To receive Report No. 165/2015 from the Director for Resources.

(Report to follow)

Report No. 165/2015 was received from the Director for Resources. The report was prepared at the request of the Resources Scrutiny Panel, following the discussion at a previous meeting about the budget for IT and a willingness to gain a better understanding of how the budget was spent.

During the discussion the following points were noted:

      i.        Clarification was sought as to who the Performance and Support team are and what they do;

    ii.        A breakdown of the £130k website budget was provided: £100k was allocated to redesign the website and £30k was brought forward for project management costs. Future annual costs are currently unknown;

   iii.        Concerns were raised over the £100k costs. It was explained that there are only a limited number of web developers who specialise in government websites and that the Council was not starting from scratch and needed the online services it was intending to offer to integrate with its back office systems. The last time the website was developed approximately four to five years ago, it cost £40k-£50K;

   iv.        Concerns raised over whether additional IT staff would be needed, and arrangements put in place to keep the website up to date;

    v.        It was suggested that people do not find the current website user friendly and that the new website will be going out for public consultation;

   vi.        Due to the large number of people who pay in person - approximately 250 per week - and the amount of resources needed to process them, the Council need to have a simple and transactional friendly website.

Councillor Stewart left the meeting at 8.20pm

  vii.        The panel expressed concern over the number or vacancies within the IT department. It was confirmed that recruitment has not been progressed in order to allow  the incoming Head of IT the flexibility to create and develop his own team structure;

viii.        Concerns raised over whether the Council gets value for money for the Agresso system with the cost of the system and two full time members of staff supporting it. It was confirmed that both posts that previously supported the system are now vacant and all options would be considered including procuring external support due to the difficulty in recruiting specialists and the expense involved;

   ix.        Concern was raised over the high cost for Education & Early years system.  This system is renowned for being expensive, however it is up for review and alternative options will be considered;

    x.        The Raise system is being replaced by Liquid Logic. The annual cost will increase as it will be externally hosted, however as more systems are hosted over time the cost will reduce as IT support may be reduced;

   xi.        The Panel expressed interest in how often the video conferencing facilities were used. It was explained that the facilities are not used regularly due to some limitations to who you can use it with and that the facility needs to be promoted. However, with the Skype facility available on iPads there is scope to review this; and

  xii.        The Panel sought confirmation of the IT Operational Support budget, specifically the purchase of hardware and the maintenance agreements.  Assurances were made that this was only a budget, there was a plan for the purchase of hardware however it changed every year;

xiii.        The maintenance agreement budget is the cost of contracts committed to for external providers.

AGREED:

1) That the Panel noted the contents of Report No. 165/2015; and

2) That the Director for Resources would provide an update to the Panel in 6 months.