Issue - meetings

To review and approve the revised business plan for Orbis Public Law.

The Committee considered a report on the updated Orbis Public Law Business Plan, introduced through a presentation by Philip Baker. 

Witnesses:

Philip Baker, Assistant Chief Executive (ESCC) 

Rachel Crossley, Assistant Director, Chief of Staff (SCC) 

Abraham Ghebre-Ghiorghis, Executive Lead Officer, Strategy Governance and Law (BHCC)

Tony Kershaw, Director of Law and Assurance (WSCC)

Andrea Kilby, Business Development Manager, Orbis Public Law

Emma Nash, Project Manager, Orbis Public Law

Key points

1.    The presentation set out the progress made since the October Joint Committee meeting, and set the baseline to measure future performance. 

2.    Philip Baker highlighted the “Leap of Faith” from Collaboration to Convergence for Orbis Public Law (OPL), and set out the factors underpinning convergence such as: a single Interim Head of Orbis Public Law; a joint operating budget; integrated case management systems; and a resource pool by legal discipline (rather than geographical area). 

3.    Officers confirmed the work being undertaken in aligning processes, such as time recording and accounting records, to allow meaningful comparisons across the partnership and establishment of a joint budget. Officers confirmed the development of an OPL Framework Agreement for both non-social care and social care cases. 

4.    In-house advocacy is monitored and more cost-effective, and measured against an agreed notional target for comparison against external advocate costs to support in demonstrating in-house value. 

5.    Members were informed that client departments favour the in-house advocates, given the ability of the advocate to become familiar with the case over time.  Officers also highlighted that cases where in-house advocates attended Case Management Hearings, early in the process, usually resulted in fewer hearings overall.  Officers acknowledged that recruitment and retention is an issue, and  set out the efforts made to grow the authorities’ own staff, including supporting the qualification for higher courts rights of audience.

6.    Officers explained the Digital Courts project.  The OPL case management system can be used to produce court bundles, which are currently printed and circulated to participants.  OPL are piloting new software with the Guilford Family Courts to use electronic versions of these bundles, using laptops, tablets and a large screen in court instead of paper bundles.  The first electronic hearing will be in February 2018, and it is hoped to roll the pilot out to Brighton later in the year. 

7.    Officers highlighted the considerable savings to be made, in paper, printing, postage and petrol. Members considered this work should be more widely publicised, and referred to the EY Market Insight briefing at the Orbis Joint Committee.

8.    Officers set out the work sharing element of the integration, whereby officers in each authority can work on the files of the others to provide the resilience needed.     

9.    Philip Baker set out the Performance Baseline that had been established in terms of a shadow budget, the volume and types of work, the cost per chargeable hour, staff make up, work sharing and the child care advocacy project.    

10.  Each authority had its own pattern of spending on external legal advice, some  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4

For the Orbis Public Law Joint Committee to be aware of the early achievements of the partnership, the aims and ambitions for its future and the planning for how they may be realised.

Declarations of interest:

None

Witnesses:

Tony Kershaw, Director of Law and Assurance, West Sussex County Council

Ann Charlton, Director of Legal, Democratic and Cultural Services, Surrey County Council

Philip Baker, Assistant Chief Executive, East Sussex County Council

Elizabeth Culbert, Head of Legal Services, Brighton and Hove City Council

Susan Smyth, Orbis Strategic Finance Manager & Orbis Public Law Finance Lead, Surrey County Council

Emma Nash, Orbis Public Law Project Manager, East Sussex County Council.

Key points raised during the discussion:

1.           Members commented that the details in the business plan were too high level and they requested more granularity.  Members also requested the inclusion of targets and financial information within the business plan, so that it was clear to see whether targets were on track to be achieved. 

2.           Officers explained that all partners undertook legal work for other public sector organisations and that OPL may bid for future work of this nature as a way of increasing income.  There was some discussion around public sector spending and how taxpayers’ money is spent effectively to deliver the best possible services.

3.           Members noted that pilot testing of a new system to manage contract documents was underway, with a view to rolling this out across the partnership.  It was suggested that the system could drive a lot of efficiencies within the operation of the legal service.

4.           Officers informed the Committee that income is mostly generated through pension fund conveyancing, property and developer fees and from services provided to other public sector bodies and schools.

5.           There was some discussion around the future operation of the partnership and whether it would seek an Alternative Business Structure (ABS) from the Solicitor’s Regulation Authority (SRA).  Officers explained that there was some work to be done around building an architecture for OPLs future operations, however an ABS would not allow the partnership to do anything that it is not able to do already.  It can continue to trade with other public sector bodies under existing powers.

6.           Members requested a timeline to be included within the business plan, with outputs given timescales for achievement.  Officers explained the plan was developing and evolving with the partnership, however it was ready to be finalised as an initial document that would be reviewed and modified as appropriate on a monthly basis. 

7.           The Chairman suggested that given the challenges currently faced across all partner authorities, the Committee should meet before March to review and approve the revised business plan.

Actions/ further information to be provided:

Officers to revise business plan with suggested amendments.

Officers to identify a date for an additional meeting of the Committee in January 2018.

RESOLVED:

Members noted the business plan and commented as appropriate.