Agenda item

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Corporate Projects Programme Manager explained that Members were familiar with the report that provided an overview of the major projects under the auspicious of the Board as it had been presented to previous meetings.  There had been changes made to the overview report because of new highlight reports which was the next item on the agenda.  The Board was informed that there were 17 projects on the list – 5 red, 9 amber, 3 green.

The Board was reminded of the previous more detailed 5 RAG ratings but the report had moved to a simplistic approach taking into account the highlight reports process which followed as the next agenda item.  The RAG ratings were now just red, amber and green.

The Corporate Projects Programme Manager advised that officers had been unable to present the West Winch report because of staffing capacity issues but would endeavour to bring a report to future meetings.

The Board was informed that this was the first month of the new reporting arrangements this was quite an ask of project managers so a significant amount of work had been put in but that there were a few gaps which were part of the transition to the new arrangements.

In response to a comment from the Chair, the Corporate Projects Programme Manager explained the reporting process and undertook to circulate the reporting timetable as an appendix to the minutes.

The Corporate Projects Programme Manager explained the change that at the end of every month was that all reports would be published on Mod Gov so all Members were able to view the information and it was anticipated that the January update would be published on 1 March 2023.

Councillor Morley asked if it was the purpose of the Board to go through each project or just take a helicopter view of what was presented.  In response, the Chair, Councillor Blunt explained that this was a helicopter view and that the next step would be to discuss how the Board could undertake a “deep dive” into specific projects.

Councillor Kemp commented that the report set out a clear format of the overall view of the projects which included the financial risks.

In response to questions from Councillor Morley on the Board selecting which red RAG project to look at in more detail and a consistent approach being adopted across the Council on the current progress, the Interim Technical and Delivery Advisor explained that Members get early warning as Members could view reports on a monthly basis and could see the flow of information available and where the risks were etc, and also see the first report in detail where red flags were identified and it depended on how deep the Board wished to go.  He explained that sometimes reports could have a red status but the commentary and mitigating measures set out in the report and why, type of mitigation that may be etc, may mean the Board were comfortable with the project, without needing further information.

Councillor Blunt added that he would expect Portfolio Holders to be aware of any projects which had a red flag.

Under Standing Order 34, Councillor de Whalley thanked the Interim Project Delivery and Technical Advisor and the officers for the work undertaken and commented that transparent approach was much appreciated but was not entirely clear how much was down to a change in process and how much was down to the change in status of the projects.  In response, the Interim Project Delivery and Technical Advisor explained that what had happened was that there was more demand on the Project Managers to explain why a certain risk, cost overruns, etc in the status there were and that more detail had been included than previously so Project Managers would not have to explain to the MMPB why the particular status.  It was noted that this was the first month of the new reporting arrangements and that there be may a few hiccups in the terminology/understanding and the reason for setting up the Programme Management Office was to help with consistency across projects and it was hoped that the reports would continue to improve to enable the Board to have a better understanding of the projects.

The Chair, Councillor Blunt expressed concern that the report was written three weeks ago and had gone through at least two other stages before being presented to the Board and commented that those changes could cause the report to change and asked how would Members know that. In response, the Corporate Projects Programme Manager explained that this was normal process of operational management, with information going through checks and then the Officer Major Projects Board and added that if senior officers felt an element needed adjustment, this was the normal evolution of reports presented to Councillors.

The Interim Technical and Delivery Advisor added that a period of time had to be set for reporting and the quality control of the information to be presented was reviewed by the Project Boards so the data was an accurate as possible for that one month. However, if for some reason the issue was resolved then the officers could give a verbal update.

The Chair, Councillor Blunt commented that it would be useful to present the information to an all Member Briefing.

In response to questions from Councillor de Whalley on why there was no January report for West Winch, the Chair, Councillor Blunt advised that this was due to a staffing issue.

Councillor Kemp commented that West Winch was the biggest project and provided an overview on the importance of transparency.