Agenda item

To consider the work of Internal Audit in 2020/2021.

6.1       The Committee received the annual Internal Audit opinion. The Committee was advised that this was an overall positive opinion, indicating that the Council’s governance, risk management and internal control systems in the areas audited were adequate, and that the Council generally had effective internal control systems, with 95% of audits receiving a positive (substantial or satisfactory) assurance opinion. It was highlighted to the Committee that there was one limited assurance audit, reported to the Committee in December 2020, which related to Direct Payments in Adult Social Care. Officers advised the Committee that follow-ups had indicated progress, with a medium-priority recommendation yet to be addressed by Adult Social Care.

6.2       The Committee queried the levels of improvements to reporting. Moira Mackie commented that improvements were to speed of delivery and presentation of reporting. 

6.3       The Committee also queried the issue of Direct Payments in Adult Social Care, and whether this was related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Moira Mackie confirmed that this aspect of the audit had begun prior to the pandemic, and care was taken during the pandemic to work with the service to address any related weaknesses as the audit progressed.

6.4       The Committee further queried the reporting on the Hampshire County Council Managed Service (“IBC”), and its equivalence to an audit. Moira Mackie confirmed that it was possible for Internal Audit to audit whether the IBC system was being used properly by staff and managers, including reporting of staff absences and financial transactions, in line with the Council’s own policies and procedures. However, the Committee was advised that Hampshire County Council had responsibility for auditing the IBC system itself, and this included review of the processes and controls for the system by Hampshire County Council’s external auditor reviews. The Committee heard that this relied upon the individuals being compliant with local controls (a “self-service model”) and that the audit processes only reviewed specific points and processes.

6.5       The Committee noted that, regarding schools, 40% of schools had no wellbeing policy at the time of audit. The Committee queried whether mental health could be integrated into the broader consideration of wellbeing in schools. Moira Mackie commented that she would bring this to the attention of the relevant people in other departments, who were best placed to assist schools to improve on this aspect.

6.6       The Committee queried some of the terminology used with regard to assurance, when compared with the schools reporting, including whether schools could be considered “satisfactory” considering that many were noted to be, for example, not reviewing their information security and health and safety policies. Moira Mackie noted that these specific policies were chosen as part of the thematic review audit work, as these were not usually examined. She also commented that some Westminster schools had not felt they had time to respond, considering the review of such policies as being under school governors’ remit. The Committee noted the low response rate and highlighted the importance of schools being fully audited and being compliant.  The Committee also noted the importance of governance in Ofsted’s assessments of schools. The Committee’s concerns were emphasised around consistency of reporting by schools in certain areas, including risk assessments and child injury incidents. The Committee recommended a more complete investigation of these concerns by the relevant Executive Director and Cabinet Member and referred the issue to Scrutiny.

6.7       RESOLVED: That the Committee receive an update at its next meeting and also refer these concerns to the Business and Children’s Policy and Scrutiny Committee for further investigation at its next meeting.