NHSCFA Board meeting 13th July 2022
Minutes of NHSCFA Board meeting - FCG-BOA-MIN - Meeting – 13.07.22
Meeting time 11:00 – 13:30
Meeting title: NHSCFA Board Meeting
TT welcomed everyone noting it was positive a face-to-face meeting for the first time in over 2 years with the majority of people attending in person.
Apologies were received from Martin Spencer, Richard Hampton and George Cooke
No new declarations of interest were made.
The Board agreed the minutes as a true and accurate record subject to a couple of minor amendments: on para 6.1 “ALB’s” replaced by “CFA” and one small typo on para 18.1 where it should read ‘£500,000’ instead of ‘£5000,000’.
The Board reviewed the action log. Action Point 155 to be carried forward to the next Board meeting in September.
TT highlighted the importance of the engagement with the ICB’s in order to actively fight fraud and also the slight delay in the establishment of the new Fraud Authority.
GH informed the meeting on the following:
ARAC minutes from the meeting on 18.05.22 and REMCO minutes from the meeting on 13.06.22 were noted and accepted by the Board.
MJB gave a brief finance update highlighting the confirmation by DHSC that an additional £0.527m have been allocated to the organisation. This money which will partly offset the Cost Improvement Programme and will also help covering costs incurred with the implementation of the Evolution Programme.
MJB reassured the Board in terms of the delivery of the capital programme. At the moment the only risk is the FCU infrastructure costs which are unknown however, there is a back up list of things that can be pulled forward if necessary.
GH inquired if the rising cost of living had been incorporated into the budget, MBJ said that an analysis is being made but they hadn’t been included in the current position.
A discussion ensued about mileage and WFH allowances and what is happening in other organisations. JS suggested that there should be very clear policies in terms of the WFH allowance.
Action point 158 MJB to prepare a paper to the Board with an analysis in terms of the need for the current 3 offices and potential costs savings.
The new budget was formally approved by the Board.
Paper was taken as read. RR highlighted the quick recovery of the pension money on Operation Badon which is normally a lengthy process and how that will be of benefit for future similar situations.
TT stressed the importance of this type of positive outcomes reaching ministerial level. JA and RR confirmed there is a document being prepared to that effect where this example will be included.
TM introduced the final Q4 performance report highlighting the substantial change in one of the figures - Impact Assessment of Fraud Prevention Notices (FPN). This was due to an incorrect multiplier, duplication of entries and the inclusion of data from Wales, all of which has now been corrected. TM proceeded by referring lessons learned and how validation processes will be tightened up to avoid this situation occurring again.
The Board expressed concern regarding the high variation of figures in such a short space of time. TM gave assurances and mentioned the Data Strategy Group will be keeping a closer eye on monthly variations. AR mentioned the existence of a secondary checking process with the consolidated data return and signing off providing further assurance.
Action point 159 Going forward, TM to present a verified set of figures to the Board quarterly and/ or six monthly, whichever provides the best balance between timeliness and accuracyAction point 160 TM to prepare a paper for the next ARAC giving assurance on the figures’ validation process.
Prompted by GH’s observation regarding enforcement figures, a discussion ensued and summarising, TT suggested the focus should be on 2 key elements:
Paper was taken as read. With regards to financial targets, TM informed the meeting there is a projected delivery of just under £350m against the £400m target for the 3 year strategy. A stronger assurance of these figures will be obtained by doing validation work.
TT requested that once this validation work is completed, the information is shared with the Board by email previous to the next Board meeting in September.
Action point 161 TM to share paper with final figures for Q1 with the Board once available and bring to the Sept Board meeting; including an update on what is being done regarding the difference between the projected delivery and the target.
MJB informed the meeting that an error in the unadjusted figures on the Audit Completion Report had now been rectified. He also confirmed everything is on target for the laying of the accounts on the 14th July. JA agreed that was the case, despite the political instability.
Once again the Board expressed thanks to the team for all the work delivered to be able to lay pre recess.
All documents were noted with the Board recognising there were no significant changes. All Board members agreed it was a robust set of policies, well written in a clear manner and AS confirmed there are a range of mechanisms in place to ensure staff are complying with them.
JS and TT suggested that, due to there being a lot of them, the review of these documents is phased through the year as it makes it easier to go through them in more detail. AS agreed and explained that will be the case going forward.
AC pointed out that on the Confidentiality Audit Procedure, para 4.1 it should read “……a Caldicott Guardian, who must be the CEO……”.
The Board reviewed the forward planner and an additional item is to be added to the September meeting: Board effectiveness
It was agreed by the Board members that going forward the meetings will go back to being face-to-face where practical but with the flexibility of anybody joining virtually if they wish.
It was suggested the next Board meeting (currently scheduled for the 7th September) could be moved to the following week, face-to-face, in the Newcastle office
Action point 162 AS/ SS to check Board members’ availability w/c 12th September
AC volunteered to write the next blog and JS the one after.
It was agreed by all that the meeting had been conducted effectively and covered all the items on the agenda.
The Board agreed to allocate some time in the September meeting to have an informal discussion - political considerations.
Action point 163 AS/ SS to allocate some time in the September meeting agenda for an informal discussion
Was this page helpful?
Tell us what's happened so we can fix the problem. Please do not provide any personal, identifiable or sensitive information.