Agenda item

The Panel is invited to comment on the Procurement Outcomes – the Social Value Policy.

Executive Councillor: Cllr S Claffey

By means of a report by the Procurement Manager (a copy of which was appended in the Minute Book), the Procurement Outcomes – the Social Value Policy was presented to the Panel.

A couple of points of clarity were made following the Officer’s introduction. The definition of social value engine was clarified to the Panel as a nationally recognised peer-reviewed tool using many different measures which allows for a suggested outcome based on the value of the grant awarded and the agreement made. The definition of proxy was clarified to the Panel as the different measures used. The dictionary defines proxy as a figure that can be used to represent the value of something in a calculation.

It was observed that 5.5 of the report looked at post decision implementation, and it was advised to the Panel that a follow up report on outcomes once the policy was in place could be brought to a further meeting of the Panel if it were to be requested.

It was confirmed that the policy would be applied to all future procurements once approved and would not be retrospectively applied to previous agreements although it was noted that social value was already built into public sector frameworks so would have already been applied where this framework had been applied. It was noted that procurement was influenced by several internal factors including the MTFS, and that the policy itself which established mitigation of risks. In terms of liaising with local businesses, it was noted that the Council’s Economic Development Team had established networks which could be utilised for this purpose. It was further acknowledged that local businesses may also see this as a risk but that work and legislation was in place to collaborate and work for the benefit of local communities.

It was noted that whilst the Council had a database of current contractors, some had a national office with local branches therefore data from the database would not give a full picture of current local connections but that this reporting would be possible through the social value engine tool.

The Panel heard that support for bid writing was available for local businesses through Support Cambridgeshire. It was also noted that the Council organised Business Breakfasts allowed for networking and information sharing with local businesses. Work to understand further opportunities to engage small businesses and co-operative models of delivery would continue to be investigated. The importance of maintaining a balance between the social value and quality of fulfilment whilst remaining mindful of spending public money was noted as well as the importance of measuring the tangibility of social value versus value for money.

Following a question on how applications could be weighed against each other if offering different social and financial benefits, the Panel were advised that any social value related to a specific contract would be stipulated in the procurement process with the investment into the CHAWs fund an alternative route rather than a preference.

The Panel were keen to see specific codification of Council priorities and how that would adapt to different contracts. Following which the Panel heard that there were two ways to stipulate weighting which were detailed within the policy and that each procurement was dealt with on a project by project basis to ensure that the right weighting had been applied.

The six social value outcomes were discussed and how these would be met using the software to the social value engine where each of the metrics is responded to and then the evidence against them is gathered back and flagged against the outcomes. The scoring process was noted to be established before the contract was tendered and that a balanced perspective was maintained through an officer Panel and scoring process.

The Panel requested tangible examples to fully understand the process and how the weighting would be applied and expressed concern that without this, it would be difficult to establish a full understanding of the potential outcomes of the policy. They were advised that whilst it would be possible to provide examples it would not be a quick process. It was reiterated that the importance and weighting of each of the six social value outcomes was established before the tender process. It was suggested that three hypothetical examples be worked up and brought back to a future scrutiny meeting or via a briefing note. Following a discussion on the matter, it was proposed to add an additional recommendation to the Cabinet report. The additional recommendation and it’s wording was proposed by Councillor Martin and seconded by Councillor Bulat and the Panel voted in favour of forwarding the proposed recommendation to the Cabinet;

1.2 that Cabinet do not go ahead with the approval of the policy until such a time as work to provide examples as requested has been completed and reported back through the democratic process and to establish a framework to monitor and to include penalties through reporting upon that process.

It was noted that the policy had been developed following recent government legislation and took into account best practice from other local authorities. It was confirmed that measures would be in place to ensure compliance with the terms of contracts awarded to ensure promised social value elements were fulfilled.

Following the discussion, it was

RESOLVED

that the comments of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel be passed to Cabinet for their consideration when making a decision upon the recommendations within the report, and additionally, the Panel request that the Cabinet consider adding the following recommendation to their report;

1.2 that Cabinet do not go ahead with the approval of the policy until such a time as work to provide examples as requested has been completed and reported back through the democratic process and to establish a framework to monitor and to include penalties through reporting upon that process.