbright Sports Centre • Dalbeattie Sports Centre • Eskdale Leisure and Sports Centre, (Langholm) * • David Keswick Athletic Centre, *

The Fitness Provision at both the Eskdale Centre and the David Athletic Centre will be delivered as a partnership with Education but retaining an element of and utilising Leisure and Sport professionally qualified staff. This approach helps to mitigate the staff impact specifically in Langholm where alternative staff employment will be challenging to identify. 2015/16 Community Sports Hubs Voluntary Management Committee made up from interested community sports clubs would be established and would then use volunteers to operate the following sites in partnership with the Council thus saving on staffing costs.

• King George V, Dumfries • Beechgrove Sports Centre, Moffat


33


School Lets – 2014/15 saving Facility Savings (net controllable Budget) / Staff Castle Douglas Sports Centre £12,900 / two staff Kirkcudbright Sports Centre £11,100 / one staff Dalbeattie Sports Centre £8,000 / two staff Eskdale Leisure and Sports Centre £18,500 / three staff David Keswick Athletic Centre £12,500 / three staff Total £63,000

Additional savings from 2015/16 onwards through Community Sports Hubs

Facility Savings (net controllable Budget) KGV £52,900 / five staff Beechgrove Sports Centre £45,100 / three staff Total £98,000


Implementation of any of these options will mean a reduction in the FTE requirement in these facilities. These reductions will be achieved through a proactive approach to identifying alternative employment within the service, early retirements, deletion of vacant posts and redeployment.


School Lets This proposal requires close working relationship between Leisure and Sport, Active Schools and Community Sport Staff and Education colleagues. Community Sport Hubs There are significant challenges in regard to TUPE and Procurement which will require to be developed and addressed during 2014/15 if this saving is to be achievable in 2015/16 and beyond.

Impact Assessment

Potential Effect Effect on Service User 2 Service users will require to familiarise themselves with changes in the way services are delivered and/or access services. Consideration will have to be given to how fitness suite users and casual users are accommodated.

Effect on Staff 3

Redeployment is likely to mean change in job location for some staff. Change will also provide development opportunities for some staff, although the challenges remain.

Effect on Other Council Services 2 School lets officers in some areas will experience an increase in volume in terms of let applications. Effect on Council’s Agreed Priorities Council Priority 1 – A good start in life for all our children 1

33

No direct effects identified.









Council Priority 6 – Protect and Sustain the Environment 2 Leisure and Sport staff currently carry out a scheduled maintenance programme of Multi use games areas and running tracks which will need to managed when sites transfer. Effect on ability to attract External Funding 1

There will be no effect on external funding.



• Impacts to staff will be minimised through effective communication and considered

management. • We will work with partners to maximise impact of available resources to minimise the

impacts to customers. • Staff training and development

Documents

Building the local economyegenda.dumgal.gov.uk/aksdumgal/images/att31846.pdfEducation/Planning & Environment 18 Smarter Home to School Transport 280 280 280 Social Work 19 Block Contracts