Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Sheffield City Region:
Assurance Framework February 2018
6018
Contents
1. About this Assurance Framework
2. About the Sheffield City Region
3. Structures and Roles
4. Ensuring Openness and Transparency
5. Making Robust Decisions
6. Measuring Success
7. Appendix: Monitoring and Evaluation Logic Models
Document verification:
Produced By: Reviewed by: Approved by: Lyndsey Whitaker, Melanie
Dei Rossi, Fiona Boden,
Felix Kumi-Ampofo
Ruth Adams Dave Smith and Eugene Walker
Version number: version 6
File location: \\SCR\SCRData\Policy_Development\Governance\Assurance Framework\2018\Documents
6018
Glossary
BCR Benefit to Cost Ratio
BMBC Barnsley Metropolitan District Council
CA Combined Authority
D2N2 Derby, Derbyshire, Nottingham and Nottinghamshire
DC District Council
DfT Department for Transport
ESFA Education and Skills Funding Agency
ESIF European Structural Investment Funds
FBC Full Business Case
FE Further Education
FLUTE Forecast the impact between Land-Use Transport and the Economy
FTE Full Time Equivalent
GVA Gross Value Added
HE Higher Education
LCR Leeds City Region
LEP Local Enterprise Partnership
LGF Local Growth Fund
LTA Local Transport Authority
MBC Metropolitan District Council
MCA Mayoral Combined Authority
MHCLG Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
NEET Not in Education, Employment or Training
NR Network Rail
OBC Outline Business Case
RGF Regional Growth Fund
SAF Single Assessment Framework
SBC Strategic Business Case
SCC Sheffield City Council
SCR Sheffield City Region
SCRIF Sheffield City Region Investment Fund
SEP Strategic Economic Plan
SYPTE South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive
VfM Value for Money
VfMS Value for Money Statement
WebTAG Web based Transport Appraisal Guidance
6018
1. About this Assurance Framework
The role of this document
1.1.1. The aim of this document is to establish how the SCR will use public money responsibly and transparently, and attain best value for public spending. This document sets out:
• The respective roles and responsibilities of the LEP, the Mayoral Combined Authority
(MCA) and other elements of the decision-making and delivery structure;
• The key processes for ensuring accountability, probity, transparency, legal compliance
and value for money;
• How potential investments to be funded by the SCR will be appraised, prioritised,
approved, and delivered;
• How the progress and impacts of these investments will be monitored and evaluated.
1.1.2. The Assurance Framework sits alongside several other SCR documents – most notably the
Constitution, including the Financial Regulations, the Strategic Economic Plan (SEP), and the
Monitoring and Evaluation Framework. The Framework has been developed in response to
the National LEP1 Assurance Framework guidance for and the best practice guidance on
governance and transparency2.
Keeping the Assurance Framework current
1.2.1. The SCR is continually working with Government to secure local control over additional
funding through the two Devolution Deals. Until such agreement is reached the Assurance
Framework will be applied only to the Local Growth Funds and other funding already
secured. Should agreement be reached on the SCR Devolution Deal then this Assurance
Framework would be updated in accordance with the national guidance3.
1.2.2. The SCR made a commitment in 2017 to review the Assurance Framework on an annual
basis at the end of each calendar year with a view to having a revised Framework in place for
February of the following year. The purpose of the review is to examine whether there is any
evidence that existing processes could be improved, and to consider any legal, funding, or
other contextual changes that might require a change of assurance processes. The review
also considers if any proposed changes to the Assurance Framework require changes to
other SCR documents, such as the Constitution. For example, the 2018 update to the
framework takes account of changes arising to LEP policies and procedures following the
Ney Review4 and the election of the Combined Authority’s first metro mayor in May 2018.
1.2.3. The next annual review of this document is scheduled to commence in December 2018. The
1https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/567528/161109_LEP_Assurance_Framework.pdf 2https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/679430/LEP_Governance_and_Transparency_Best_Practice_Guidance.pdf 3https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/516215/Single_Pot_Assurance_Framework.pdf 4https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-local-enterprise-partnership-governance-and-transparency
6018
LEP and MCA will approve any changes to the Assurance Framework in accordance with
normal voting procedures.
The structure of this document
1.3.1. The remainder of this document is structured around the following sections:
• Section 2 describes the Sheffield City Region, the City’s Plan for Growth and the
proposed Single Pot of funding
• Section 3 describes the structures and roles of the organisations that make up the SCR’s
decision-making bodies
• Section 4 describes policies for ensuring openness and transparency in what we do
• Section 5 explains how we make robust and evidenced decisions
• Section 6 explains how we deliver projects, monitor and evidence their success, and
learn from experience
6018
2. About the Sheffield City Region
Overview
2.1.1. The Sheffield City Region (SCR) is committed to putting in place stable, accountable and
transparent decision making. Critical to this is a private sector-led Local Enterprise
Partnership (LEP) which supports and works alongside a Mayoral Combined Authority
(MCA). This ‘SCR Model’ combines the best of private sector expertise and public sector
capacity, transparency and accountability.
2.1.2. The SCR MCA was established on the 1st April 2014. This comprises the nine local
authorities that collectively reflect the functional economic geography of the Sheffield City
Region (see Figure 1 below). On 3rd May 2018 SCR will elect a Mayor for the Combined
Authority.
Figure 1: Sheffield City Region Geography
The City Region’s Plan for Growth
2.2.1. The SCR has a 10-year Strategic Economic Plan (SEP)5 to create a bigger and stronger
private sector. The vision, priorities and strategic objectives of this Plan, and thus the future
economic growth of the City Region, is set out in figure 2.
5 The SCR SEP is accessible online at the Sheffield City Region’s website:
https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/SCR-Growth-Plan-March-2014-1.pdf
6018
Figure 2: The SEP’s vision for the growth of the SCR
2.2.2. Based on this Plan, the City Region was awarded £295.2m of devolved Local Growth Fund
(LGF) for investment between 2015/16 and 2020/21 through the Growth Deal agreed in July
2014. This aligns a range of funding streams including major scheme transport funding, skills
capital funding and business investment funding; formerly regional growth funding (RGF). A
further £30.7m was awarded in January 2015 and a third-round allocation in January 2017 of
£37.8m; thus a total LGF allocation of £363.7m.
2.2.3. The City Region’s Growth Deal also featured several freedoms and flexibilities. This included
allocating a number of revenue programmes to the City Region including the Growth Hub and
Skills Bank.
2.2.4. The LEP is currently in the process of refreshing the SEP. The new SEP will bring in the
latest evidence on the performance of the economy, and will respond to the changed context
in the wider UK economy.
2.2.5. The refreshed SEP will form the basis of a Local Industrial Strategy, with an emphasis on
ambition and inclusivity. It will seek to create a 21st Century Making City Region by building
on the City Region’s core strengths of designing, developing and distributing innovative
product solutions. The strategy will be developed throughout 2018. The final, agreed strategy
will be reviewed and updated on a regular basis to ensure a sound strategic basis for
investment and action.
About the Proposed Single Pot
2.3.1. In 2015, the City Region agreed a devolution deal with Government that included a
£30m allocation of funding per annum for 30 years which was to be invested to boost
economic growth. Five-yearly Gateway Reviews would take place to ensure that the money
contributes to national growth.
6018
2.3.2. As part of the devolution deal, the MCA would have responsibility for a ‘Single Pot’ of funding,
comprising:
• The gainshare devolution deal funds;
• Local Growth Fund (LGF); and
• The devolution deal’s multi-year transport settlement.
2.3.3. The SCR MCA would be the Accountable Body for the Single Pot. The LEP would be
responsible for setting strategic direction on economic growth and would hold partners to
account in the delivery of our SEP.
2.3.4. This document establishes an Assurance Framework which the SCR MCA and LEP will
follow in relation to decision making on Single Pot investments for the City Region. Whilst the
SCR Devolution Deal remains on pause, this Assurance Framework will be applied only to
the Local Growth Funds already secured.
6018
3. Structures and Roles
Summary
3.1.1. The key points of our decision-making structure are as follows:
• The MCA provides overall strategic direction for the City Region and approves all large
decisions over an agreed threshold as defined in the Combined Authority Financial
Regulations. It is the accountable body for all funding allocated to the LEP and/or MCA.
• The MCA sets the overall budget for each of the four Thematic Boards: Business Growth,
Housing and Infrastructure, Skills and Transport.
• The LEP provides an independent business perspective on what is needed to support
economic growth. The LEP leads on the development of the SEP for SCR which sets out
the economic and investment priorities for the City Region.
• To ensure that there is sufficient oversight of investment decisions, investments below an
agreed financial threshold are reviewed and can be approved by the appropriate Board,
where they are in accordance with the programme agreed by the MCA. Each Thematic
Board comprises a local authority Leader and Chief Executive and LEP private sector
Board membership and an officer of the SCR Executive Team. The Thematic Boards
ensure that decisions are made in a robust and evidence-based manner. They do not
originate policy.
• In all cases, the final sign-off for funding is done by either the MCA or the appropriate
Board if the project is within their delegated authority.
• The SCR Overview and Scrutiny Committee provides scrutiny of decisions and the SCR
Audit Committee oversees the audit of the City Region’s spending.
Overview of structures
3.2.1. Figure 3, sets out the organisations and structures involved in SCR decision- making and
how they relate to one another.
6018
Figure 3: Sheffield City Region decision making structures
3.2.2. SCR decision-making involves several distinct groups working together. In brief:
• The MCA Board is the accountable body for all funding, including the proposed Single
Pot. It provides the ultimate democratically representative sign-off for the SEP and all
investment decisions.
• The LEP provides a vital business voice to City Region policy and is responsible for
reflecting the views of business and developing economic policy, embodied in the SEP.
• The MCA and LEP, by virtue of overlapping membership of the latter, are closely linked.
• In order to ensure sufficient capacity to review, approve and monitor projects, four Thematic
Boards have been established which may approve projects or business cases below a
specified financial threshold.
• The Programme Board helps to review and co-ordinate the work of the Thematic Boards
to ensure that the overall objectives of the MCA progress in a timely manner.
• The MCA and LEP are supported by a dedicated SCR Executive Team, which provides
the day-to-day support on policy development, commissioning, project development,
project appraisal, programme management, and meeting administration. The SCR
Executive Team works closely with Leaders, Chief Executives and officers from the
member authorities of the SCR to fulfil these functions.
• The SCR Audit and Scrutiny Committees provide essential oversight of the functions of
the SCR.
3.2.3. The following sections provide a description of the different elements of the structure, and
their respective roles.
The Mayoral Combined Authority
Role of the MCA
3.3.1. The SCR MCA and LEP form the core decision-making Boards for the Sheffield City Region.
As the nine Leaders of the member local authorities, the LEP Chair and Mayor are
represented on both Boards, there are strong linkages between the MCA and LEP.
6018
3.3.2. The MCA comprises the nine SCR local authority Leaders and the metro Mayor (following
their election in May 2018. The Constitution can be accessed online here: SCR-Combined-
Authority-Constitution
3.3.3. The SCR MCA’s current remit is strategic economic development and transport, with the
constituent Leaders being accountable for where public money is being spent. This provides
the MCA with a broad range of objectives aligned to its overarching purpose of driving
economic growth across Sheffield City Region and maximising investment to achieve this
purpose.
3.3.4. On this basis, typically the agenda for the SCR MCA is focused on different elements of the
SEP and discusses items including:
• Programme updates – on initiatives being delivered;
• Accepting schemes to the programme;
• Investment decisions;
• Monitoring of performance; and
• Assurance, strategic risk management and governance.
3.3.5. The SCR MCA is responsible for setting the policy direction, commissioning and making
investment decisions on schemes. It fulfils these functions coherently in the context of the
local economic growth agenda and the overarching investment priorities of the SEP.
3.3.6. As well as being a member of the Authority, the Mayor will assume the role of MCA Chair
upon taking office in May 2018. The Mayor will have certain public transport powers relating
to how buses may operate in the future, provided through the Bus Services Act.
Membership of the MCA
3.3.7. The SCR MCA membership is set out below, along with the type of membership. This
includes both constituent and non-constituent members and observers.
Table 1: SCR MCA membership Member Post MCA
Membership type
Sheffield City Region6 Elected Mayor
Constituent
Barnsley MBC Leader Constituent
Bassetlaw DC Leader Non-constituent
Bolsover DC Leader Non-constituent
Chesterfield DC Leader Non-constituent
Derbyshire Dales DC Leader Non-constituent
Doncaster MBC Elected Mayor
Constituent
North East Derbyshire DC Leader Non-constituent
Rotherham MBC Leader Constituent
Sheffield CC Leader Constituent
SCR LEP Chair LEP representative Derbyshire CC Leader Observer
Nottinghamshire CC Leader Observer
D2N2 LEP Chair Observer
3.3.8. Democratic mandate – As set out in the Constitution, non-constituent members can have
6 The Sheffield City Region Mayor will be elected by voters in Barnsley, Doncaster, Rotherham and Sheffield
6018
voting rights extended to them by the consistent members. At each meeting of the MCA all
items of business are considered in terms of if non- constituent members may or may not
vote. All voting members of the MCA are democratically elected Local Authority Leaders or
Mayors or the CA mayor.
3.3.9. Substitutes – The Constitution sets out that substitutes, for the purpose of MCA business,
will be nominated and agreed by the full members annually, but an individual may be re-
appointed any number of times. Most Local Authority substitutes are Deputy Council Leaders
(or Mayors) or economic or transport portfolio holders as is appropriate for each Local
Authority. LEP substitutes are the deputy chairs or the appropriate private sector workstream
lead.
3.3.10. Decision making – at least three members of the MCA must be present for a meeting to be
valid. If a decision is required to meet agreed timescales and a meeting of the SCR MCA is
not possible/scheduled, written procedures for decision making - as set out in the
Constitution - will apply.
3.3.11. Full voting members – All full voting members of the MCA have one equally weighted vote.
To comply with legislation regarding Combined Authorities and majority votes for constituent
MCA members, the SCR CA Order makes available two additional membership places for the
South Yorkshire Local Authorities (the constituent members), however, a protocol has been
established which means that the two additional members do not attend or vote at SCR MCA
meetings.
3.3.12. Local Enterprise Partnerships – The SCR and D2N2 (Derby and Derbyshire, Nottingham
and Nottinghamshire) LEPs do not have voting rights as standard on the SCR MCA, but the
Authority may choose to give voting rights to the LEPs on matters it deems appropriate.
3.3.13. Overlapping geography – The Department for Transport (DfT) statement on 23 January
2013 distributes 50% of the notional Major Scheme Transport Funding allocation for
Bassetlaw, Bolsover, Chesterfield, and North East Derbyshire to SCR and the remaining 50%
to the D2N2 LEP area. This model is being applied to the majority of Local Growth Funds and
European funding allocations. As such, and to encourage embedded joint investment
decision making across the areas, the SCR MCA invites Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire
County Councils, in addition to the D2N2 LEP, to be full voting members of the SCR MCA
when making decisions on LGF schemes located in the overlap area. Likewise, Derbyshire
and Nottinghamshire County Councils are consulted on transport plans such as the SCR
Transport Strategy.
3.3.14. Local Transport Authority (LTA) membership – the Sheffield City Region geography
covers three LTA areas: South Yorkshire, Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. The SCR MCA
forms the LTA for South Yorkshire and as such, it is not necessary to include an additional
LTA member for this area. For the Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire LTA areas, the County
Councils form the LTAs and their membership of the SCR MCA is therefore considered
sufficient as representation of the LTAs for the County areas.
3.3.15. Observers – Observers are invited to attend SCR MCA meetings when relevant business is
being considered. Observers can comment but do not have voting rights. Observers can
include:
• Adjacent LEPs – Leeds City Region (LCR) LEP are invited to attend the SCR MCA as
an observer given the close links between the two functional economies, the overlap in
economic geography (Barnsley MBC) and the potential impact on both City Regions of
major investments. Other LEPs, which are adjacent to the SCR or have close economic
links (for example but not restricted to the Manchester and Humber LEPs) will be invited
to attend as observers where the schemes being considered for investment could have
an impact on other areas or where the agenda is appropriate.
6018
• Government Agencies – On occasion, a range of Government agencies will have an
interest in decisions made by the SCR MCA. These agencies include but are not
restricted to Homes England, Highways England, and Network Rail (NR). These agencies
are not full voting members of the SCR MCA, but are consulted on matters of relevance
and may be invited to attend SCR MCA meetings as observers where the SCR MCA
deems it appropriate. Memorandums of Understanding will be developed with relevant
agencies as required.
3.3.16. Membership review – As set out in the Constitution, Members of the SCR MCA are
appointed for a one year term at the Annual General Meeting, but an individual may be re-
appointed as a Member any number of times.
Status and Role as Accountable Body
3.3.17. The SCR MCA was formally constituted in law on the 1 April 2014. This Authority is the
Accountable Body for funding devolved to the SCR MCA and LEP, including all money
allocated to the City Region through its Growth Deal, and any devolution and transport
funding.
3.3.18. As the accountable body, the SCR MCA holds all funding and makes payments to delivery
bodies. It provides programme management to account for the funding and ensures that
investment impact is assessed. The SCR MCA is also responsible for the following:
• Ensuring that the decisions and activities of the SCR MCA conform with the legal
requirements regarding equalities, environmental, European Union legislation (e.g. State
Aid), etc. and that records are maintained so that this can be evidenced;
• Ensuring (through its Section 73 Officer or equivalent) that the funds are used legally,
appropriately and are subject to the usual local authority checks and balances, for
example, including financial duties;
• Ensuring that the funds are used in accordance with the conditions placed on each grant;
• Ensuring that the approved Assurance Framework is being adhered to;
• Responsibility for the decisions of the SCR MCA in approving schemes (for example, if
subjected to legal challenge);
• Ensuring funds are used in accordance with relevant rules concerning capital and
revenue expenditure; and
• Maintaining and publishing annual accounts (including LGF and other funding sources received from Government), in accordance with the relevant regulations, each year in draft form by 31 May and finalised in July.
3.3.19. The SCR Executive Team has an important role in pro-actively advancing the decision-
making process through close co-ordination and working with member authorities, Leaders
and Chief Executives. The SCR Executive Team also manages the administration and
support of the SCR MCA, and as such maintains the official record of the MCA proceedings
and holds all MCA documents.
3.3.20. Appraisal Panel - The Statutory Officers ensure that the Accountable Body duties are
discharged through their representation on the Appraisal Panel. This embeds the roles and
functions of the Statutory Officers in the project appraisal process. All projects seeking
funding from SCR are reviewed by the SCR Appraisal Panel and are subject to independent
technical scrutiny. This Panel consists of representatives of the three statutory officers of the
MCA, and relevant senior officers from the SCR Executive Team.
6018
The Local Enterprise Partnership
Role of the LEP
3.4.1. The LEP is the originator of economic policy within the SCR and is the author and custodian
of the SCR SEP. It is responsible for ensuring that SCR policy and decisions receive the
input and views of key business leaders, and by extension, reflects the views of the wider
business community. The LEP leads on engaging with local businesses and understanding
the needs of different sectors and markets.
3.4.2. Typical items for discussion on the LEP Board agenda include:
• Economic programme, strategy and policy development – on new initiatives being
brought forward;
• Performance of SCR programmes; and
• Providing a forum for debate between the public and private sectors.
Membership of the LEP
3.4.3. The SCR LEP comprises a private sector majority with 11 private sector representatives, the
nine Leaders of the member Local Authorities, the metro Mayor and three co-opted members
to provide specialist advice on housing, infrastructure and skills and employment. The private
sector Board includes a representative from the City Region’s Higher Education (HE) sector,
as agreed by these institutions.
3.4.4. The Chair and Vice Chair of the LEP are appointed from the private sector. The Chair leads
on building the reputation and influence of the City Region at a national and international
level and chairs the LEP Board. The LEP Chair is also a non-voting member of the Mayoral
Combined Authority.
3.4.5. The Vice Chair provides day to day leadership and support to the LEP Board Members, leads
on business relations within the City Region, including engaging with the SME business
community and deputises for the Chair when necessary.
3.4.6. At all times, one of the LEP private sector Board members is designated as the small
business representative. It is anticipated that typically this person will be from a small
business themselves and is tasked with leading engagement with small businesses, to
ensure that the views of SMEs are adequately represented by the LEP. Currently, this role is
being fulfilled by the Vice Chair.
3.4.7. The membership of the LEP, therefore, provides strong private sector leadership, and a
forum for business leaders to work with public sector and HE leaders to develop the
economic strategy for the City Region.
3.4.8. All Board members are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with ‘The 7 principles
of public life’7 These principles are embedded in the SCR LEP Code of Conduct8 and the
SCR MCA Members’ Code of Conduct as detailed in the Constitution.
3.4.9. All appointments for private sector LEP Board membership are made through an open,
transparent, competitive and non-discriminatory process using application forms and
interviews to judge experience, suitability and fit.
7 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-7-principles-of-public-life 8 https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/LEP-Code-of-ConductV1.0.pdf
6018
3.4.10. The SCR is committed to diversity. As part of the process of making future appointments to
the LEP Board, the SCR has published a diversity statement explaining how we will ensure
that Boards have diverse representation, which is reflective of the local business community,
including geographies and protected characteristics9.
3.4.11. Private sector LEP Board members are appointed for a three-year term, but an individual
may be re-appointed for a further term with the agreement of the Chair. In exceptional
circumstances, with a clear rationale, Members may be appointed for a further term not
exceeding 2 years. To ensure that members are suitably committed to the work of the LEP,
consistent non-attendance at meetings is grounds for termination of membership.
Thematic Boards
3.5.1. The SCR MCA has established a series of Thematic Boards, accountable to the MCA and
LEP. Each has a defined thematic portfolio, as agreed by the MCA, that together cover the
full delivery scope of the MCA and LEP. This includes projects and programmes funded via
LGF activity and other Government investment:
• Business Growth Board – includes responsibility for overseeing the Growth Hub, with
updates captured in the resolution record as appropriate and provided to the MCA and
LEP.
• Housing and Infrastructure Board – includes responsibility for overseeing the work on
One Public Estate, JESSICA/GPF funds and the Enterprise Zone with updates provided
to other Thematic Boards and escalated to the MCA/LEP as appropriate. Updates on the
JESSICA fund are included within the quarterly performance/finance reports received by
the MCA.
• Skills, Employment and Education Board – includes responsibility for the Skills Bank
with updates on performance provided at each meeting. Key aspects of these updates
are then captured within the resolution record for consideration by the LEP and MCA.
• Transport Board – includes responsibility for the development of the HS2 Growth
Strategy, with this work forming a standing item for the Thematic Board.
3.5.2. The purpose of the Thematic Boards is to provide adequate experienced leadership capacity
to review projects and make investment decisions. These Boards bring together the public
and private leadership of the MCA and LEP to drive the delivery of the SCR’s programme of
activity, ensuring that the focus remains on the outcomes being delivered. The creation of
these Thematic Boards also therefore enables the MCA and LEP Boards to operate
strategically rather than merely as investment boards.
3.5.3. The Thematic Boards review appraised projects and make a recommendation to the MCA
Board to approve business cases. Within their respective themes, it is the role of Thematic
Boards to provide leadership review of programme performance and to identify and
recommend mitigations for any programme risks or poor performance. It is not the role of the
Thematic Boards to discuss or develop new policy, but rather to ensure that policy agreed by
the MCA and LEP is enacted through the investments in different areas.
3.5.4. Membership of each of these Thematic Boards at present comprises:
• Two local authority Leaders from the MCA;
9 https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/LEP-Diversity-PolicyV1.0.pdf
6018
• The two-lead private sector LEP Board members;
• The two-lead local authority Chief Executives; and
• An officer of the SCR Executive Team, either the Head of Paid Service or a deputy.
3.5.5. This combination of membership on the Thematic Boards provides accountability to both the
public and private sectors.
3.5.6. Consistent attendance at the Thematic Board meetings is essential. Attendance at Thematic
Board meetings is recorded. Where members of the Thematic Boards do not attend 50% of
Board meetings within any given six-month period a motion will be made to the MCA/LEP
Board to replace this member with a suitable alternative, and a vote on this issue will be held
in the normal manner.
3.5.7. For each Thematic Board, a nominated local authority Leader and private sector LEP Board
member are responsible for co-chairing their respective Thematic Boards. Due to this co-
chairing role, they also report back the progress made and decisions taken by their Board to
the LEP and MCA respectively, alongside formal reporting of decisions made by the SCR
Executive Team.
3.5.8. All decisions taken by the respective Thematic Boards need to be unanimous between Board
members. If agreement cannot be reached the decision required will need to be escalated to
the MCA and LEP as appropriate.
3.5.9. The Chairs and Vice Chairs of the MCA and LEP respectively are able to attend all Thematic
Boards and act as the initial point of call for any issues arising within these Boards.
3.5.10. Each Thematic Board is supported by a wider group of advisors that bring together key
stakeholders from the public and private sectors specific to that technical portfolio area.
However, the role of these groups is in an advisory capacity only and as such they do not
have voting rights.
3.5.11. The SCR MCA is also the Local Transport Authority (LTA) for South Yorkshire. The Transport
Executive Board operates in an advisory role to the SCR MCA in matters concerning LTA
business. Additionally, the co-chairs of the Transport Executive Board are the nominated
representative for the SCR MCA and LEP respectively on the Transport for the North
Partnership Board.
Sub Boards discharging the duties of the Thematic Boards, as delegated by the
Mayoral Combined Authority
3.5.12. In addition to the four Thematic Boards, the SCR also has in place two Sub Boards that
discharge the duties of the Thematic Boards, with delegated authority from the Mayoral
Combined Authority. These Boards relate to specific funds allocated to the SCR from
Government through the LGF, where the Boards have authority to make decisions – within
delegation limits – to take forward a defined programme of activity.
3.5.13. Given their delegated authority to make decisions, the Sub Boards contain members of the
LEP Board. This ensures that they remain consistently aligned to achieve the outcomes of
the SCR SEP. The current membership composition and the respective links to the Thematic
Boards are shown in Table 2.
6018
Table 2: Sub Boards discharging the duties of the Thematic Boards, as delegated by the Mayoral Combined Authority
Sub Board Delegation
from
Reports to Membership requirements
Business Investment Fund
Programme
MCA MCA where the grant is in
excess of £2m
Otherwise reports through at
each Business Growth Board
- 1 LEP Board member
- 3 private sector experts
- Lead Chief Executive
- MCA Senior Finance Manager
Housing Investment Board MCA MCA where the grant is in
excess of £2m
Otherwise reports to the
Housing and Infrastructure
Board
- 1 MCA Board Member
- Lead Chief Executive
- LEP Board members
- Homes England representative
- MCA Finance Manager
The Programme Board
3.6.1. The Programme Board supports the Statutory Officers and Appraisal Panel and:
• Provides a check on the financial decision-making powers of Investment Boards, and
ensures that the work of the Thematic Boards is co-ordinated and that projects are
progressing in line with SCR objectives,
• On advice from the Statutory Officers, reviews and recommends changes to decisions
and delegation limits to the MCA as appropriate for each Board,
• Has oversight of the application of the Assurance Framework by the Thematic Boards,
• May itself exercise some cross cutting financial delegations for the MCA.
3.6.2. The Programme Board brings together the Statutory Officers of the MCA. In 2018, we will
further develop this Board to include political representation and a private sector LEP Board
representative.
SCR Audit and Scrutiny Committees
3.7.1. The SCR MCA has a joint SCR Overview and Scrutiny Committee which exercises scrutiny
functions over its activities and decisions (and those of formal Sub Boards/Committees and
the LEP). This comprises 14 Members and has a political balance. Each Local Authority
appoints at least one Elected Member to the joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee – often
this is the chair of each authority’s own overarching scrutiny committee. The joint SCR
Overview and Scrutiny Committee will produce an annual work plan which will be made
available to the public on the SCR MCA website. This is currently under development and will
be published in April 2018.
3.7.2. The SCR MCA also has an Audit Committee in accordance with the Chartered Institute of
Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) guidance. The MCA has an established process
6018
for internal audit. This is provided by Barnsley Metropolitan District Council (BMBC), whilst
KPMG are the appointed external auditors. This process is in keeping with arrangements in
place for local authority spend. As the accountable body for all LEP funds, this covers the
requirements for both the LEP and the MCA.
3.7.3. In conjunction with the BMBC internal audit team, the SCR MCA Head of Paid Service,
Section 73 Officer and Monitoring officer prepare an annual Internal Audit Plan at the start of
each financial year, which is reviewed towards the end of the financial year. The Internal
Audit Plan includes all aspects of the business case evaluation and monitoring process for all
Growth Deal schemes. This provides independent and objective assurance to the MCA. The
Plan is approved by the SCR MCA and is considered by the Overview and Scrutiny
Committee. The current plan was approved by the SCR MCA in April 2017.
3.7.4. The Authority is required to consider the conclusions of any review by the Overview and
Scrutiny Committee at the next available meeting of the Authority. There is no requirement to
delay the implementation of any decision of the Authority in anticipation of consideration of
that decision by an overview and scrutiny committee.
SCR Executive Team
3.8.1. The SCR Executive Team has an important role in pro-actively advancing the decision-
making process through close co-ordination and working with member authorities, Leaders
and Chief Executives. It provides a significant proportion of officer support to the functioning
of the above structure, which is supplemented by, and complements, officer support in the
member authorities.
3.8.2. The SCR MCA and LEP appoint three Statutory Officers with a formal role of discharging the
duties and obligations on their behalf. The roles are defined in the Constitution and comprise,
briefly:
• Head of Paid Service – The SCR Managing Director fulfils the role of the Head of Paid
Service. The Head of Paid Service discharges the functions in relation to the Mayoral
Combined Authority as set out in section 4, Local Government and Housing Act 1989 and
acts as the principal advisor to the LEP.
• Section 73 Officer – The Finance Director fulfils the role of Section 73 Officer in
accordance with the Local Government Act 1985 to administer the financial affairs of the
Mayoral Combined Authority and LEP.
• Monitoring Officer – The Monitoring Officer fulfils their role in accordance with the Local
Government Act 1972 to administer the Legal duties of the Mayoral Combined Authority
and LEP.
It should be noted that the Section 73 and Monitoring officers have been appointed by the
MCA from within the organisational structure of SCC and BMBC respectively. As such these
posts and their associated officers are not shown in Figure 4 below.
3.8.3. For the purposes of this document, it is important to note the SCR Executive Team’s role in
supporting the following:
• Developing policy: The Team supports both the MCA and the LEP to draft key policy,
including the SEP.
• Initiating and encouraging project ideas: The Programme Commissioning Directorate
works with officers from member authorities and other project promoters to identify and
help bring forward viable project ideas that support the strategic objectives of the City
Region. However, this Directorate acts as a scheme promoter only by exception where
there is a new area of work or activity that affects multiple authorities and represents the
6018
most cost-effective solution.
• Developing business cases: The Programme Commissioning Directorate provides
support to project promoters to develop businesses cases where such support is required.
• Appraising projects: Senior officers from the Programme Assurance and Performance
Directorate sit on the SCR’s Appraisal Panel, which independently reviews and appraises
projects prior and makes recommendations to the Thematic Boards.
• Monitoring and evaluation: The Programme Assurance and Performance Directorate
manages the monitoring and evaluation framework on an individual project basis,
providing reports and updates to the Thematic Boards and MCA/LEP Boards.
• Programme monitoring: The Programme Assurance and Performance Directorate
provides overall programme monitoring. Collating details of the performance of the
different funding streams (e.g. LGF) and communicating this to the MCA and LEP Boards
and to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) as per the
Government’s requirements.
• Administration of the SCR decision-making processes: The SCR Executive Team is
the backbone of the administrative structure that ensures meetings are planned and
arranged in a timely fashion and that the inputs to and outcomes of these meetings are
communicated. It is also the job of the SCR Executive Team to ensure that minutes and
agendas of the meetings of the LEP, MCA Board, and Audit and Scrutiny Committees are
published online in a prompt manner, as are key reports that are required for public
transparency and accountability.
3.8.4. The structure of the SCR Executive Team contains a number of important ‘Chinese walls’
that ensure that there are no conflicts of interest between the different roles noted above.
Most importantly, Commissioning is entirely separate from Programme Assurance and
Performance. This clear distinction between the Directorates means that there is a distinct
separation between scheme promotion and appraisal, to ensure that impartial advice is
provided to the LEP and MCA.
3.8.5. The structure of the SCR Executive Team is set out below:
Figure 4: SCR Executive Team Structure
Resolving potential conflict between the MCA, as the accountable body,
and the LEP
3.9.1. The configuration and membership of the SCR LEP Board and SCR MCA are designed such
that they have mutually supportive roles as detailed earlier in this chapter and as such there
is a strong overlap in membership. This facilitates communication and reduces the potential
for conflict.
3.9.2. The Thematic Boards, which are co-chaired by a LEP Board Private Sector Member and a
local authority Leader, have the remit for enacting the approved economic policy of the SCR
LEP and operating programmes in accordance with the operational policies of the SCR MCA.
3.9.3. The potential for conflict is further mitigated by the operational structure where the SCR
Executive Team serves both the SCR MCA and LEP Boards.
3.9.4. Given these strong controls and clarity in remit, there are minimal circumstances where the
MCA would not comply with a LEP decision. However potentially this could occur if:
• The LEP Board was seeking to influence a decision of the SCR MCA which is within the
remit of the Accountable Body i.e. an operational decision as opposed to a strategic
decision regarding the economic strategy;
• The LEP Board was seeking to influence a decision which is non-compliant with public
accountability and processes for making spending decisions, or does not offer value for
money.
• The MCA was seeking to influence a decision which is within the remit of the LEP Board
(e.g. supporting a project not aligned with the objectives of the LGF or which does not fit
with the SEP).
• The MCA was refusing to operationalise a policy directive of the LEP in accordance with
the SEP.
3.9.5. In such circumstances conflicts would be escalated to the Head of Paid Service, Section 73
Officer or Monitoring Officer to resolve outside of a formal process and with the agreement of
the Chairs of the LEP Board and MCA. Should the conflict not be resolved, and depending
upon the nature of the conflict, this would be formally escalated to either the LEP Board (i.e. if
the SCR MCA would not operationalise a policy of the LEP Board), or to the SCR MCA (i.e. if
the MCA were being asked to operationalise a policy/programme which was non-compliant
with approved public accountable practices).
4. Ensuring Openness and Transparency
Conflicts of Interest
4.1.1. The SCR MCA has a conflict of interest policy set out within its Constitution. This is available
online at: SCR-Combined-Authority-Constitution This policy applies to the SCR LEP, to the
Thematic Boards, Sub Boards with delegated authority and to the SCR Executive Team.
4.1.2. The SCR LEP has a published Declarations of Interest policy. This is available online at:
LEP-Declaration-of-Interests-Policy
4.1.3. Each member of the SCR MCA and the LEP is required to make a declaration of interest for
the purposes of their individual organisations (e.g. Local Authority and LEP declarations of
interest). Individual declarations of interest forms and the register of interests are published
on the SCR website on the links below. Declarations of interest are recorded within the
minutes of each MCA and LEP meeting and are updated, as appropriate, following each MCA
and LEP meeting:
LEP Board - Individual Register of Interests
MCA Board - Individual Register of Interests
Register of Declarations at MCA Meetings
Register of Declarations at LEP Meetings
4.1.4. Senior members of the staff within the SCR Executive Team are also required to complete an
Individual Register of Interest and update it if and when circumstances change. These are
available on the SCR website10.
4.1.5. Members of the SCR MCA and LEP are expected to act in the interests of the Sheffield City
Region when making investment decisions. As discussed in Section 5, decisions are made
via an appropriate process, free from bias or perception of bias. Controls to ensure this
include:
• An open strategic process led by the LEP to be ultimately signed off by the MCA.
• An appraisal process which is designed to assess all projects on the merits of the application, including those where the applicant is the SCR MCA with clear separation in place between those commissioning and appraising schemes.
• An Appraisal Panel consisting of representatives of the three Statutory Officers of the
MCA, and relevant officers from the SCR Executive Team, to apply the principles of the
HM Treasury Green Book Five Cases to project proposals.
• The suite of bespoke SCR assurance and appraisal modelling tools which enables an
independent and consistent perspective on economic impact of infrastructure projects.
• Distinct Directorates in place within the SCR Executive Team to distinguish between
programme and project commissioning and performance and assurance.
Gifts and Hospitality
4.2.1. The SCR LEP has a published policy on gifts and hospitality, available online at: LEP-Gifts-and-Hospitality-Policy
4.2.2. The SCR LEP policy on the acceptance and declaration of gifts and hospitality aligns with
10 These are available at https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/about-us-governance-policy/who-we-are/
Local Authority systems and standards. It also applies to the SCR Executive Team and any sub-groups and officer functions involved in advice or decision making regarding its Growth Deal. These policies include clear processes to facilitate ethical governance.
4.2.3. The SCR MCA has an approved code of conduct for members11, which is included in the
Constitution. In accordance with this code of conduct a Member must, within 28 days of
receiving any gift or hospitality over the value of £100, provide written notification to the
Monitoring Officer of the existence and nature of that gift or hospitality. The SCR MCA code
of conduct is available online at: CA Code of Conduct.
4.2.4. The SCR LEP also has a code of conduct which requires LEP Board members to comply
with the LEP Gifts and Hospitality Policy. The LEP Code of Conduct is available online at:
LEP-Code-of-Conduct.
Support and Administration Arrangements
4.3.1. The SCR Executive Team undertakes the administrative role required to support the SCR
MCA and LEP. This role includes publishing SCR MCA processes and outcomes; and
preparing, circulating and publishing meeting minutes and agendas. It also includes ensuring
that MCA and LEP members have correctly complied with the relevant public declaration of
interests.
4.3.2. Technical functions related to business case and project appraisal across workstreams are
managed by the SCR Assurance Team within the SCR Executive Team, with appropriate
ethical walls in place. The principal responsibility of this team is independent scrutiny and
advice to the appropriate Board and subsequently the SCR MCA and LEP on scheme
business cases. Where the necessary technical expertise does not exist within this team,
external support is commissioned and managed by this team to fulfil this responsibility.
4.3.3. Note that in addition to the above functions, the SCR Executive Team also provides advice
on strategy and policy to the SCR MCA and LEP, ensuring that there is consistency in advice
on strategic economic and related issues.
Working Arrangements and Meeting Frequency
4.4.1. The SCR MCA meets approximately every six weeks in public, but additional meetings take
place if the need arises. The SCR LEP also meets every six weeks.
4.4.2. The Thematic Boards meet every six weeks, with their meetings staggered. In support of the
SCR MCA and LEP, the SCR Chief Executives Group meets approximately every three
weeks. The SCR Appraisal Panel meets every two weeks, or more frequently if necessary, to
ensure the pipeline of project proposals continues at the required pace.
4.4.3. The meetings schedule ensures appropriate timing for key decisions on all funding
allocations. SCR MCA meetings are open to the public, with notice of the meeting and
agenda items provided at least five clear working days in advance of the meeting.
4.4.4. The schedule of SCR MCA, SCR LEP and Audit and Scrutiny Committee meetings is
published on the SCR website12.
11 Available at http://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Combined-Authority-Members-Code-of-
Conduct.pdf 12 https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/about-us-governance-policy/meetings/
Transparency and Local Engagement
4.5.1. Core information regarding activity being undertaken by the SCR LEP and MCA is available
on its incorporated website13. This includes the publication of key documents such as the
SCR SEP and Assurance Framework, as well as details of meetings and events to provide
ongoing engagement with public and private partners across the City Region. Regular news
updates on activity underway are also provided through dedicated pages and on social media
outlets including LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook.
4.5.2. The SCR LEP has developed a robust, but proportionate, approach to sharing and publishing
information to engage with public and private partners. This includes:
• Being incorporated in the Sheffield City Region website, which includes specific sections
on thematic priorities, the SEP and other plans and information on projects14
• Making sure all meeting agendas, papers (when not exempt for some reason), and
minutes are published in line with best practice. For example, papers and agenda are
published five working days in advance of a meeting, and draft minutes published no
more than ten working days afterwards. As with existing local authority rules and
regulations, where papers contain commercially sensitive information they may be
considered as a private item. Decisions on whether individual agenda items are private
items are made by the LEP Chair in consultation with the SCR’s Head of Paid Service
and Monitoring Officer using existing local authority regulations. This serves as the official
record of LEP proceedings;
• Publishing a conflicts of interest policy, register of interests (described above), complaints
procedure and a published confidential complaints policy15.
• Publishing a Forward Plan of Key Decisions that are scheduled to be made by SCR MCA
over the coming month, including the funding of major projects. This is available at:
Forward Plan of Key Decisions
• Publishing a Contracts Register16 which provides details of all contracts and agreements
that are in place and contract values
• Undertaking a programme of engagement events with public and private partners across
the City Region to receive feedback on activity being undertaken by LEP, including
strategy development and progress in delivering the SEP. These events are advertised on
the City Region’s website as well as via social media channels.
• Having regular update meetings between the LEP and business representative
organisations, including the Chambers of Commerce, Federation of Small Business,
Institute of Directors and the EEF.
4.5.3 The SCR MCA is subject to a robust transparency and local engagement regime which is
aligned with its constituent local authorities. The Constitution includes a publication scheme,
which sets out how and when agendas, minutes and papers will be made available to the
public. It also sets out any exceptions to the standard scheme. The SCR Publication
Scheme, which applies to both the LEP and CA, is available online at: SCR-Publication-
Scheme
4.5.4 In particular, the SCR MCA:
13 https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/ 14 https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/explore/ 15 https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/LEP-Confidential-Complaints-PolicyV1.0.pdf 16 https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Contract-Register.pdf
• Is subject to the Transparency Code applied to local authorities;
• Is incorporated in the Sheffield City Region website, which includes a specific section on
the SEP;
• Ensures all its meetings are open to the public and appropriately accessible;
• Makes sure all meeting agendas, papers (when not exempt for some reason), and
minutes are published on the SCR website, within the minimum timescale standards, set
out in the paragraph below;
• Makes clear the approach to making investment decisions on the SCR MCA website;
• Makes clear all decisions made (including levels of funding), the rational for, and the
expected outcomes of decisions;
• Receives at each meeting the Resolution Record from each Thematic Board meeting;
• Publishes all funding decisions online, including funding levels;
• Receives regular dedicated updates on programme performance, which are published as
dedicated papers for MCA meetings; and
• As the accountable body for LEP funding, holds a record of all relevant documentation
relating to this Government funding allocated to the area.
4.5.5 All MCA minutes are signed at the same or next suitable meeting of the Authority. All meeting
papers and the results of the SCR MCA17 and the LEP’s18 decision making are published
online here: SCR Meetings
4.5.6 Details of any scheme approvals made in accordance with delegations and a Resolution
Record for each of the Thematic Boards form standing agenda items at each MCA meeting.
These are published as part of the standard process for MCA papers. Resolution records are
also considered at each LEP meeting.
4.5.7 Likewise, details of project progress – with links to the key documents for each project19, are
made available in an easily accessible/searchable way on the SCR website. Additionally,
regular quarterly updates are provided at MCA meetings on the performance of the
programme.
4.5.8 Members of the public can provide feedback via email and in writing to the MCA. The public
can also submit questions to MCA meetings via the SCR website20.
4.5.9 The SCR MCA is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Environmental
Impact Regulations 2004. As Accountable Body, the MCA fulfils these functions on behalf of
the LEP. BMBC (on behalf of the MCA) holds records and is the focal point for statutory
information requests. The public are made aware of their right to access information through
the SCR MCA website21. Requests are dealt with in accordance with the relevant legislation.
The emphasis within SCR MCA processes is on publishing information and decisions in an
open and transparent way so that FOI requests are less necessary.
Complaints, Appeals and Whistleblowing Policy
4.6.1. In any case where it is alleged that the SCR MCA or LEP is (a) acting in breach of the law,
(b) failing to adhere to its framework, or (c) failing to safeguard public funds, complaints (from
17 Available from April 2014 when the MCA was formed 18 Minutes are available online dating back to 2011 19 https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/explore/our-projects/ 20 https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/about-us-governance-policy/who-we-are/ 21 https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/about-us-governance-policy/how-we-make-decisions-2/
stakeholders, members of the public or internal whistleblowers) are directed to the MCA’s
Monitoring Officer or their deputy. They will address the allegation following the protocols set
out in the Constitution, which is aligned to those of constituent Local Authority members.
4.6.2. Where the SCR MCA or LEP cannot resolve locally to the complainant’s satisfaction, and the
complaint relates to the City Region’s funding, the issue may be passed to MHCLG, DfT or
other relevant government departments.
4.6.3. All applicants for funding are made aware of the recommendations made by the respective
Thematic Board/Appraisal Panel on funding allocations and the rationale for these.
Unsuccessful applicants can appeal any recommendations or decisions (where delegated
authority applies) made by Thematic Boards prior to their consideration for decision by the
MCA.
Subsequent decisions of the MCA and LEP are scrutinised by the SCR Overview and
Scrutiny Committee. In addition, if a complaint is made about a MCA or LEP decision, the
MCA Chair and Monitoring Officer will convene an independent committee to review the issue
and make a recommendation back to the MCA/LEP Boards as appropriate. The above
complaints policy is set out on the SCR website22.
4.6.4. The SCR LEP has a published Whistleblowing Policy which is available at: LEP-
Whistleblowing-Policy
22 See https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/about-us-governance-policy/how-we-make-decisions-2/ and
https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/LEP-Confidential-Complaints-PolicyV1.0.pdf
5. Making Robust Decisions
Principles
5.1.1. The framework outlined in this section is intended to achieve the following key principles:
• Achieving best value in spending of public money. SCR LEP and the MCA recognise that
sometimes the best investments offer long-term outcomes, but expect that only in
exceptional circumstances will approved investments not offer at least ‘good’ value for
money. That is a benefit cost ratio (BCR) of at least 2 for transport schemes or
appropriate public sector cost per job/GVA (in line with the latest national additionality
guidelines) and in all cases the combined benefits must exceed the cost of intervention
over the projected timeframe.
• Ensuring transparency and accountability in decision-making and allocation of available
funding;
• Ensuring that the money spent results in delivery of outcomes to across SCR in a timely
fashion, and in accordance with the conditions placed on each grant, by actively
managing the devolved budget and programme to respond to changed circumstance (for
example, scheme slippage, scheme alteration, cost increases etc.);
• Appraising projects in a way which is consistent with the Green Book ‘five case business
case’ model and proportionate to the funding request, complexity and risk relative to the
intensity of assessment and processes required;
• Avoiding conflicts of interest within organisations, particularly regarding the division
between Programme Assurance and Commissioning within the SCR Executive Team;
• Ensuring an appropriate division of responsibilities between the MCA Board and the
Thematic Boards, in that the MCA remains responsible for accepting a project onto the
programme and where required, due to scale, complexity or risk, signing off each
project’s funding approval. The intermediate stages between these points or smaller and
simpler schemes are delegated to Thematic Boards where appropriate;
• Implementing effective evaluation to indicate where the project has achieved its stated
aims, and using feedback appropriately to refine the decision-making process.
• That the use of resources is subject to the usual local authority checks and balances as
well as normal local government audit accounting and scrutiny requirements.
5.1.2. The City Region has developed a common approach to programme and project management
for the delivery of its funding programmes. Founded upon a single end-to-end process, the
Sheffield City Region utilises a holistic approach for all types of investment made. Inherently,
our approach to prioritisation is to identify those schemes which can contribute to the growth
of the economy and provide good value for money and to do this in a way that is objective,
consistent and transparent.
5.1.3. The process is founded on the principles of HM Treasury’s Green Book and prevailing
guidance for the type of investment that SCR is seeking to make, for example the Homes
England and MHCLG Appraisal Guide (2016).
Project prioritisation and assessment resources
5.2.1. The SCR Executive Team utilises a range of tools and processes for assessing and
prioritising projects. The most significant of these are:
• The SCR Appraisal Panel - this panel includes representatives of the three statutory
officers of the MCA and relevant officers from the SCR Executive Team able to provide
coverage of each of the Green Book five cases. This Panel reviews all business cases
and projects, including the technical analysis undertaken by the SCR Assurance Team
and presents recommendations to the appropriate Boards to endorse, approve, defer for
further work or reject proposals. Generally, the team meets every two weeks, with
additional meetings taking place as and when these are necessary.
• The SCR Assurance Team – this is an independent team within the Programme
Assurance and Performance Directorate which is tasked with the appraisal and
assurance of all applications for SCR investment. The team deploys bespoke tools and
models to determine value for money and strategic alignment. When specialist technical
expertise is required, the Assurance Team commissions the Central Independent
Appraisal Team (CIAT), which is a panel of consultants, to appraise business cases. The
Assurance Team ensures there is always a clear distinction and adequate separation
between the scheme promoters and the decision makers.
• A suite of appraisal modelling tools – this includes FLUTE (Forecasting the interactions
of Land-Use, Transport and Economy). This is a tool for understanding the economic
impact of a programme of capital infrastructure projects. Other bespoke tools for housing,
skills and other infrastructure projects have been developed and tested and are now in
use. The SCR Transport Model (SCRTM1) and an updated FLUTE (FLUTE18) will both
be in operation before the end of 2018.
• WebTAG (Web Based Transport Appraisal Guide) – this is used to guide the
modelling and appraisal of transport schemes and provides a comprehensive approach
to considering the potential positive and negative impacts of such investments. Projects
seeking an SCR contribution of £5m or higher will require a full WebTAG appraisal.
However, on some occasions, projects seeking a lower value may also require a full
WebTAG appraisal.
5.2.2. The SCR Executive Team is planning to establish an External Capital Funding Team; a team
of experts and ‘project managers’ that would be employed by the SCR and contracted out to
project promoters to assist with the delivery process, particularly regarding the development
of the business cases. These would alleviate the burden of the process on promoters who
sometimes lack the resources or capacity to complete the stages unassisted. This team
would work independently of the Programme Assurance and Performance Directorate.
Process
5.3.1. An outline of the decision-making process for allocating available funds is presented in Figure
5. However, depending on the level of funding, complexity and risk, the process may vary.
Project sponsors are advised after the Strategic Business Case (SBC) has been appraised.
The following sections set out the steps involved in this process in greater detail.
Figure 5: Overall Process for developing and appraising projects
Strategy and Objective Setting
5.4.1. The SCR has robust processes for developing overarching strategy and investment
prioritisation. This is set out in the SEP which is being refreshed to take into account the
latest evidence including; economic analysis, the SCR Integrated Infrastructure Plan, the
SCR Transport Strategy and other local and national intelligence sources.
5.4.2. The SCR places emphasis on evidencing strategic propositions and priorities. Strategies are
also based on an inclusive process and reflect consultation with relevant stakeholders as
appropriate.
5.4.3. The refreshed SEP will be accompanied by high level Delivery Plans to prioritise programme
investment based on need and opportunity to utilise best
practice and maximise the return on investment across each of the thematic areas. These
Delivery Plans will help inform the work of the SCR Programme Commissioning Directorate
and subsequent commissioning calls.
5.4.4. In January 2018, the SCR began a 12-week public consultation on the draft SCR Transport
Strategy to refresh the previous iteration which was produced in 2011.
Allocating Budgets to Strategic Priorities
5.5.1. Based on the SEP priorities and the resulting Delivery Plans, available funding is allocated to
each of the four Thematic Boards for project commissioning and delivery.
5.5.2. A draft budget is prepared by the SCR Executive Team based on an analysis of the budget
split necessary to achieve the objectives in the SEP and other strategies and the delivery
timeframes of the planned projects. The MCA and LEP Boards approve this recommendation
based on normal voting procedures in line with their respective financial responsibilities.
5.5.3. The SCR Capital Programme, Transport Revenue and LEP Revenue budgets are approved
by the SCR MCA and SCR LEP at the start of each financial year. Capital budget approvals
will have allocations over multiple years and a five-year investment programme is therefore
considered as part of the budget setting process. This is updated on a rolling annual basis
such that projects commissioned in one year will be ready for delivery in future years.
5.5.4. Quarterly monitoring against budgets is reported to the SCR MCA Board on a quarterly basis.
The programme and revenue budgets are published on the SCR website23 along with the
quarterly financial monitoring reports.
Commissioning process
5.6.1. The SCR Commissioning Directorate publishes calls for projects on a regular basis. These
are publicised on the SCR website and through the SCR social media feeds. Calls have a
specific focus and make clear the rationale for the required interventions to meet the
objectives of the Delivery Plans and the SEP.
5.6.2. Projects usually originate from two sources: SCR Programme Commissioning Directorate
and Thematic Boards proactively identify potential projects which satisfy the strategic
objectives. These will then be published via a call; or project promoters approach the SCR in
response to a commissioning call.
5.6.3. Thematic Boards have oversight and ownership of their own commissioning plans (i.e. IIP for
infrastructure/Transport strategy etc.) and are responsible for achieving the conditional
outcomes identified for each Board to deliver. This is supported by the Appraisal Panel and
the SCR Programme Assurance and Performance Directorate.
5.6.4. The application templates and guidance documents for each commissioning call are available
via the SCR website. Calls for ESIF funded activity are also advertised on the www.gov.uk
website.
Preparation of Strategic Business Case Documents
5.7.1. A Strategic Business Case (SBC) is the first official communication to the SCR from the
scheme promoter/Delivery Partner. The SBC provides a first view of the ‘how, what and
when’ the project will deliver against the SEP outcomes. It is based on a standard template
that all scheme promoters will be required to complete. The SBC document includes:
• Project objectives and vision and rationale for public sector/LGF investment;
• Project outputs and outcomes against the SEP;
23 https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/about-us-governance-policy/how-we-make-decisions-2/
• High level timescales;
• High level cost of project;
• Initial funding required; and
• Project sponsor.
5.7.2. This information is in line with HM Treasury Green Book guidance on presenting appraisal
results and as such includes:
• Strategic case: contribution to SCR strategic objectives; contribution to national policy
objectives;
• Economic case: impact on local growth, plus social, distributional and environmental
impacts, assessment of the value the project adds;
• Financial case: Cost estimate and sources of funding e.g. identified scheme promoter,
private sector and other contributions;
• Commercial case: proven market place for the project, certainty in outcomes,
procurement processes and commercial viability; and
• Management Case: Demonstrates the project is capable of being delivered successfully,
including Delivery Plans, statutory processes, programme, risk management (with
appropriate mitigation plans) and benefit realisation.
5.7.3. Depending on the nature of the scheme, the SBC document is also required to meet with best
practice in the relevant thematic area, for example, the MHCLG Appraisal Guide for housing
schemes.
5.7.4. These documents are then submitted to the SCR Appraisal Panel via the Programme
Management Office, which reviews the funding source and provides an initial check as to
which element of funding would be most appropriate. The purpose of this is to provide a
check to ensure that the funding requirements are being met, and also to enable the effects
and outcomes of the funding to be tracked.
5.7.5. Depending on the nature, size and complexity of the project, the Appraisal Panel and
Programme Assurance and Performance Directorate may seek additional technical advice. In
these cases, the SBC documents are subjected to independent appraisal by the CIAT. At this
stage, the appropriate testing tools may be used to better understand the potential outcomes
of the project and appraise the SBC.
5.7.6. Where many projects are submitted in a single cycle, a balanced scorecard approach may be
used to rank these according to a variety of criteria specific to each commissioning call such
as deliverability, proportion of funding ask from public sources, additionality and to identify
projects which fall below any pre- agreed appraisal thresholds.
5.7.7. The SCR Appraisal Panel reviews the appraisal outcomes and makes recommendations to
the Thematic Boards to either accept a project to the programme pipeline, defer the project
and/or seek further information or reject the project. All projects are subject to funding
availability. The Thematic Boards are then asked to consider and endorse the
recommendation which is then submitted to the MCA for approval.
5.7.8. There may be a prudent degree of over-programming at this stage, to ensure full utilisation of
available funds in the event that one or more projects fails to deliver, is delayed or cost
savings are achieved. This is agreed by the MCA for each budget/approval cycle.
5.7.9. Once a project has been accepted to the SCR programme pipeline, a summary of the
project is published on the SCR website. This is updated periodically to include links to the
key documents for each project and a record of progress. The SCR Executive Team collects
any external comments on these schemes and these are considered as part of the appraisal
process. Project sponsors are also required to publish their SBC’s on their own websites (or
an appropriate summary of the submission) and must consider all comments received and
reflect this in the OBC and FBC. On some occasions, often for transport schemes or for
complex, novel or potentially contentious schemes, the FBC is also published. In all
instances, SCR funding is conditioned on satisfying all statutory requirements.
5.7.10. Figure 6 below shows the flow of this process in a typical case concerned with large strategic
projects.
Figure 6: Process for Preparation of SBC Documents
Production and Appraisal of Outline and Full Business Cases
5.8.1. Having been accepted onto the programme pipeline, the next stage is for promoters to
develop the business case. The requirements at this stage are dependent on the nature,
scale, risk and complexity of the project. Smaller, simple projects are unlikely to require an
Outline Business Case (OBC) in addition to a Full Business Case (FBC). The appropriate
and proportionate appraisal requirements are determined by the SCR Assurance Team in
conjunction with the Appraisal Panel on a project by project basis.
5.8.2. The possibility of support (grants and/or capacity) from the SCR Executive Team for
promoters to develop business cases is currently being explored. However, the precise form
this may take has not yet been determined.
5.8.3. The OBC and FBC build upon the foundations of the Strategic Business Case in that they
provide further detail on the five cases outlined in the HM Treasury Green Book guidance.
The SCR Programme Commissioning Directorate provides guidance, when needed, to
project promoters during the development of the business case.
5.8.4. The project promoter is responsible for funding all scheme development work up to and
including the OBC.
5.8.5. Further development beyond the OBC decision point remains the responsibility of the
promoter. However, funding for this could be sourced through LGF as part of their business
case application. As with Government practices, only bids that successfully clear the final
stage will receive such funding.
5.8.6. It is essential that scheme promoters and the SCR MCA agree the scope of appraisal of
costs and benefits before any substantive business case development is undertaken.
Appraisal specific to certain programme types will be explored at this time. For non-transport
schemes, approaches to capturing and quantifying costs and benefits are explored and
appropriate guidance on requirements is provided as required.
For transport schemes, WebTAG24 compliant appraisal is applied proportionately, based on
the (public sector) cost of the scheme and the scale of the impacts. To facilitate this scoping,
an Appraisal Scoping Report template is used, comprising:
• Level of analytical detail to be applied to approve a scheme against overarching
Government transport objectives and the rationale for this;
• Modelling tools to be applied;
• Alternative interventions to be considered; and
• Timescales for business case development.
The SCR Executive Team defines a transport scheme as “any scheme that significantly
changes the transport network infrastructure, whatever its objectives”.
5.8.7. Modelling and appraisal of transport schemes must be in accordance with the latest WebTag
at the time the business case is submitted for approval. This forms an essential part of the
Appraisal Scoping Report.
5.8.8. The five cases must ensure that all impacts of a scheme (monetised and non- monetised) are
presented for consideration. The business case templates and guidance set out the basis for
consistent capture of impacts, including Optimism Bias.
5.8.9. Once OBC and FBC business cases are fully developed, they are submitted to the Appraisal
Panel for review. An independent assessment is undertaken of all business cases to quality
assure and scrutinise the project including all necessary due diligence checks.
5.8.10. At each stage of the business case sign-off, the Appraisal Panel produces a Value for Money
Statement (VfMS) as part of the appraisal summary, so that stakeholders can understand the
potential costs, benefits, risks and impacts. These statements are on a proportionate basis
relative to the level of funding sought but they are applicable to all programmes. The
appraisal summary is included in the supporting information for all recommendations made to
Thematic Boards.
5.8.11. The Section 73 Officer of the SCR MCA is responsible for signing-off VfM statements
(Appraisal Panel Summary) as true and accurate. This sign-off must be achieved before the
project can progress. As already described, the Section 73 Officer follows the established
professional codes of practice that guide and bind the undertaking of the role. At all stages of
decision-making, the national guidance on registering conflicts of interest is adhered to. This
includes any interests declared by members of the Appraisal Panel or the Section 73 Officer.
5.8.12. The SCR MCA and/or the SCR LEP can decide to remove a scheme/project from the
programme if the business case does not provide the required assurance of value for money.
5.8.13. Projects promoters must also ensure that the commercial, financial and management
24 https://www.gov.uk/guidance/transport-analysis-guidance-WebTAG
arrangements are appropriate for effective delivery. Project Promoters may find the
Infrastructure and Projects Authority Project Initiation Routemap Handbook helpful when
developing these aspects of the business case.
5.8.14. The Appraisal Panel’s recommendation is made to the appropriate Board. The Board can
approve the project if it is within the threshold set out in the Combined Authority Financial
Regulations and aligned to the agreed budget delegations. Projects which exceed the
threshold or which fall outside of the agreed budget delegations are endorsed by the
appropriate Board and sent to the MCA for approval. Once approved, the recommendations,
including the VfM Statement (Appraisal Panel Summary), are published on the SCR website.
5.8.15. All funding decisions taken by the SCR will be communicated in writing to project applicants.
5.8.16. Figure 7 indicates the process to be followed at this stage.
Figure 7: Process for Development of Business Case and Project Approval
Full Project Approval
5.9.1. Following approval of a Full Business Case (FBC) it may be necessary to complete a range
of statutory processes to ensure the project is actually ready to start. For example, planning
permission, a Compulsory Purchase Order, or satisfying a number of conditions agreed as
part of the FBC. Where this is the case, approval to enter into a funding agreement is carried
out as a separate stage. Compliance checks of such processes/conditions are then carried
out by the SCR Executive Team, prior to making a recommendation to the appropriate
approving authority. In many cases, it will be possible to secure approval to a full business
case and approval to enter into funding agreements at the same time.
5.9.2. The Programme Board, as owner of the Assurance Framework, retains the ability to review decisions in discharging its functions.
5.9.3. This final approval allows the SCR Operational Contracts team in the Programme Assurance
and Performance Directorate to enter into a formal funding agreement with the scheme
Promoter, and the project transitions to the delivery stages outlined in the next section.
5.9.4. Figure 8 summarises all the stages in the project lifecycle.
Figure 8: Process for Development of Business Case and Project Approval
SCR Project / Programme lifecycle
DeliveryDevelopment / Appraisal Closure
Pro
ject
Pro
mo
ter
C
ASC
R B
oard
SCR E
xecu
tive
Te
am
Business Case
Development
(Strategic /Outline /
Full)
Full Approval
Delivery, Progress
reporting and
Grant Claims
Appraise and
Recommend
Approve Spend <£
Threshold or
Endorse Spend >£
Threshold
Approve Policy
Decisions and Spend
>£ Threshold
Progress
Business Case
Performance
Management,
Appraise and
Recommend
Progress Reporting
Approve Spend <£
Threshold or
Endorse Spend >£
Threshold
Approve Policy
Decisions and Spend
>£ Threshold
Project Monitoring /
Evaluation
Project
Completion /
Opening
Benefit Realisation
Appraisal
Review
Performance and
Approve Close or
Corrective Action
Approve Project
Closure
Full
Approval
Release of Funding, Cost Control and Approval Conditions
5.10.1. Grants/loans to scheme promoters are capped and promoters bear risk for all overspend
beyond the approved amount.
5.10.2. The SCR MCA's Section 73 officer (or equivalent) must certify that funding can be released
under the appropriate conditions (in line with statutory duties). SCR Treasurers work closely
together to ensure standards and processes are comparable.
5.10.3. A mechanism for ‘claw-back’ provisions is in place to ensure that funding is only spent on the
specified scheme and linked to delivery of outputs and outcomes. Payment milestones are
agreed between the promoter and the SCR MCA based upon the complexity, cost and
timescales of the scheme. This forms part of the programme management role of the SCR
MCA, which is subject to external audit. The conditions relating to the Authority’s agreement
to fund a scheme are set out in a Funding Agreement between the SCR MCA and the
scheme promoter so that the responsibilities of each are clear.
5.10.4. Each grant claim is crosschecked against the approved project baseline information
as part of the quarterly reporting processes.
Managing Risk
5.11.1. The Assurance Framework includes a comprehensive issues and risk management
approach, which has been developed in accordance with Green Book principles and other
project management guidance.
5.11.2. It is important that the level of risk taken on any project and programme is understood from
an early stage alongside the associated cost implications, including delivery partners and
their supply chains. Through a robust approach to risk, the SCR MCA reduces the need to
de-scope schemes from the programme because of cost overruns. Promoters are required
to include risk/contingency plans as part of funding requests.
5.11.3. Throughout the programme management lifecycle, risk is managed in accordance with the
three-stage process set out in figure 9 below. A key element of our approach is that all parties
have a responsibility to contribute to the management of risk.
Figure 9: Approach to risk management
5.11.4. Risk identification and assessment takes place through business case development and
assessment at each Key Stage or Gateway. Structured risk workshops bringing together
scheme promoters and the SCR MCA could supplement this assessment. The SCR
Operational Contracts Team will work with the scheme promoter to monitor progress and
risks.
5.11.5. Risk Management controls and mitigation action plans are also agreed in one to one sessions
with the risk owners. The process is linked together to enable ease of reporting and reviewing
of primary risks that affect the project. Once a risk has been identified and evaluated it is
added to the SCR risk register. A plan is then constructed to reduce the likelihood of the risk
occurring and/or decrease the impact of a risk, should it occur. All risks are categorised into
one of two levels:
• Programme Level
• Project (Scheme) Level
5.11.6. Where controls may not be successfully managing a risk, the appropriate escalation
mechanisms will apply. Updates to the risk register are reported to and monitored by the
appropriate Board, and elevated to the MCA as appropriate. Overarching risks to the delivery
of the SEP Programme are reported to and considered by the Chairs and Vice Chairs of the
MCA and LEP respectively.
5.11.7. Cost overruns are generally the responsibility of the scheme promoter. However, the impact
of other risks such as project delays for example, can be minimised by ensuring funding is
not released until needed. Quarterly project updates include key project risks and issues,
along with and change requests.
5.11.8. The SCR’s Head of Paid Service is the named senior officer for risk management for the
MCA and LEP programmes.
5.11.9. The SCR is currently developing a Strategic Risk Management Framework to identify, assess
and manage risks for all directorates and their activities within the SCR Executive Team.
6. Measuring Success
The importance of Measuring Success
6.1.1. Measuring the success of projects provides important lessons which are used to further
improve the decision-making processes outlined in the previous section. This increases the
likelihood of successful delivery of future projects.
6.1.2. Further, measuring the impact of a project is important to understand the outcomes achieved
by the funds available to the SCR. This information is useful both to the funding providers,
who will wish to quantify the benefits gained by the fund, and also to the SCR in order to
ensure adherence to the principles of value and efficiency in future decisions about spending
on projects.
6.1.3. The SCR is seeking to be an early adopter of emerging policy on LEP governance and
transparency arrangements in producing a LEP Annual Report. The Annual Report would
highlight the outputs, outcomes and impact of projects and activities funded by the SCR.
Our logic models for understanding impact
6.2.1. Our monitoring and evaluation framework sets out several logic models which define
indicators that SCR monitor and evaluate to understand the impact of investment in relation
to the headline outcomes of the SEP. These are set out in in Section 7 (Appendix: Monitoring
and Evaluation Logic Models) for the different thematic areas.
Delivery, Monitoring and Evaluation
6.3.1. All scheme/project promoters, whether they are seeking or are in receipt of funding, are
required to provide regular financial and delivery information to the SCR MCA. This is an
integral element of the commissioning and delivery stage in the SCR programme
management cycle, and forms the basis of the SCR MCA Performance Management and
external reporting procedures.
6.3.2. Scheme promoters are responsible for informing the SCR MCA of any changes to scope,
costs and implementation timescales. The SCR Programme Board will assess the impact of
any changes on the overall scheme programme, cost increases or slippage and will report
this to the appropriate Board where necessary. The SCR MCA does not guarantee that it will
meet any cost increases either in full or in part.
6.3.3. Once a project is underway, a continual communication process is maintained between the
SCR and the project promoters. The promoter provides quarterly reports to the Operational
Contracts Team at the SCR. The Programme Management Office collates the programme
information and completes quarterly reports to MHCLG which are signed-off by the S73
Officer and LEP Board. Performance summaries are reported to the appropriate SCR
Boards, the MCA and the LEP
6.3.4. The SCR Operational Contracts Team also communicates directly with the project promoter
to address any slippages or concerns regarding project delivery. Corrective action is taken
immediately.
6.3.5. Monitoring takes place throughout the lifespan of the programme. Specifically, the Finance
Team works with the Programme Management Office to understand the overall scale of
investment and the fit between the capital revenue split and the conditionality of constituent
components of the funding. This ensures that there is ongoing assessment of the
effectiveness of each type of investment in line with the expectation of funding providers. For
example, the government expects the SCR to report back as to how effective the LGF and
other funding has been. The programme monitoring process therefore identifies the funding
of each project and allocates the outputs achieved by each project to its contributory funds
accordingly.
Project Evaluation and Closure
6.4.1. The SCR has a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation framework designed to provide
robust feedback on the lessons learned from individual projects. At the end of the delivery
stage, the Promoter is responsible for ensuring a project is evaluated, in line with the SCR
monitoring and evaluation framework.
6.4.2. The scheme promoter is required to ensure adequate resource is allocated to undertake the
agreed monitoring and evaluation. This could include allocating the resource against local
funds.
6.4.3. Project evaluation not only provides accountability for the investment made but also provides
the local evidence base to improve future bidding and the assessment of value for money
and appraisal. This is reviewed by the SCR Executive Team against the objectives of the
scheme as set out in the business case and project Funding Agreement and against the most
appropriate counterfactual. Evaluation results for all projects are published on the SCR MCA
website.
6.4.4. In cases where there is variation between the project objectives and outcomes, the SCR
Executive Team works with the promoter to agree corrective action. If this and any further
corrective action is unsuccessful, clawback provisions can be invoked as a final resort, and to
securing the outcomes via alternative measures.
6.4.5. At the end of the project, the Programme Assurance and Performance Directorate makes a
recommendation to the appropriate Thematic Board to effect closure. This recommendation is
endorsed by the Thematic Board and sent to the MCA which finally closes the project.
Further Programme Evaluation
6.5.1. Further, in conjunction with the other Combined Authorities in receipt of City, Growth or
Devolution Deals, the SCR has procured a panel of specialists to develop a methodology and
appropriate metrics to consistently evaluate the impact of the financial support, including any
support given through the proposed Single Pot. The proposed evaluation framework is in two
parts which together will cover all activities supported. The elements of this are:
• National Performance - Using an agreed list of metrics, the evaluation will assess
performance of SCR against key indicators, to assess progression; and
• Local Performance - To provide ‘local granularity and assess value for money’ the
specialist panel of external evaluators, will develop a local evaluation methodology,
incorporating the national performance indicators but augmented by outputs and impacts
specific to the range of projects supported by the SCR.
6.5.2. One of the principles for prioritising projects is that there must be scope for the SCR to invest
in projects where up-front public funding is needed to catalyse private-sector investment in
the medium term, and achieve economic benefits in the longer term. An example of this is
remediating contaminated sites to allow new commercial or residential development to take
place. Due to the potential risks involved, the private sector is often unlikely to bring this
forward with public sector support, except in exceptional circumstances.
7. Appendix: Monitoring and Evaluation Logic Models
Figure 10: SCR Strategic Monitoring Priorities
Figure 11: Business Growth Logic Model
Figure 12: Transport and Infrastructure Logic Model
Figure 13: Skills and Employment Logic Model
