Please Contact: Lydia Hall
Please email: lydia.hall@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Please Direct Dial on: 01263 516047
27 November 2015
A meeting of the Audit Committee of North Norfolk District Council will be held in the
Committee Room at the Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer on Tuesday 08 December
2015 at 2.00 pm
Members of the public who wish to ask a question or speak on an agenda item are
requested to arrive at least 15 minutes before the start of the meeting. It will not always be
possible to accommodate requests after that time. This is to allow time for the Committee
Chair to rearrange the order of items on the agenda for the convenience of members of the
public. Further information on the procedure for public speaking can be obtained from
Democratic Services, Tel: 01263 516047, Email: democraticservices@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Anyone attending this meeting may take photographs, film or audio-record the proceedings
and report on the meeting. Anyone wishing to do so must inform the Chairman. If you are a
member of the public and you wish to speak on an item on the agenda, please be aware that
you may be filmed or photographed.
Sheila Oxtoby
Chief Executive
To: Mr V FitzPatrick, Mr S Hester, Mr B Jarvis, Mr M Knowles, Mrs A Moore
and Mr D Young
All other Members of the Council for information.
Members of the Management Team, appropriate Officers, Press and Public
If you have any special requirements in order to attend this meeting, please let us
know in advance
If you would like any document in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a
different language please contact us
Chief Executive: Sheila Oxtoby
Strategic Directors: Nick Baker and Steve Blatch
Tel 01263 513811 Fax 01263 515042 Minicom 01263 516005
Email districtcouncil@north-norfolk.gov.uk Web site northnorfolk.org
AGENDA
1.
TO RECEIVE APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
2.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
To receive public questions, if any.
3.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
To determine any items of business which the Chairman decides should be
considered as a matter of urgency pursuant to Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local
Government Act 1972.
4.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members are asked at this stage to declare any interests that they may have in any
of the following items on the agenda. The Code of Conduct for Members requires
that declarations include the nature of the interest and whether it is a disclosable
pecuniary interest.
5.
MINUTES
(Page 1)
To approve as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Audit Committee
held on 15 September 2015.
6.
AUDIT UPDATE AND ACTION LIST
(Page 8)
To monitor progress on items requiring action from the meeting of 15 September
2015 including progress on implementation of audit recommendations.
7.
AUDIT COMMITTEE WORK PROGRAMME
(Page 9)
To review the Audit Committee Work Programme.
8.
ANNUAL AUDIT LETTER
(Page 10)
To receive the Annual Audit Letter from the External Auditors.
9.
INTERNAL AUDIT PROGRESS REPORT
(Page 19)
To receive a follow up report on the recommendations made by Internal Audit.
10.
INTERNAL AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS FOLLOW UP REPORT
(Page 44)
To receive a follow up report on recommendations made by Internal Audit.
11.
BUSINESS CONTINUITY
To receive an update on Business Continuity.
12.
EXCLUSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC
(Page 52)
To pass the following resolution, if necessary:
“That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public
be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that
they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in
of Part I
of Schedule 12A (as amended) to the Act.”
Agenda item _5 _
AUDIT COMMITTEE
Minutes of a meeting of the Audit Committee held on Tuesday 15 September 2015 in
the Committee Room, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 2.00 pm.
Members Present:
Committee:
Mr V FitzPatrick (Chairman)
Mr S Hester
Mr M Knowles
Mrs A Moore
Mr D Young
Officers in
Attendance:
The Head of Finance, the Internal Audit Consortium Manager, the PWC
External Auditors (AB & AA), the Monitoring Officer and the Democratic
Services officer
13.
APOLOGIES
None.
14.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
None received.
15.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None
16.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Mrs A Moore declared an interest – that her husband received a pension from NNDC.
17.
MINUTES
The Minutes of the meeting of the Audit Committee held on 16 June 2015 were
approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
18.
AUDIT UPDATE AND ACTION LIST
It was agreed to move the self assessment item to March 2016 and that the medium
priority audit recommendations would be in the follow up report in the December
meeting.
19.
AUDIT COMMITTEE WORK PROGRAMME
Audit Committee
1
15 September 2015
The Committee were advised that PWC would be completing the Annual Audit Letter
for December 2015 and the certification for the March 2016 meeting.
20. MONITORING OFFICER’S REPORT
The Monitoring Officer introduced his report and explained that from 1989, each local
authority had a monitoring officer whose focus was on corporate governance, the
constitution, standing orders and procedures, and incorporated a whistleblowing role.
The Monitoring Officer said that his daily role was to advise on the constitution and on
processes and procedures; such as whether something is a Cabinet or Full Council
decision, Standards Committee and complaints (for NNDC as well as Parish and Town
Councils). He added that there were parish engagement events coming up and that he
would be supporting the authority with those.
The Monitoring Officer said that his annual report included ombudsman cases and
whistleblowing policies.
The Chairman thanked the Monitoring Officer for his report.
The Monitoring Officer said that unfortunately the statistics in the report on standing
order exemptions were old ones. He explained that, for example, time constraints
could limit the opportunity to get quotes on the open markets and that he assessed in
each case whether it was a reasonable request.
The Chairman asked whether this was on the register.
The Monitoring Officer confirmed that it was and that an up-to-date version would be
circulated.
The Head of Finance clarified that the franking machine was not an item of spend in
the Capital programme for 2014/15.
The Chairman asked whether the duties in section 2.1 were a reactive task rather than
a proactive one.
The Monitoring Officer said that it was a proactive role but that such reports were few
and far between in all authorities. Examples of this would be if a committee had made
an unlawful decision or that one didn’t fall within their terms of reference. He added
that they were usually sorted out early and in a satisfactory way.
The Chairman asked what kinds of cases the 11 ombudsman cases consisted of.
The Monitoring Officer said that the Ombudsman investigated maladministration which
was summarised as where the authority has not followed their own processes or where
an individual has been treated unfairly or that an injustice has been caused. He
explained that it was the operational side and that there was not any legal remedy and
that it was not about individuals (unlike the standards regime) but the Council as a
whole. He added that the Ombudsman took a pragmatic approach and that financial
recompense was sometimes awarded.
The Monitoring Officer said that the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction did not extend at
present to Parish Councils and that an authority can be compelled to make a public
report but that this was only in rare cases where the authority did not acknowledge its
blame.
Audit Committee
2
15 September 2015
21.
ANNUAL GOVERNANCE STATEMENT
The Head of Finance informed Members that the Annual Governance Statement is
updated each year and covers the processes and governance arrangements for how
the Council conducts its business. She said that it was refreshed and updated annually
at the same time as the Statement of Accounts. The statement refers to activities in the
year to support the governance for the Council including the Internal Audit reviews and
also includes details of boards and groups along with their objectives.
The Head of Finance explained that the AGS process identifies any governance issues
that require action and these are included at section 6 of the statement. The actions
from 2013/14 have been implemented and the new action arising from the 2014/15
process is in relation to the publications that the Council is required to make in line with
the Governments Transparency agenda.
The AGS for 2014/15 has been considered by the Performance and Risk Management
Board ahead of coming to the Audit Committee today and following consideration by
the Audit committee today will go to Full Council next week for approval.
The Chairman, referring to section 4.1.10 asked what the format of the Peer Challenge
was.
The Head of Finance explained that the review took place in December 2014 and that
it was not compulsory but that NNDC had chosen to take part. The organisation was
visited by other LGA members; a leader, a CEO and senior directors from comparable
councils. The focus of the review included economic growth and the Business
Transformation Programme and how NNDC were progressing with these and what
opportunities could be made.
The Head of Finance explained that the review took place over four days and that it
was an intensive process where Members, staff and external stakeholders were
interviewed.
The Head of Finance said that at the end of the process, the peer team presented their
findings and recommendations. Their findings of the organisation were very positive,
and highlighted areas where the Council could develop its thinking to improve capacity
and also taking a more ambitious target around the outcomes on business
transformation.
It was PROPOSED by Cllr M Knowles and SECONDED by Cllr S Hester that the Audit
Committee RECOMMEND the report to Full Council.
22.
STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS
The Head of Finance informed the Committee that the statement is produced every
year and that a draft version was produced by 30th June on the outturn position that
was reported to Cabinet and Scrutiny in June. . She explained that the outturn position
as reported to Members in June performance was measured against target and that
the accounts were very prescriptive, but lengthy. She added that the deadline for
production of the draft and final accounts would be brought forward in the future.
The Head of Finance informed Members that there was an underspend of £431,000
which was recommended to be transferred into the invest to save reserve. She said
Audit Committee
3
15 September 2015
that page 12 of the report detailed the movement in reserves and that it was split
between ‘useable’ and ‘unusable’. She further explained that the useable reserves
were cash back reserves of £20.5 at the year end and included earmarked reserves of
£12.2 million, general reserve of £2.3 million and capital receipts of £6 million. The
unusable reserves were largely accounting/statutory reserves which were £10.6
million. The Head of Finance said that there was detail in note 6 in the accounts and
that each of the statements was supported by notes.
The Head of Finance drew Members’ attention to page 41 of the report of earmarked
reserves and balance. She said that there was a big movement of £3.3m and that it
was an allocation to the business rates reserve and the broadband reserve. She
explained that the statement showed the council’s position as at 31 March and that it
didn’t reflect the forecast use of reserves for financing projects and capital spend over
the medium to long term in line with the financial strategy.
The Head of Finance said that the useable Capital Receipts reserve (asset disposal)
was for capital purposes only and that there were no capital grants that hadn’t been
used with £6 m left at the end of the year.
The Head of Finance said that the unusable was for accounting mechanisms and
entries to show other movements on assets and pension funds.
The Head of Finance said that the comprehensive income and expenditure account
included the cost of services, capital charges, depreciation charges and how this is
financed as well as grant income and taxation. She said that looking at the position
year on year, the accounts gave a snapshot of a specific point in time.
The Head of Finance said that the balance sheets on pages 14 and 15 showed the net
worth of NNDC and that the cash flow statements showed the cash transactions in a
year. She said that the collection fund at the end on page 98 showed the billing
authority and how the organisation was performing in terms of council tax and business
rates collection. She informed Members that the council tax collection fund l showed
them to be in a surplus position and that they had collected more than what had been
paid out but said that this was not an excessive surplus. The Head of Finance said that
the business rates were in a deficit of £1.9m and showed that what was collected was
less than what they had said they would pay out. She explained that they had to pay
out what they had committed to, but that this was mitigated through the section 31
grant to recompense fr the greater amount of reliefs paid out. The Head of Finance
concluded by saying that the report did not show the council’s future spending plans
and that this was an ongoing process throughout the year.
The Chairman congratulated the Head of Finance and her team for the work they had
done in order to produce the report.
The Chairman asked whether there would be an increase in the pension liability fund
as liabilities was a long term issue.
The Head of Finance replied that liability was taken into account in their long term
financial planning and that it was factored into the financial process.
Mr D Young asked whether the £39m was specific to NNDC employees.
The Head of Finance said that it was current and past employees.
Audit Committee
4
15 September 2015
Mr S Hester asked whether the lump sum payments in pensions would affect the
council.
The Head of Finance said that these would be taken into account.
Mr Knowles commented that this would affect cashflow rather than liability.
The External Auditor (AB) said that the pension fund was audited separately.
Mr Young asked about receivables on page 87 of the report and asked about the bad
debt provision of 10%.
The Head of Finance said that they used a robust process and that it was the age and
size of the debt, not just a percentage, and the likelihood of recovering some of these
debts.
Mr Young asked whether the debts should be written off.
The Head of Finance said that certain debts i.e. council tax debts of small amounts
might not be economical to chase. She said that they determined a bad debt provision
each year and that it was thoroughly looked at but that debt could be written back on.
Mr Hester asked whether a debt was passed onto the next of kin.
The Head of Finance said that they put charges on properties by enforcement.
Mr Young, referring to page 4 of the report, queried the reference to the recycling
contract and the loss of £250,000 in profit.
The Head of Finance said that it had been based on the previous contract and that the
profit shown were from the new contract. She explained that there was concern over
contamination ion the recycling and that this was being covered by the service area
involved.
Mr Young commented that the information from NNDC about recycling was less
detailed than the information provided by Norfolk County Council and that this should
be looked into.
The Chairman, referring to page 2 of the report asked why there was such a large
variance with a £3m underspend.
The Head of Finance said that this was mainly due to business rates and underspends
being allocated to reserves for future commitments. She said that there was also
stormworks being completed from the previous year, business rates section 31 grants
as well as an underspend and additional income.
Mr Hester asked what would happen with the surplus.
The Head of Finance said that this was a recommendation by Cabinet that the
underspend be allocated to the restructuring/invest to save reserve.
The Chairman, referring to page 42 of the report asked about the reserve statements.
The Head of Finance said that they had a whistleblowing amount of £10,000 which
was now zero and that this had come through the internal audit report and how the
Audit Committee
5
15 September 2015
council funded and resourced these types of investigations and that this had been
reallocated in 2013/14.
The Chairman said that the recharges were £1.2m on page 58 of the report.
The Head of Finance said that this was the cost that was budgeted for and that in
effect it was a recharge to all of the services that they supported to give a true cost of
the departments and all of their overheads.
It was PROPOSED by Cllr V FitzPatrick and SECONDED by Cllr S Hester that the
Audit Committee RECOMMEND the report to Full Council
23.
ANNUAL GOVERNANCE REPORT
The External Auditor (AA) introduced the report to Members and said that it was the
September issue. She outlined the following:
Page 2: Executive Summary – changes since the Audit Plan in March
1) Change in Engagement Leader
2) Increase of a risk – from elevated risk to significant risk
Pages 3,4,5: Risks identified in the audit plan
Page 8: included main accounting issues identified and related parties. She
said that since the Statement of Accounts had been updated there was a
change in Appendix 2.
Page 30: Annual Governance Statement and value for money conclusion
(which was still in progress)
The External Auditor (AA) said that they were required to inform the Council of any
significant deficiencies and that these were listed on page 14 of the report.
Mrs A Moore asked about the issues with Cabbell Park and Cromer on page 27, point
4 and asked whether Members had full access to the information.
This was discussed and Members should have all of the information.
Mr M Knowles asked about the asset valuation.
The External Auditor (AB) said that there was difference in calculation and that the
assets were not currently valued.
24.
INTERNAL AUDIT PROGRESS REPORT
The Internal Audit Consortium Manager introduced the report and drew Members
attention to page 178 of the report which explained the terminology used by the newly
appointed auditors, in comparison to that previously used.
The Internal Audit Consortium Manager referred Members to the table at 2.1 on page
181, which confirmed the IT audits that have subsequently been agreed with
management. The 2015/16 March audit plan is currently at 41% completion,
highlighting that internal audit plan is on track and where it was anticipated to be.
Audit Committee
6
15 September 2015
The Internal Audit Consortium Manager highlighted that there were new staff on the
contract but that they had kept people from the previous contract, and that this mix was
working well.
The Internal Audit Consortium Manager, in referring to the Waste Management audit,
confirmed that five recommendations had been raised with management and four had
been agreed. The one not agreed was regarding the Openwide contract and a five
year extension between NNDC and Places for People. She said that an issue
regarding the amount stated and agreed to pay varied and that no further action had
been taken.
The Internal Audit Consortium Manager said, in reference to waste management, that
a generic risk register was in place for Kier and that it needed to be reflective of the
contract. She also said that a software itinerary was needed in IT to ensure that
unauthorised software wasn’t added.
The Internal Audit Consortium Manager informed Members that the new contractors
performance was at appendix 3 and that there were no issues in relation to
performance.
Mrs A Moore commented that she preferred the analysis previously used.
The Internal Audit Consortium Manager explained that it was so they could be
benchmarked against the other clients of the contractor.
Mr D Young asked about the Waste Management audit and wanted to clarify that the
Openwide contract was for £377,000 a year and that it was renewed at £277,000 and
that the contract had not changed.
The Internal Audit Consortium Manger confirmed that NNDC was paying the correct
amount but that the contract did not reflect this. It had been referred to legal and no
further action had been taken.
The Head of Finance said that it would raise concerns in case of a dispute.
Mr Young said that he did not agree that no further action should be taken.
The Chairman agreed and said that it would be prudent to change it.
It was agreed that the Internal Audit Consortium Manager would go back to the Head
of Assets and Leisure and have the contract amended.
The Chairman commented that it was an unnecessary risk.
The Committee ACCEPTED the update.
The meeting closed at 3.50pm
______________________
Chairman
Audit Committee
7
15 September 2015
Agenda Item
6
AUDIT COMMITTEE 15 SEPTEMBER 2015 – ACTIONS ARISING FROM THE
MINUTES
18. Audit Update
and Action
List
Agreed for the medium priority audit
recommendations to be reported at December
meeting.
Emma Hodds
19. Monitoring
Officer’s
Report
The Monitoring Officer would circulate an up-to-date
version of statistics for the annual report.
David Johnson
8
Agenda Item 7
AUDIT COMMITTEE WORK PROGRAMME 2015 – 2016
JUNE 2015
PWC
SEPTEMBER
2015
PWC 2014/15
Annual
Governance
report
(ISA260)
Internal Audit
Annual Report and Progress Report
Opinion and
on Internal Audit
Review of the
Activity
Effectiveness of
Internal Audit
Progress report on
Internal Audit
Activity
Follow up on
Internal Audit
Recommendations
NNDC
Corporate Risk
Register/ risk
management
framework
Business
Continuity Plan
Review
Business
Continuity training
update
DECEMBER 2015
MARCH 2016
PWC Annual Audit
Letter
E&Y Audit Plan
(with overview)
Annual Grant
Certification
Report from
PWC
Progress Report
on Internal Audit
Activity
Progress Report
on Internal Audit
Activity
Follow Up Report
Strategic and
on Internal Audit
Annual Audit
Recommendations Plans
Undertake selfassessment
Statement of
Accounts
Local Code of
Corporate
Governance and
Action Plan
Business
Continuity
Monitoring
Officer’s Report
9
Corporate Risk
Register
(deferred from
December)
Risk
Management
Framework
Agenda Item 8
www.pwc.co.uk
North Norfolk District
Council
Annual Audit Letter
2014/15
Government and
Public Sector
October 2015
10
Contents
Code of Audit Practice and
Statement of Responsibilities
of Auditors and of Audited
Bodies
Introduction
1
Audit Findings
3
Final Fees
6
In April 2010 the Audit Commission
issued a revised version of the
‘Statement of responsibilities of
auditors and of audited bodies’. It is
available from the Chief Executive
of each audited body. The purpose
of the statement is to assist auditors
and audited bodies by explaining
where the responsibilities of
auditors begin and end and what is
to be expected of the audited body in
certain areas. Our reports and
management letters are prepared in
the context of this Statement.
Reports and letters prepared by
appointed auditors and addressed
to members or officers are prepared
for the sole use of the audited body
and no responsibility is taken by
auditors to any Member or officer
in their individual capacity or to
any third party.
PwC  Contents
North Norfolk District Council
11
An audit is not designed to
identify all matters that may be
relevant to those charged with
governance. Our audit does not
ordinarily identify all such
matters.
Introduction
The purpose of this letter
This letter summarises the results of our 2014/15 audit work
for members of the Authority.
We have already reported the detailed findings from our
audit work to the Audit Committee in the following reports:



Audit opinion for the 2014/15 financial statements,
incorporating conclusion on the proper arrangements to
secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of
resources;
Report to those charged with Governance (ISA (UK&I)
260); and
Annual Certification Report (to those charged with
governance).
The matters reported here are the most significant for the
Authority.
Scope of Work
The Authority is responsible for preparing and publishing its
Statement of Accounts, accompanied by the Annual
Governance Statement. It is also responsible for putting in
place proper arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and
effectiveness in its use of resources.
Our 2014/15 audit work has been undertaken in accordance
with the Audit Plan that we issued in March 2015 and is
conducted in accordance with the Audit Commission’s Code
of Audit Practice, International Standards on Auditing (UK
and Ireland) and other guidance issued by the Audit
Commission.
We met our responsibilities as follows:
Audit Responsibility
Results
Perform an audit
of the accounts in
accordance with
the Auditing
Practice Board’s
International
Standards on
Auditing (ISAs
(UK&I)).
We reported our findings to the Audit
Committee on 15 September 2015 in our
2014/15 report to those charged with
governance (ISA (UK&I) 260). On 30
September 2015 we issued an
unqualified audit opinion.
Report to the
National Audit
Office on the
accuracy of the
consolidation
pack the
Authority
is required to
prepare for the
Whole of
Government
Accounts.
We reported to the National Audit Office
on 30 September 2015 that a detailed
review of the consolidation pack was not
required as the Authority was below the
threshold.
Form a
conclusion on the
arrangements the
Authority has
made for securing
economy,
efficiency and
effectiveness in its
use of resources.
On 30 September 2015 we issued an
unqualified value for money conclusion.
PwC  1
North Norfolk District Council
12
Audit Responsibility
Results
Audit Responsibility
Results
Consider the
completeness of
disclosures in the
Authority’s
annual
governance
statement,
identify any
inconsistencies
with the other
information of
which we are
aware from our
work and
consider whether
it complies with
CIPFA / SOLACE
guidance.
We undertook our work in accordance
with our Audit Plan. There were no
issues to report in this regard.
Issue a certificate
that we have
completed the
audit in
accordance with
the requirements
of the
Audit
Commission Act
1998 and the
Code of
Practice issued by
the Audit
Commission.
We issued our certificate on 30
September 2015 on completion of our
work. There were no issues to report in
this regard.
Consider
whether, in the
public interest,
we
should make a
report on any
matter coming to
our notice in the
course of the
audit.
We undertook our work in accordance
with our Audit Plan. There were no
issues to report in this regard.
Determine
whether any
other action
should be
taken in relation
to our
responsibilities
under the
Audit
Commission Act.
We undertook our work in accordance
with our Audit Plan. There were no
issues to report in this regard.
PwC  2
North Norfolk District Council
13
Audit Findings
Accounts
We audited the Authority’s accounts in line with approved
Auditing Standards and issued an unqualified audit opinion
on 30 September 2015.
We noted significant issues arising from our audit within our
Report to Those Charged with Governance (ISA (UK&I) 260).
This report was presented to the Audit Committee on 15
September 2015 and the final report was issued on 30
September 2015. We wish to draw the following points,
included in that report, to your attention in this letter.
Related parties
In forming an opinion on the financial statements, we are
required to evaluate:
-
whether identified related party relationships and
transactions have been appropriately accounted for
and disclosed; and
whether the effects of the related party
relationships and transactions cause the financial
statements to be misleading.
It was identified during the course of our work that the
Authority does not hold a full list of related parties. Per
CIPFA code of practice, paragraph 3.9.2.15, “Related party
relationships where control exists should be disclosed
irrespective of whether there have been transactions between
the related parties.” The Authority would therefore need to
hold a complete list of related parties in order to meet this
requirement.
Declaration forms completed by Councillors only require
Councillors to disclose interests that they or their close family
members have in other organisations where they are aware
that these organisations have transacted with the Authority.
There is therefore a risk that Councillors omit related parties
from their declaration forms because they didn’t know about
a transaction and the Authority does not hold a complete list
of related parties.
Finally, the Authority was unable to obtain declaration forms
for two Councillors who did not return to Council following
the election.
In our work we identified five additional related parties
which the Authority had transacted with or provided grants
to in the year, and which had not been disclosed in the initial
draft accounts. For four of these the Councillor in question
was representing the Authority on the Board of another
organisation. In one case the Authority was unaware of the
individual’s involvement in the organisation. These
omissions were raised as adjusted misstatements relating to
disclosures and we included recommendations for
improvements in our ISA 260 report.
Pensions liability
The most significant estimate in the Statement of Accounts is
in the valuation of net pension liabilities for employees in the
Norfolk County Council pension fund. The Authority’s net
pension surplus/liability at 31 March 2015 was £39 million
(2014 - £32 million).
We reviewed the reasonableness of the assumptions
underlying the pension liability, and we are comfortable that
the assumptions are within an acceptable range. The report
from the Pension Fund actuary was reviewed by the PwC
pensions team and the assumptions used were compared to
PwC  3
North Norfolk District Council
14
the industry averages with no exceptions or major variances
noted.
We validated the data supplied to the actuary on which to
base their calculations and did not identify any issues to
report.
Valuation of property, plant and equipment
The Authority’s property, plant and equipment (PPE) balance
is significant – as at 31 March 2015, the Council held PPE
assets of £50,211k (2013/14: £47,246k). Our risk assessment
within our report to those charged with governance outlined
the audit risk associated with this balance and the audit
procedures we performed. Overall we are content that the
valuation of the Authority’s is materially correct however, our
work has identified three issues which have resulted in
unadjusted misstatements.
Grant income: Pathfinder grant income of £0.13m was
recognised in 2014/15 as a gain on disposal of an asset. This
was grant income initially received by the Authority from
central government, and then passed to Norfolk Community
Foundation to distribute based on certain conditions. Norfolk
Community Foundation did not meet these conditions and so
in 2014/15 the grant was returned to the Authority to
distribute. When the grant was returned it was recognised as
a gain on disposal of an asset (a credit to operating
expenditure) but it is our view that it would be more
appropriate to recognise this under grant income. This was
reported as an unadjusted misstatement in our ISA 260
report.
Asset valuations are a year out of date: The Authority
values its assets which are based on market or replacement
cost values to 1 April rather than 31 March. In financial year
2014/15, the assets subject to this kind of revaluation were
the public conveniences. PwC performed an exercise to
revalue the public conveniences from 1 April 2014 to 31
March 2015 and noted a movement in the value.
Assets not revalued in year: The Authority revalues its
assets on a five year rolling cycle where there has been no
significant movements since the previous revaluation which
is in line with CIPFA guidance. The Authority did not
undertake a formal assessment of whether there had been a
significant movement on the asset not subject to a formal
valuation in 2014/15. As part of our audit work, we requested
that management perform this assessment as valuation
indices indicated there may have been a material movement.
As a result of this request, the Authority’s internal valuers
undertook a desktop revaluation of all significant assets and
noted that the asset values had been subject to movement,
however this was not material.
The combined unadjusted misstatement for these two items
is £0.2m.
PwC  4
North Norfolk District Council
15
Use of Resources
We carried out sufficient, relevant work in line with the Audit
Commission’s guidance, so that we could conclude on
whether the Authority had in place, for 2014/15, proper
arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness
in your use of the Authority’s resources.
In line with Audit Commission requirements, our conclusion
was based on two criteria:
The Authority’s most recent Medium Term Financial Strategy
shows a balanced budget for 2016/17 with a total gap of
£1.9m up to 2019/20. The Authority has demonstrated
ongoing achievement of savings in the past years. Further its
general fund reserves balance held as at 31 March 2015 is
£2.3m which covers the funding gap up to 2019/20. This
together with our review of its future savings plans has given
us comfort over the Authority’s arrangements in its use of
resources.

that the organisation has proper arrangements in
place for securing financial resilience; and
We issued an unqualified conclusion on the ability of the
organisation to secure proper arrangements to secure
economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources.

that the organisation has proper arrangements for
challenging how it secures economy, efficiency and
effectiveness.
Annual Governance Statement
To reach our conclusion, we carried out a programme of work
that was based on our risk assessment which included:

Obtaining and reviewing the Authority’s Medium
Term Financial Strategy, including the assumptions
utilised in identifying the funding gaps arising;

Considering and discussing the emerging savings
options as well as the magnitude of unidentified
savings with officers, in order to understand the
current plans to address the funding gap;

Considering the Authority’s historic record in
delivering savings; and

Considering the monitoring and reporting
arrangements, together with governance structures
in place in relation to savings and efficiencies.
Local authorities are required to produce an Annual
Governance Statement (AGS) that is consistent with
guidance issued by CIPFA/SOLACE. The AGS accompanies
the Statement of Accounts.
Whole of Government Accounts
We undertook our work on the Whole of Government
Accounts consolidation pack as prescribed by the National
Audit Office. The audited pack was submitted on 30
September 2015. We found no areas of concern to report in
this context.
Certification of Claims and Returns
We presented our most recent Annual Certification Report
for 2013/14 to those charged with governance in January
2015. We certified one claim worth £31.7 million. A
qualification letter was required to set out the issues arising
from the certification of the claim. We will issue the Annual
Certification Report for 2014/15 in January 2016.
PwC  5
North Norfolk District Council
16
Final Fees
Final Fees for 2014/15
We reported our fee proposals in our audit plan.
We are currently in the process of agreeing the fee over and above the scale element with Public Sector Audit Appointments
Limited (PSAA) and will report the final position in due course.
Our fees charged were therefore:
2014/15
outturn
2014/15
fee
proposal
2013/14
final
outturn
*
72,150
74,466
**
35,480
35,187
-
-
-
107,630
109,653
Audit work performed under the Code of Audit Practice
- Statement of Accounts
- Conclusion on the ability of the organisation to secure proper arrangements for the
economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources
- Whole of Government Accounts
Certification of Claims and Returns
Non Audit Work
TOTAL
*Note our fee for the audit of the statement of accounts has not been finalised. We are currently in the process of agreeing
this with the Authority and PSAA and will report the final position in due course.
**Our fee for certification of claims and returns is yet to be finalised for 2014/15 and will be reported to those charged with
governance in March 2016 within the 2014/15 Annual Certification Report.
PwC  6
North Norfolk District Council
17
In the event that, pursuant to a request which North Norfolk District Council has received under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, it is required to disclose any information contained in this
report, it will notify PwC promptly and consult with PwC prior to disclosing such report. North Norfolk District Council agrees to pay due regard to any representations which PwC may make in
connection with such disclosure and North Norfolk District Council shall apply any relevant exemptions which may exist under the Act to such report. If, following consultation with PwC, North
Norfolk District Council discloses this report or any part thereof, it shall ensure that any disclaimer which PwC has included or may subsequently wish to include in the information is reproduced
in full in any copies disclosed.
This document has been prepared only for North Norfolk District Council and solely for the purpose and on the terms agreed through our contract with Public Sector Audit Appointments Limited.
We accept no liability (including for negligence) to anyone else in connection with this document, and it may not be provided to anyone else.
© 2015 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. All rights reserved. In this document, "PwC" refers to the UK member firm, and may sometimes refer to the PwC network. Each member firm is a separate
legal entity. Please see www.pwc.com/structure for further details.
130610-142627-JA-UK
18
Audit Committee
8 December 2015
Agenda Item No______9_____
Progress Report on Internal Audit Activity: 4 September to 24 November 2015
Summary:
This report examines the progress made between 4 September
and 23 November 2015 in relation to delivery of the Annual
Internal Audit Plan for 2015/16.
Conclusions:
Progress in relation to delivery of the Internal Audit Plan is line
with expectations with the audit plan now being 72% complete;
and positive assurances have been awarded in the five audit
reviews finalised in this period.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the Committee notes the outcome of the
audits completed between 4 September and 24 November 2015
where assurance levels have been given.
Cabinet member(s):
Ward(s) affected:
All
All
Emma Hodds, Internal Audit Consortium Manager
01508 533791, ehodds@s-norfolk.gov.uk
Contact Officer, telephone
number, and e-mail:
1.
Background
1.1.
This report reflects progress made with regard to assignments featuring in the
approved Annual Internal Audit Plan for 2015/16 which was endorsed by the
Audit Committee on 17 March 2015.
2.
Overall Position
2.1.
The overall position in relation to the progress made against the Internal Audit
Plan is within the attached report.
3.
Conclusion
3.1
Progress in relation to delivery of the Internal Audit Plan is line with expectations
and positive assurances have been awarded in the five audit reviews finalised in
this period.
4.
Recommendation
4.1
It is recommended that the Committee notes the outcome of the audits
completed between 4 September and 24 November 2015 where assurance
levels have been given.
19
Audit Committee
8 December 2015
Appendices attached to this report:
Progress Report on Internal Audit Activity
20
Eastern Internal Audit Services
North Norfolk District Council
Progress Report on Internal Audit Activity
Period Covered: 4 September to 24 November 2015
Responsible Officer: Emma Hodds – Internal Audit Consortium Manager (IACM)
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 2
2. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE APPROVED INTERNAL AUDIT PLAN ................... 2
3. PROGRESS MADE IN DELIVERING THE AGREED AUDIT WORK ............................. 2
4. THE OUTCOMES ARISING FROM OUR WORK ........................................................... 2
5. PERFORMANCE MEASURES ....................................................................................... 5
APPENDIX 1 – PROGRESS IN COMPLETING THE AGREED AUDIT WORK .................. 6
APPENDIX 2 – AUDIT REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARIES ............................................. 8
APPENDIX 3 – PERFORMANCE MEASURES ................................................................... 9
Page 1 of 23
21
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
This report is issued to assist the Authority in discharging its responsibilities in relation to the
internal audit activity.
1.2
The Public Sector Internal Audit Standards also require the Chief Audit Executive (known in
this context as the Internal Audit Consortium Manager) to report to the Audit Committee on
the performance of internal audit relative to its plan, including any significant risk exposures
and control issues. The frequency of reporting and the specific content are for the Authority
to determine.
1.3
To comply with the above this report includes:



Any significant changes to the approved Audit Plan;
Progress made in delivering the agreed audits for the year;
Any significant outcomes arising from those audits; and
Performance Indicator outcomes to date.
2.
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE APPROVED INTERNAL AUDIT PLAN
2.1
At the meeting on 15 March 2015, the Annual Internal Audit Plan for the year was approved,
identifying the specific audits to be delivered, with the IT audits confirmed at the previous
Committee meeting in September. Since then there have been no further changes to the
plan.
3.
PROGRESS MADE IN DELIVERING THE AGREED AUDIT WORK
3.1
The current position in completing audits to date within the financial year is shown in
Appendix 1 and progress to date is in line with expectations. Quarter one and two work is
now complete, all quarter three work also complete and at draft report stage, with planning
for quarter four now underway.
3.2
In summary 122 days of programmed work has been completed, equating to 72% of the
(revised) Audit Plan for 2015/16.
4.
THE OUTCOMES ARISING FROM OUR WORK
4.1
On completion of each individual audit an assurance level is awarded using the definitions
shown in the table below.
Substantial
Assurance
Based upon the issues identified there is a robust series of suitably
designed internal controls in place upon which the organisation relies to
manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the
objectives of the process, and which at the time of our review were being
consistently applied.
Reasonable
Assurance
Based upon the issues identified there is a series of internal controls in
place, however these could be strengthened to facilitate the organisation’s
management of risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the
objectives of the process. Improvements are required to enhance the
controls to mitigate these risks.
Limited
Based upon the issues identified the controls in place are insufficient to
Page 2 of 23
22
Assurance
ensure that the organisation can rely upon them to manage the risks to the
continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process.
Significant improvements are required to improve the adequacy and
effectiveness of the controls to mitigate these risks.
No Assurance Based upon the issues identified there is a fundamental breakdown or
absence of core internal controls such that the organisation cannot rely
upon them to manage risk to the continuous and effective achievement of
the objectives of the process. Immediate action is required to improve the
controls required to mitigate these risks.
4.2
Recommendations made on completion of audit work are prioritised using the definitions
shown in the table below.
Urgent
Fundamental control issue on which action to implement should be taken within
1 month.
Important Control issue on which action to implement should be taken within 3 months.
Needs
Attention
Control issue on which action to implement should be taken within 6 months.
4.3
In addition, on completion of audit work “Operational Effectiveness Matters” are proposed,
these set out matters identified during the assignment where there may be opportunities for
service enhancements to be made to increase both the operational efficiency and enhance
the delivery of value for money services. These are for management to consider and are not
part of the follow up process.
4.4
During the period covered by the report Internal Audit Services have issued five final reports
and the Executive Summary of these reports are attached at Appendix 2, full copies of
these reports can be requested by Members from the Internal Audit Consortium Manager.
4.5
As a result of these audits 18 recommendations have been raised; no priority one (urgent)
recommendations, 10 priority two (important) recommendations and eight priority three
(needs attention) recommendations. All of which have been agreed by management. In
addition four Operational Effectiveness Matters have been proposed to management for
consideration.
4.6
In summary the final reports issued conclude the following:
Corporate Governance and Risk Management
This scope of this was to review the governance of the contracts register and the processes
in place for risk management. On conclusion a reasonable assurance was awarded with
two priority two (important) recommendations and two priority three (needs attention)
recommendations agreed with management.
The priority two recommendations relate to; regular review of the risk management
framework in line with Council policy, this was last reviewed in 2010 and a purchase ledger
Page 3 of 23
23
analysis is to be undertaken to compare to the contracts register to ensure that all contracts
are accounted for.
Housing Strategy
The audit covered the systems and controls in place in relation to Housing Strategy and
Affordable Housing, with two priority two (important) recommendations agreed with
management, and a reasonable assurance provided.
The first recommendation was in relation to the Housing Development Officer post only
being until December 2015 and the risks associated with this key post however this has
since been extended to December 2016. The other recommendation relates to the need for
a retrospective agreement between Victory Housing Trust and the Council to reflect the
requirement for nomination arrangements to be in place for the provision of affordable
housing within the Exception Housing.
Homelessness and Housing Options
The objective of the audit was to review the systems and controls in place within
Homelessness and Housing Options, to help confirm that these are operating adequately,
effectively and efficiently. A reasonable assurance was awarded on conclusion of the audit
with one priority two (important) recommendation and three priority three (needs attention) ,
agreed with management. The important recommendation relates to written decision letters
when reaching a conclusion on a case; senior officers will now incorporate an additional
process when awarding higher banding to check that letter has been sent. This provides the
evidence that the Council has performed their duties to homeless applicants in accordance
with legislation.
Parks, Open Spaces and Woodland Management
The audit covered the areas of; income; maintenance and health and safety; and monitoring
of events and management plans. The audit concluded with a reasonable assurance and
three priority two (important) one priority three (needs attention) recommendations were
agreed with management.
The important recommendations relate to; reviewing and reminding staff of the procedures to
follow for the receipt, secure storage, collection, accounting for and banking of income at the
Parks and Woodlands; ensuring that a clear audit trail is in place for income collected,
retained, accounted for and banked; and ensuring that suitable arrangements are in place
for the management of the float retained at Holt Country Park.
Register of Electors
This IT audit reviewed; application management & governance; system security; interface &
processing controls; change controls; and system resilience & recovery. The audit concluded
with a reasonable assurance and four recommendations (two priority two and two priority
three) were agreed with management.
The important recommendations relate to; ensuring that the system administrator role is
adequately reflected in the appropriate job description; and ensuring that only the
appropriate staff have administrator access to the Electoral Services IT Application.
4.7
It is pleasing to note that all audits concluded in a positive opinion being awarded, indicating
a strong and stable control environment to date, with no issues that would need to be
considered at year end and included in the Annual Governance Statement.
Page 4 of 23
24
5.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
5.1
The new Internal Audit Services contract includes a suite of key performance measures
against which the new contractor will be reviewed on a quarterly basis. There are a total of
13 indicators, over 4 areas. From the first year of the contract records will be maintained for
all 13, however performance can only be recorded on 11 of these as base line data is
required for the final 2. The performance measures can be seen at Appendix 3.
5.2
There are individual requirements for performance in relation to each measure; however
performance will be assessed on an overall basis as follows (for the first year):



9-11 KPIs have met target = Green Status.
5-8 KPIs have met target = Amber Status.
4 or below have met target = Red Status.
Where performance is amber or red a Performance Improvement Plan will be developed by
the contractor and agreed with the Internal Audit Consortium Manager to ensure that
appropriate action is taken.
5.3
The work for quarter one and two has been completed and a report on the performance
measures provided to the Internal Audit Consortium Manager, performance is currently at
green status with targets having been satisfactorily met for this quarter.
5.4
In addition to these quarterly reports from the Contractors Audit Director, ongoing weekly
updates are provided to ensure that delivery of the audit plan for the current financial year is
on track. A review of the most recent update indicates that the Internal Audit plan of work at
North Norfolk remains on track, and there are no issues that need to be addressed.
5.5
It is worth noting that although some feedback has been received from managers at the end
of the audit review, the response rate is quite low. As the audit work is undertaken by a
contractor it is important to received feedback to ensure that from a client perspective the
audit is undertaken in a professional and timely manner. This will be discussed with Heads
of Service at meetings arranged in the New Year.
Page 5 of 23
25
APPENDIX 1 – PROGRESS IN COMPLETING THE AGREED AUDIT WORK
Audit Area
Audit Ref No. of days Revised
Days
Status
Days Delivered
Quarter 1
Leisure, Arts and Pier Pavilion
NN1601
10
10
10
Waste Management
NN1602
17
17
17
TOTAL
Quarter 2
Corporate Governance and Risk Management NN1603
27
27
27
8
8
8
Housing Strategy & Affordable Housing,
including Housing Enabling & Empty
Properties
Homelessness and Housing Options
NN1604
10
10
10
NN1605
10
10
10
Parks and Open Spaces & Woodland
Management
TOTAL
Quarter 3
Remittances
NN1606
10
10
10
38
38
38
NN1607
12
12
11
Car Parking
NN1608
10
10
9
22
22
20
15
16
10
41
15
16
10
41
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
Quarter 4
Key Controls and Assurance
Accountancy Services
Accounts Receivables
TOTAL
NN1609
NN1610
NN1611
Assurance
Level
Recommendations
Date to
Committee
Urgent
Important
Needs
Attention
Op
Final Report issued 17 July
Reasonable
2015
Final Report issued 9 July 2015 Reasonable
0
5
3
1
0
2
1
1
Final Report issued 24
November 2015
Final Report issued 30
October 2015
Reasonable
0
2
2
0
Reasonable
0
2
0
1
Final Report issued 3
November 2015
Final Report issued 28
October 2015
Reasonable
0
1
3
1
Reasonable
0
3
1
2
Draft Report issued 20
November 2015
Draft Report issued 17
November 2015
26
15 September
2015
15 September
2015
8 December
2015
8 December
2015
8 December
2015
8 December
2015
Audit Area
Audit Ref No. of days Revised
Days
Status
Days Delivered
Disaster Recovery
Software Licensing
NN1612
NN1613
0
0
8
6
7
6
Draft Report imminent
Final Report issued 7 August
2015
Register of Electors
NN1614
0
8
8
Cash Receipting Application
IT audits to be confirmed
TOTAL
Follow Up
Follow Up
TOTAL
NN1615
NN TBC
0
30
30
8
0
30
7
0
28
Final Report issued 6
November 2015
Draft Report imminent
NN NA
12
12
12
12
9
9
170
170
122
TOTAL
Percentage of plan completed
72%
27
Assurance
Level
Recommendations
Date to
Committee
Urgent
Important
Needs
Attention
Op
Reasonable
0
3
2
1
15 September
2015
Reasonable
0
2
2
0
8 December
2015
0
20
14
7
APPENDIX 2 – AUDIT REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARIES
Assurance Review Corporate Governance and Risk Management
Executive Summary
OVERALL ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT
SCOPE
The audit covered a review of the systems and controls in place in relation to
Corporate Governance and Risk Management, in particular;

Governance of the Contracts Register; and

Risk Management.
ACTION POINTS
Urgent
Important
Needs Attention
Operational
0
2
2
0
28
RATIONALE
 The systems and processes of internal control are, overall, deemed ‘Reasonable’ in managing the risks associated with Corporate Governance and
Risk Management. The assurance opinion has been derived as a result of two ‘important’ and two ‘needs attention’ recommendations being raised
upon the conclusion of our work.
KEY FINDINGS
Positive Findings
Governance of the Contracts Register
 The Council's procurement framework, Contract Standing Orders, Financial Regulations, Procurement Strategy and Procurement procedural
guidance are available on the Council’s website and are regularly reviewed.
 The requirements for maintaining a Contracts Register are clearly defined within the Local Government Transparency Code 2015, which is
published on the Council’s website.
 Controls are in place for ensuring access to the Contracts Register is restricted within the Council’s network.
 Within the annual Self-Assessment Assurance Statement, Heads of Service are required to disclose whether all contracts held within their service
departments, of a value of £5,000 or greater, have been included within the Contracts Register.
Risk Management
 Procedures are in place for ensuring appropriate levels of access to the Council’s TEN performance management system.
 New and emerging service risks are captured and, where applicable, escalated to the Corporate Risk Register, as and when required.
 Provision is made within the standing agenda of Cabinet reports for the requirement to discuss/capture the risks of the matters being considered.
 A procedure is in place to help ensure risks are assigned to key officers who are responsible for monitoring and reducing the impact of these risks.
 Progress with risk management is reported regularly to senior management and Members of the Council.
Issues to be addressed
The audit has highlighted the following areas whereby controls would benefit from being strengthened, and as a result of these findings, two important
recommendations have been made.
Governance of the Contracts Register
 A purchase ledger analysis has not been undertaken and reconciled to the Contracts Register to identify contracts which may be unaccounted for
in the register, as such the Council may not being aware of all its contractual obligations.
29
Risk Management
 The Council’s Risk Management Framework has not been reviewed and updated, where necessary, in accordance with Council policy. There is a
risk that reliance will be placed on outdated procedures leading to inconsistencies in the identification and mitigation of significant risks affecting the
The audit has also highlighted the following areas where two ‘needs attention’ recommendations have been made.
Governance of the Contracts Register
 Contingency procedures are not in place in relation to the maintenance of the Contracts Register for periods of staff member absence. The
Contracts Register may not be adequately maintained resulting in contracts not being included.
Risk Management
 Resilience measures are in not place in relation to the processes within Risk Management to support key staff unavailability. The processes
surrounding Risk Management may not be adequately maintained.
Previous audit recommendations
The audit reviewed the previous internal audit recommendations, of which one remains outstanding, in particular with regard to the need for
management to regularly review the Contracts Register, has yet to be fully implemented, with progress continuing to be monitored through internal
audit’s cyclical follow up arrangements.
The audit has also highlighted one instance where the risk remains outstanding although has been accepted by management of the Council until
appropriate procedures can be put in place, in particular; risk management training has not been provided to Council Members who were elected in
May 2015. The Head of Finance stated that this was due to other training areas taking priority. However, plans are in place for members to undertake
risk management training by the end of quarter four of the 2015/16 financial year.
30
Assurance Review of Housing Strategy and Affordable Housing
Executive Summary
OVERALL ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT
SCOPE
The audit covered a review of the systems and controls in place in relation to Housing
Strategy and Affordable Housing, in particular;

Housing Strategy; and

Affordable Housing.
ACTION POINTS
Urgent
Important
Needs Attention
Operational
0
2
0
1
31
RATIONALE
 The systems and processes of internal control are, overall, deemed ‘Reasonable’ in managing the risks associated with Housing Strategy and
Affordable Housing. The assurance opinion has been derived as a result of two ‘important’ recommendations being raised upon the conclusion of
our work.
 The audit has also raised one Operational Effectiveness Matter, which sets out matters identified during the assignment where there may be
opportunities for service enhancements to be made to increase both the operational efficiency and the delivery of value for money services.
KEY FINDINGS
Positive Findings
It is acknowledged that there are areas where sound control are in place and operating consistently.
Housing Strategy
 The Housing Strategy 2012-2015 addresses the key housing priorities within the Council's Corporate Plan 2012-2015. Procedures are in place for
the revision of the Housing Strategy and the Corporate Plan to ensure that the Council’s priorities are accurately reflected.
Affordable Housing
 Strategy, policy and procedures are maintained for the short, medium and long term objectives and processes within Affordable Housing.
 Controls are in place for ensuring access to the Housing Stock Database and the Locata system is restricted.
 Guidelines extend to the provision of arrangements for assessing eligibility for affordable housing including shared equity housing.
 Procedures are in place to accommodate the Council’s forthcoming acquisition of affordable housing under two shared equity schemes throughout
2015 and 2016. These schemes have been subject to approval in accordance with levels of delegated authority.
 A consolidated record of all affordable housing property within the District is maintained.
 Procedures are in place for monitoring the activities of Registered Providers in relation to existing affordable housing stock and affordable housing
allocation.
 Progress with the provision of affordable housing is monitored and regularly reported to senior management and members.
 A procedure is in place to monitor capital expenditure within the Housing Enabling Budget.
 Arrangements are in place for the agreement, receipt, monitoring and allocation of commuted sums.
32
Issues to be addressed
The audit has highlighted the following areas whereby controls would benefit from being strengthened, and as a result of these findings two important
recommendations have been made.
Housing Strategy
 The Housing Development Officer post is due to become vacant from December 2015. There are currently no plans to replace this post and there
is no service risk to highlight the potential impact this will have in administering the service including maintaining Housing Stock Database.
Affordable Housing
 The Council has been unable to locate documentation for the nomination agreement necessary for affordable housing provisioned within the
Felmingham Exception Housing Scheme, this requires retrospective action to ensure that there is assurance on the Council’s position and that of
other interested parties, in respect of nomination rights and proceeds of sale through tenants’ ‘Right to Acquire’ is clearly understood.
Operational Effectiveness Matters
The operational effectiveness matters for management to consider relate to the functionality of the Housing Stock Database, to identify potential
improvements which can be made to its functionality and efficiency.
33
Assurance Review of Homelessness and Housing Options
Executive Summary
SCOPE
OVERALL ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT
The objective of the audit was to review the systems and controls in place within
Homelessness and Housing Options, to help confirm that these are operating
adequately, effectively and efficiently.
The audit covered:

Homelessness and Housing Options
ACTION POINTS
Urgent
Important
Needs Attention
Operational
0
1
3
1
34
North Norfolk District Council
2015/16
RATIONALE
 The systems and processes of internal control are, overall, deemed ‘Reasonable’ in managing the risks associated with the Homelessness
and Housing Options. The assurance opinion has been derived as a result of one ‘important’ and three ‘need attention’ recommendations
being raised upon the conclusion of our work.
 The audit has also raised one ‘operational effectiveness matter(s)’, which sets out matters identified during the assignment where there may
be opportunities for service enhancements to be made to increase both the operational efficiency and enhance the delivery of value for money
services.
KEY FINDINGS
Positive Findings
It is acknowledged there are areas where sound controls are in place and operating consistently:

Housing Options staff attend relevant training sessions to be kept up to date on new developments in relation to housing options.

P1E returns are submitted quarterly to the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG).

Housing Benefit (HB) claims are immediately submitted for homeless applicants who qualify for HB.

Landlords’ invoices are verified for accuracy through comparison with the temporary accommodation moving in memorandum, and these are
paid in a timely manner.

The Council’s Risk Management Framework is supported by the TEN performance and risk management system and Housing Options
Service level risk is monitored quarter.
Issues to be addressed
The audit has highlighted the following areas whereby controls would benefit from being strengthened, and as a result of these findings one important
recommendation has been made.
Homelessness Enquires and Investigations

Written decision letters were not always produced with copies held on file for all homeless applications processed by the Council. Without
decision letters being recorded as issued, applicants may be waiting excessive periods to clarify whether a decision has been made.
The audit has also highlighted the following areas where three ‘needs attention’ recommendations have been made.
35
North Norfolk District Council
2015/16
Temporary Accommodation

Not all temporary accommodation agreements were signed by applicants, with circumstances explained. This issue was also raised in the
August 2012 audit report.
Homelessness Enquires and Investigations

There is no systematic method for storing supporting evidence obtained during homeless application inquiry process on Locata. This could
result evidence being difficult to retrieve if required.

Evidence of applicants’ written consent to disclose information and for the Council’s representative to seek verification of points made in an
application could not be found on file for some applicants. This could cause delays or prevent applications progression.
Operational Effectiveness Matters
The operational effectiveness matters, for management to consider relate to considering that applicants’ priority need and intentions are subject to
inquiries, in cases where homelessness or threatened homelessness and eligibility are established.
36
North Norfolk District Council
2015/16
Assurance Review of Parks and Open Spaces
Executive Summary
SCOPE
OVERALL ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT
The objective of the audit was to review the systems and controls in place within Parks
and Open Spaces, to help confirm that these are operating adequately, effectively and
efficiently.
The audit covered the areas of:

Income;

Maintenance and Health and Safety; and

Monitoring of Events and Management Plans.
ACTION POINTS
Urgent
Important
Needs Attention
Operational
0
3
1
2
37
RATIONALE
 The systems and processes of internal control are, overall, deemed ‘Reasonable’ in managing the risks associated with the Parks and Open Spaces Audit.
The assurance opinion has been derived as a result of three ‘important’ and one ‘needs attention’ recommendation being raised upon the conclusion of
our work.
 The audit has also raised two ‘operational effectiveness matters’, which set out matters identified during the assignment where there may be opportunities
for service enhancements to be made to increase both the operational efficiency and enhance the delivery of value for money services.
KEY FINDINGS
Positive findings
It is acknowledged there are areas where sound controls are in place and operating consistently:

Delivery of events and activities run at the Parks and Woodland managed by the Council are monitored, to ensure that annual targets are met and
are fit for purpose.

An Inspection and maintenance regime is in place to monitor the safety of areas within the Council’s responsibility.

Clear lines of responsibility have been defined for the Parks and Woodland managed by the Council.
Issues to be addressed
The audit has highlighted the following areas whereby controls would benefit from being strengthened, and as a result of these findings three ‘important’
recommendations have been made.
Income

Written procedures are not in place for the receipt, secure storage, collection and banking of income from the Parks and Woodland managed by the
Council. Without such procedures, there is an increased risk that that the Council is not receiving all income due and that this remains undetected.

A clear audit trail is not in place within the Council to ensure the appropriate processes are followed in relation to the collection, accounting and
banking of income received from the Parks and Woodland managed by the Council. Without a clear audit trail in place, there is an increased risk that
money will be unaccounted for or lost as investigations in to its whereabouts cannot be undertaken.

Arrangements are not in place for the management of the float retained at the Visitors Centre in Holt Country Park. Without such arrangements in
place, there is a risk that services will not be available at the park through a lack of money retained at the park, leading to financial and reputational
loss for the Council.
The audit has also highlighted the following areas where one ‘needs attention’ recommendation has been made.
38
Monitoring of Events and Management Plans

The Management Plans for non-green flag accredited Parks and Woodland managed by the Council are out of date and have not been reviewed
since their inception in 2007. Without regular review and monitoring, there is an increased risk that the objectives within these Management Plans are
out dated and that poor performance is not identified and resolved.
Operational Effectiveness Matters
The operational effectiveness matters, for management to consider relate to a risk assessment for all Parks and Woodland managed by the Council to be
undertaken on a more frequent basis and a revision to the memorandum agreement between the Council and the FCE for Bacton Woods to reflect the correct
period of agreement and arrangements for reporting of activity.
39
Assurance Review of the Xpress Electoral Services Application
Executive Summary
OVERALL ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT
SCOPE
The audit looked at the following aspects of the Application:

Application Management and Governance;

System Security (excluding Access Controls and Password Controls);

Interface and Processing Controls;

Change Controls; and

System Resilience and Recovery.
ACTION POINTS
Urgent
Important
Needs Attention
Operational
0
2
2
0
40
RATIONALE
 The systems and processes of internal control are, overall, deemed ‘Reasonable’ in managing the risks associated with the Xpress application. The
assurance opinion has been derived as a result of two ‘important’ recommendations and two ‘needs attention’ recommendations being raised upon the
conclusion of our work.
KEY FINDINGS
Positive Findings
Application Management and Governance
 The Electoral Services Manager acts as the system administrator for the application and acts as the “Data Access Officer” with responsibility for ensuring
the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the data processed by the application.
 The Head of Organisational Development is the overall owner of the application.
 The application is adequately licenced via a Site Licence.
 There is relevant user training for the application in place.
System Security (excluding Access controls and password controls)
 Master data updates are managed using application releases that effectively upgrade the application with changed master data. Local users have no
access to this functionality.
Interface and Processing Controls
 The key interface with the Department for Work and Pensions that is used to confirm resident details is adequately documented within the application and
is being managed effectively.
 System processing jobs comprise database backups and clean up jobs, which are being monitored adequately.
System Resilience and Recovery
 There are adequate onsite and offsite backup processes in place.
 The Council no longer uses tape for backups, which means that there is no longer a requirement to test the recoverability of tapes, thus demonstrating
their continued viability for use as backup media.
 The Electoral Services Department has a documented service area Business Continuity Plan. In addition, there is an Elections Business Continuity Plan,
which takes precedence should an election be being managed.
 From a disaster recovery perspective, it is possible to restore any of the available backups to an available virtual environment in a short time.
41
Issues to be addressed
Application Management and Governance
 The Electoral Services Manager’s job description does not include adequate reference to the “Xpress System Administration” and “Data Access Officer”
roles, including this would ensure formal accountability for these roles.
System Security
 All of the core users in the Electoral Services Department are designated as administrators of the application. Hence, they all have full access to the
application, which means that all users currently have permissions that provide access to functions which only the Electoral Services Manager is permitted
to use.
Interface and Processing Controls
 The automated email functionality attaches a document but the user cannot check the content of the attachment before it is sent. Due to the nature of the
information that the team deal with this could result in Data Protection issues. The Council needs to work with the vendor to understand the feasibility of
implementing a feature to allow users to review emails before they are sent is being raised, thus reducing the likelihood of a breach occurring.
Change Controls
 There are currently no change control processes in place for the application at the Council. The application vendor supplies periodic application updates
to Electoral Services Management, who update the application themselves with no formal testing within a test environment undertaken. It is considered
prudent for Electoral Services Management to investigate the feasibility of implementing change control process as far as the application allows.
IT Management are aware of the last two recommendations and these have been raised for completeness and to ensure that the control environment is
maintained.
42
APPENDIX 3 – PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Area / Indicator
Audit Committee / Senior Management
1. Audit Committee Satisfaction – measured
annually
2. Chief Finance Officer Satisfaction –
measured quarterly
Internal Audit Process
3. Each quarters audits completed to draft
report within 10 working days of the end
of the quarter
4. Quarterly assurance reports to the
Contract Manager within 15 working days
of the end of each quarter
5. An audit file supporting each review and
showing clear evidence of quality control
review shall be completed prior to the
issue of the draft report ( a sample of
these will be subject to quality review by
the Contract Manager)
6. Compliance with Public Sector Internal
Audit Standards
7. Respond to the Contract Manager within
3 working days where unsatisfactory
feedback has been received.
Clients
8. Average feedback score received from
key clients (auditees)
9. Percentage of recommendations
accepted by management
Innovations and Capabilities
10. Percentage of qualified (including
experienced) staff working on the
contract each quarter
11. Number of training hours per member of
staff completed per quarter
12. Number of high and medium priority
recommendations made per quarter
13. Number of audits which are considered
to add value
Target
Adequate
Good
100%
100%
100%
Full
100%
Adequate
90%
60%
1 day
To decrease over the life of the contract (from
year 2)
To increase over the life of the contact (from
year 2)
43
Audit Committee
8 December 2015
Agenda Item No_____10______
Follow Up on Internal Audit Recommendations 1 April to 31 October 2015
Summary:
This report provides an overview of progress made in
implementing agreed audit recommendations due for completion
between 1 April and 31 October 2015.
Conclusions:
Good progress continues to be achieved in relation to the
completion of agreed Internal Audit recommendations.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the Committee notes management
action taken to date regarding the delivery of audit
recommendations.
Cabinet member(s):
Ward(s) affected:
All
All
Emma Hodds, Internal Audit Consortium Manager
01508 533791, ehodds@s-norfolk.gov.uk
Contact Officer, telephone
number, and e-mail:
1.
Background
1.1.
In accordance with agreed internal audit review and reporting cycles, we revisit
the status of audit recommendations on a 6-monthly basis and last presented our
findings in this area to the Audit Committee in June 2015, in relation to the
2014/15 financial year end reporting.
1.2.
This report now seeks to provide an update on the status of audit
recommendations following recent verification work performed by the Contractor,
which examined the level of activity concerning the delivery of audit
recommendations falling due between 1 April and 31 October 2015.
2.
Overall Position
2.1.
The overall position in relation to the implementation of Internal Audit
Recommendations is within the attached report.
3.
Conclusion
3.1
Good progress continues to be made in relation to the completion of agreed
Internal Audit recommendations, with 18 recommendations implemented over the
first half of the 2015/16 financial year, resulting in improvements to the control
environment. There are only 12 recommendations outstanding as at 31 October
2015., none of which carry a priority one (urgent) rating.
4.
Recommendation
44
Audit Committee
4.1
8 December 2015
It is recommended that the Committee notes management action taken to date
regarding the implementation of audit recommendations.
Appendices attached to this report:
Follow Up Report on Internal Audit Recommendations
45
Eastern Internal Audit Services
NORTH NORFOLK DISTRICT COUNCIL
Follow Up Report on Internal Audit Recommendations
Period Covered: 1 April 2015 to 31 October 2015
Responsible Officer: Emma Hodds – Internal Audit Consortium Manager
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
2
2. STATUS OF AGREED ACTIONS
2
APPENDIX 1 – STATUS OF AGREED INTERNAL AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS
4
APPENDIX 2 – OUTSTANDING INTERNAL AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS
5
Page 1 of 6
46
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
This report is being issued to assist the Authority in discharging its responsibilities in relation
to the internal audit activity.
1.2
The Public Sector Internal Audit Standards also require the Chief Audit Executive (known in
this context as the Internal Audit Consortium Manager) to establish a process to monitor and
follow up management actions to ensure that they have been effectively implemented or that
senior management have accepted the risk of not taking action. The frequency of reporting
and the specific content are for the Authority to determine.
1.3
To comply with the above this report includes:
The status of agreed actions.
2.
STATUS OF AGREED ACTIONS
2.1
As a result of audit recommendations, management agree action to ensure implementation
within a specific timeframe and by a responsible officer. The management action
subsequently taken is monitored by the Internal Audit Contractor on a regular basis and
reported through to this Committee. Verification work is also undertaken for those
recommendations that are reported as closed.
2.2
Appendix 1 to this report shows the details of the progress made to date in relation to the
implementation of the agreed recommendations. This appendix now also reflects the year in
which the audit was undertaken to enable the Committee to easily identify old outstanding
recommendations. The table also identifies between outstanding recommendations that
have previously been reported to this Committee and then those which have become
outstanding this time round.
2.3
The summary position according to recommendation priority is shown in the table below,
with the previously reported position in the first table and the current position in the second
table to enable comparison:
Complete
Outstanding
Unable to confirm
status
Total
Status of Recommendations as at 31 March 2015
P1
P2
P3
Total
0
17
10
27
0
7
3
10
0
24
13
37
Status of Recommendations as at 31 October 2015
P1
P2
P3
Total
0
13
5
18
0
5
7
12
%
73%
27%
100
%
Complete
60%
Outstanding
40%
Unable to confirm
status
Total
0
18
12
30
100
Key:
Priority 1 – Urgent: Fundamental control issue on which action to implement should be taken within 1
month.
Priority 2 – Important: Control issue on which action to implement should be taken within 3 months.
Priority 3 – Needs Attention: Control issue on which action to implement should be taken within 6
months.
Page 2 of 6
47
2.4
Also attached to this report is Appendix 2 which details the five priority two (important)
recommendations which are outstanding from all audits, and provides the management
response in relation to these.
2.5
The Committee’s attention is drawn to the following three priority two (important)
recommendations which have previously been reported as outstanding:
Development Management (NN/15/12)
This recommendation was raised as a result of an audit in 2010/11 and requires written
guidance to be produced detailing the roles and responsibilities for monitoring the key
requirements of Section 106 Planning Agreements. Latest management response indicates
that a Senior Enforcement Officer has recently been recruited whose role and responsibility
includes the monitoring of section 106 Planning agreements. However the Enforcement
team is under significant pressure at this time, dealing with a high volume of complaints,
investigations and related Court cases and our previous timeline for completion, therefore a
revised date of 30 April 2016 is proposed.
Waste Management Contract (NN/12/03)
The Waste Management audit completed in 2011/12 has one outstanding relating to
reviewing the lease arrangements for the bowling greens. One lease remains to be
reviewed, however management responses indicates that the new lease won't be required
with preparations to be made over return of the asset to NNDC. This will be clearer over the
next few weeks and a new date of 18th December 2015 has been provided to update, and
potentially close the matte.
Development Management (NN/15/03)
This audit was finalised in 2014/15 and has one recommendation remaining in relation to
reconciling the planning and building control income to the general ledger. Responses
indicate that this has proven more difficult than planned and an extension was requested to
the end of the financial year to address this adequately.
2.6
It is also worth noting that of the recommendations made to date in year, a further 19
recommendations are not yet due for implementation, none of which carry a priority one
(urgent) rating – see Appendix 1 for the audit areas to which these relate. As mentioned
although the dates for completion have not yet been reached, until they are actioned, they
represent weaknesses in the control environment which leave the authority open to risk.
2.7
It is however encouraging to note that there are only a few very old recommendations
outstanding, with adequate management responses being received in relation to all
outstanding recommendations. In relation to the control environment it is positive to be able
to report that there are no urgent recommendations awaiting action, either from old audits or
current audits.
Page 3 of 6
48
APPENDIX 1 – STATUS OF AGREED INTERNAL AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS
Completed bt 1 April and 31
October 2015
Previously reported to
Committee as outstanding
(New) Outstanding
Total
Outstanding
Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3
Audit Ref Audit Area
2010/11 Internal Audit Reviews
NN1112
Development Management,
Building Control and Land
Charges
Not Yet Due for
implementation
Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3
Assurance Level
Adequate
2011/12 Internal Audit Reviews
NN1203
Waste Management Contract
Limited
2013/14 Internal Audit Reviews
NN1401
Environmental Health
Adequate
NN1402
Private Sector Housing
Adequate
NN1404
Waste Management
Adequate
NN1409
Sundry Debtors
Adequate
2014/15 Internal Audit Reviews
Procurement
Adequate
NN1502
NN1503
Development Management
Adequate
NN1504
Performance Management,
Good
Corporate Policy and
Business Planning
NN1505
Localism and Communities
Adequate
NN1511
Exchequer Services
Adequate
NN1513
AGS
N/A
NN1515
Network Security
Adequate
NN1516
Virus and Malware Protection
Adequate
NN1517
Firewall Administration
Adequate
2015/16 Internal Audit Reviews
NN1601
Leisure and Pier Pavilion
Reasonable
NN1602
Waste Management
Reasonable
NN1604
Affordable Housing
Reasonable
Homelessness and Housing
Reasonable
NN1605
Options
NN1606
Parks and Open Spaces
Reasonable
NN1613
Software licencing
Reasonable
NN1614
Xpress Electoral Services Application
Reasonable
TOTALS
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
0
13
5
0
3
Page 4 of 6
49
3
0
2
4
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
3
0
0
0
2
1
3
0
0
0
12
3
2
2
11
1
2
2
8
0
APPENDIX 2 – OUTSTANDING INTERNAL AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS
Description
Recommendation
Priority 2 recommendations - Important
NN1112
Written guidance detailing the roles and responsibilities
Development
for monitoring the key requirements of Section 106
Management,
Planning Agreements should be produced to ensure
Building Control and appropriate action is taken to enforce the conditions
Land Charge
contained therein.The guidance should be
accompanied by a collated record of all Section 106
Planning Agreements, detailing the trigger points and
accompanying obligations. This should include key
responsibilities and contacts for the obligation and state
action to be taken as and when those trigger points are
reached. Where trigger points have been reached, action
should be taken in a timely manner to enforce those
conditions.
NN1203 Waste
The Council should review the lease arrangements with
Management
the leaseholders for the two bowling greens. Methods for
Contract
calculating fees for bowling green leases should be
formally documented and agreed with the bowling green
lease holders. Calculation of bowling green leases
should look to ensure that grounds maintenance costs
charged by Kier are recovered in the lease fees.
Priority Impl Date
Responsible
Officer
Progress On Implementation
Revised Impl
Date
Planning Legal
Manager
The Head of Planning has confirmed that they have
recruited a Senior Enforcement Officer whose role and
responsibility includes the monitoring of section 106
Planning agreements. However the Enforcement team is
under significant pressure at this time, dealing with a high
volume of complaints, investigations and related Court
cases and our previous timeline for completion (end
September 2015) appears optimistic in the current
circumstances.
Our revised timeline for implementation of this
recommendation is now April 2016.
30-Apr-16
2
30-Nov-11
2
31-Mar-12
Estates &
The only outstanding one is Suffield Park Bowls Club.
Valuation Manager This was to have been completed by the end of October
2015. However, recently reports have been received that
the Club may shortly be in the process of winding up.
Accordingly, the new lease won't be required with
preparations to be made over return of the asset to
NNDC. This will be clearer over the next few weeks and I
suggest that a new date line is given of Friday 18th
December to update, to potentially close the matter.
18-Dec-15
NN1503
Monthly reconciliations for planning (and building control)
Development Control income to the general ledger should be completed.
Reconciliations should be signed and dated by the
preparer and the reviewing officer.
2
31-Mar-16
NN1511 Creditors Compliance with HMRC Requirements Self-employed
Electronic Ordering, Contractors and Consultants
Payments,
The Council should check that all individuals paid via the
Corporate
creditors system provide the requisite evidence of their
Purchasing Cards
compliance with HMRC requirements with regards
and Insurances
declaring income tax and National Insurance liabilities.
This could be included on the supplier forms used when
setting up a new supplier. The form should request their
Unique Taxpayer Reference (UTR) to be supplied prior to
any payments being made.The Council should also
routinely run reports (supplier listings) to identify any
potential instances of non-compliance with HMRC
requirements.
2
31-Mar-15 Group Accountant As per previous responses some work has ben done to
look at how this task may be carried out by Planning or
Finance, but due to a lack of resources in both teams this
hasn’t progressed at this time. Revised date of end of
financial year proposed.
30-Apr-15
Team Leader
Previous response - Awaiting outcome of managers
Exchequer
meeting and subsequent formalisation of the letter to be
sent to all consultants/casual workers. Once this has
been done, letters will be sent out retrospectively to all
current consultants/casual workers where these can be
identified.
Oct 15 - liaison occurred with Internal Audit as to
progression of this recommendation, proposed date due
to needing clarification from HMRC.
Page 5 of 6
50
30-Nov-15
Description
Recommendation
NN1601 Leisure, Arts Arrangements be undertaken between the Council and
and Pier Pavilion
Openwide to identify a resolution to the data reporting
issues to enable the Council to verify data provided and
monitor key performance aspects as specified within the
contract.
Priority Impl Date
2
Responsible
Progress On Implementation
Officer
31-Jul-15 Sports and Leisure The verification of data from Openwide will be completed
Services Manager once all the figures are in for 2015/16, and we won't get
these until April 2016
Page 6 of 6
51
Revised Impl
Date
30-Apr-16
Agenda Item 11
Brief for Audit Committee December 2015
Incidents and Emergency Planning
There have been no recent incidents that have had any major impact on the
Authority.
A live flood warden exercise took place on the 10th October in Bacton and Walcott.
The exercise participants included Flood wardens from Bacton and Eccles on Sea,
as well as members of HM Coast Guard, Coastwatch and Norfolk Fire and Rescue
Service. The operational evacuation and command and control elements of the local
flood plans were tested and they were found to be fit for purpose. Some new
learning was gained from the exercise de-brief and the NNDC Operational Flood
plan has now been update to reflect this.
Team BC Plans
All team BC plans are in place, the Civil Contingencies team has peer reviewed all
the team plans and has a database to ensure that all the plans are reviewed and
remain up to date.
Despite the fact that authority experienced several significant emergency incidents
previously, these had little impact on service delivery. This proves that the current
Business Continuity plans in place are robust and fit for purpose. The revised
Corporate BC plan has now been completed and published.
Training
The next meeting of the BCWG will take place on the 3rd December and it is hoped
that this group will meet quarterly. The main focus of the group will be to embed
business continuity into to the normal day to day activities of the authority, as well as
looking, as a group, to enhance the team BC plans that are in place.
The CCT team are still helping teams to develop and improve their own BC plans
with one to one training sessions.
Disaster Recovery and Work Action Recovery site
This project is still on-going and is now forming part of the business transformation
program.
All data is being replicated from the Cromer office to the Fakenham site on a daily
basis and if we suffer a total loss of this building, it would take a small amount of
52
reconfiguration work to get access to the stored data. The new plan for the
Fakenham DR site is to upgrade the equipment Q1 2015/16 as part of the planned
upgrade to the IT facilities.
Now that the Department of Work and Pensions has taken over most of the
Fakenham connect building, an alternative Work Action Recovery (WAR) Site and
procedure had to be put into place.
The WAR plan will now include the 10 networked PCs available in the small room
towards the rear of the building and if more space is required, arrangements have
been put into place for the Authority to use Fakenham Community centre as our
alternative recovery site should we be unable to use the main office at Cromer.
This plan has been updated and is detailed in the recently published corporate
business continuity plan.
53