Agendas, reports and minutes

Minutes of Meeting of the Community Planning Board held in the Culduthel Christian Centre, 5 Culduthel Avenue, Inverness on Friday 28 February 2020 at 10.00 am.

Present:    
    
Representing the Highland Council (HC):
Ms C McDiarmid (Substitute)
Ms A Clark
Ms E Johnston

Representing Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE):
Mr J Gibbs

Representing High Life Highland (HLH):
Mr S Walsh

Representing NHS Highland (NHSH):
Ms A Clark (Substitute)
Mr P Hawkins
Ms C Steer

Representing Police Scotland (PS):
Ch Supt G Macdonald

Representing the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS):
Mr R Middlemiss

Representing Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH):
Mr G Neville

Representing the University of the Highlands and Islands (UHI):
Mr D MacBeath

Community Partnership Chairs:
Mr P MacRae, Mid Ross (NHSH)
Mr R Muir, Skye, Lochalsh and West Ross (HIE)
Mr D Wilson, Lochaber (SFRS)
Ch Insp I Graham, Nairn (PS)
Mr J Brander, Badenoch and Strathspey (NHSH)
Mr G Ross, Inverness (HC)
    
In attendance:

Mr I Kyle, Chair, Community Learning, Development and Engagement Delivery Group/Children’s Planning Manager, Highland Council
Miss M Murray, Committee Administrator, Highland Council

Mr R Middlemiss in the Chair

Business

1.    Apologies for Absence

Apologies for absence were intimated on behalf of Ms F McLean, Mr G Moir, Mrs M Davidson, Mr A Christie, Mr B Lobban, Mr A Mackinnon, Ms M Smith, Ms D Manson, Ms L Weber, Mr P Mascarenhas, Mr D Oxley, Ms I Grigor, Mr I Donald, Mr I Ross, Prof B Robertson, Dr L Wilson, Dr D Mackinnon, Mr E Sinclair, Ch Insp J Wilson and Mr A McKinley.

2.    Minutes of Meetings

The Board:

i.    APPROVED the Minutes of the Community Planning Board – 18 December 2019;
ii.    APPROVED the Note of the Chief Officers Group – 23 January 2019; and
iii.    NOTED the Minutes of the Community Justice Partnership – 19 September 2019.

3.    Developing Community Partnerships – Updates from Chairs

There had been circulated updates from Community Partnership Chairs as follows:

a.    Caithness (Eann Sinclair, HIE)
b.    Sutherland (Jamie Wilson, Police Scotland)
c.    East Ross (Alex McKinley, SFRS)
d.    Mid Ross (Philip Macrae, NHS Highland) (no written update available)
e.    Skye, Lochalsh and West Ross (Robert Muir, HIE)
f.    Lochaber (no update available)
g.    Nairn (Ian Graham, Police Scotland)
h.    Badenoch and Strathspey (James Brander, NHSH)
i.    Inverness (Graham Ross, Highland Council)

The Chair of Mid Ross Community Partnership gave a verbal update, during which he thanked the former Chair, Ann Clark, for the significant amount of work she had done to get the Partnership to its current position.  His first meeting as Chair would be on 5 March 2020.  However, he had attended the previous meeting on 15 January 2020 at which updates on ongoing work had been provided.  The Adult and Children’s Plan were both progressing well, and the final version of the Dingwall Locality Plan had been agreed.  There were a number of projects within the Locality Plan, including an employment project involving Police Scotland and High Life Highland, and improvements to the accessibility of Dingwall High Street.  Feedback had also been provided on the Community Learning and Development (CLD) Re-Inspection Report, the main point being that it was considered that insufficient improvement had been made.  However, it was an ongoing process and the Partnership would continue to engage with the inspectors who would be returning within 12 months.  Two key improvement actions that would be taken forward were joint evaluation of outcomes of activity, and community involvement.

During discussion, the following issues were raised:

• in relation to East Ross Community Partnership, it was highlighted that the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service had appointed a new Chair, Alex McKinley, who was now in post;
• with regard to Skye, Lochalsh and West Ross Community Partnership, it was highlighted that Willie MacKinnon, Ward Manager, Highland Council, had been appointed as CLD lead.  In addition, the Chair, Robert Muir, explained that he would be retiring in April 2020.  HIE would continue to lead the Partnership and it was anticipated that Stuart Macpherson, Head of Strategic Projects, would be appointed as Chair, at least in the short term.  The Chair expressed thanks to Robert Muir for his contribution, not only as Chair of Skye, Lochalsh and West Ross Community Partnership but to the CPP as a whole, and wished him well in his retirement;
• how to collectively implement the findings of community engagement and consultation in a time of diminishing resources was a challenge that still needed to be addressed;
• in relation to Lochaber Community Partnership, it was highlighted that Derek Wilson, Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, had been appointed as Chair.  Derek had previously been Chair of Badenoch and Strathspey Community Partnership, which would now be Chaired by James Brander on behalf of NHS Highland;
• the Chair of Nairn and Nairnshire Community Partnership drew attention to the Fair Travel Scheme in Moray which provided reduced cost public transport for Care Experienced Young People up to the age of 25.  Stagecoach were willing to consider extending the scheme to Highland and it was suggested that consideration be given to establishing an inter-Community Partnership Working Group to progress the initiative.  Discussion ensued, during which support was expressed for the initiative and the Chair of Inverness Community Partnership undertook to pass the details to the Chair of the Transport Subgroup.  The Children’s Planning Manager, Highland Council, suggested that the matter be taken forward by the Corporate Parenting Board, which had recently been reviewed and which reported to the Community Planning Board;
• the introduction of a Small Grants Budgets to allow Community Partnerships to take forward local initiatives was welcomed; and
• the issue of capacity of partners to attend Community Partnership meetings having been raised, the Chair suggested that Board Members take reasonable steps within their respective organisations to ensure attendance at Community Partnerships and other CPP groups.  However, it was recognised that many representatives had important operational responsibilities and sometimes issues arose at the last minute that prevented them from attending meetings.  In addition, it was not always possible to send a substitute.

The Board:

i.    NOTED the updates; and
ii.    AGREED that the possibility of introducing a Fair Travel Scheme for Care Experienced Young People on a Highland-wide basis be progressed by the Corporate Parenting Board.

4.    Highland Aspiring Communities Project: Project Report

There had been circulated a report on the outcomes of the Highland Aspiring Communities Project.

During discussion, the following issues were raised:

• it was suggested that the Partnership Coordinating Group consider the recommendations for legacy set out in the project report and what actions could be implemented to mitigate the loss of Community Engagement Officers and bring recommendations back to a future meeting of the Board.  The Head of Health Improvement, NHS Highland, confirmed that she was chairing the next meeting of the Partnership Coordinating Group and undertook to add it to the agenda;
• a number of Community Engagement Officers had gone on to find employment in other local agencies, and it was suggested that this should be recognised as a legacy outcome of the project;
• in terms of best practice, reference was made to the success of Kyle and Lochalsh Community Trust which, by the summer, would be employing approximately seven people and had secured funding from various sources to take forward a range of projects, some of which were generating revenue which was fundamental in terms of sustainability;
• Community Engagement Officers had been a real support to Community Partnership Chairs, particularly in Inverness which did not receive LEADER funding.  Even a part-time post would take some of the burden off Chairs and allow specific areas of work to be targeted and it was suggested that consideration be given to how that could be achieved, whether through utilising CashBack for Communities funding or some other means;
• it was necessary to explore opportunities to work with a wider range of partners, recognising that these would be different in each Community Partnership area.  Many local trusts had access to community benefit money and some other local authority areas had been successful in working with their trusts to direct funding to inequality activity;
• some of the recommendations for legacy had been picked up in the recommendation to introduce a programme of community engagement training across the partnership, which had been agreed at the Board on 18 December 2019.  The points raised in the project report would help to inform the structure of the training;
• it would be helpful to look at what other Community Planning Partnerships were doing in terms of community engagement; and
• on the point being raised, it was explained that the Aspiring Communities Project did not include Caithness and Sutherland Community Partnerships as they had already accessed funding independently.   It having been queried whether there were different outcomes in those areas, it was confirmed that this could be picked up with the relevant Chairs.

The Board:

i.    NOTED the project report; and
ii.    AGREED that the Partnership Coordinating Group consider the recommendations for legacy set out in the project report and what actions could be implemented to mitigate the loss of the Community Engagement Officers, taking into account the points raised during discussion, and bring recommendations back to a future meeting of the Board.

5.    Community Planning Partnership Development Update

There had been circulated Report No CPB/01/20 on behalf of the Community Planning Partnership Development Subgroup.

During discussion, the following issues were raised:

• in relation to the Risk Register, it was confirmed that the aim was to implement a similar approach in respect of Locality Plans and this would be incorporated into the guidance for Community Partnerships.  Highland Outcome Improvement Plan (HOIP) Delivery Plans would also be subject to risk assessment.  The Risk Register would be a standing item on the agendas for both the Partnership Coordinating Group and the Board, and there would be a mechanism to escalate significant risks to the Board.  Community Partnership Chairs commented that the focus to date had been on the practical aspects of getting Locality Plans in place, and evaluating and articulating risk would form part of the next stage of delivery;
• detailed discussion took place on the steps being taken to promote the unremunerated role of Independent Chair.  It having been explained that the intention was to circulate an outline of the role through existing partnership networks, including the third sector, and assess the responses, it was suggested that first more thought needed to be given to who would be regarded as independent.  It was commented that the role would be an attractive non-executive position for someone, depending what they had in their portfolio.  However, it was necessary to carefully consider the advertisement and interview process, and to make clear to potential applicants the time commitment and responsibilities involved, as well as any potential liability.  With regard to the latter, it was suggested that it might be necessary to take legal advice.  The Chair confirmed that the points raised would be taken into consideration by the CPP Development Subgroup.  He added that the default position was that the Chair would continue to rotate between the five statutory partners, the tenure having been extended to 18 months;
• the Chair sought partners’ views on the possibility of using the community engagement training sessions as an opportunity to communicate the CPP’s vision and the changes that had been made in terms of governance etc.  Whilst it was recognised that the sessions were a good opportunity to communicate with partners at a local level, the focus was community engagement and concern was expressed about taking up too much of what would already be a busy half day.  It was suggested that the changes within the CPP could be referred to in the introduction and people could be signposted to information or materials could be provided to be handed out.  The CLD networks that were being established at a local level would also be a good opportunity to raise awareness of the work of the CPP and the direction of travel.  It was necessary to think about the broader networks that were available and it was suggested that there might be merit in having a discussion in that regard at the Community Learning, Development and Engagement Delivery Group.  It was added that there were important messages regarding the restructuring and refocussing of the CPP that needed to be promoted more widely across partner organisations and within HOIP Delivery Groups as well as at local level.  This linked to the risk referred to in terms of the commitment of partners, and the need to ensure that partner organisations were committed to community planning at all levels.  Reference was made to a paper on community planning issues that had been considered by the NHS Highland Board, and subsequent discussions as to how to operationalise some of the recommendations that had been agreed.  It was recognised that there was a piece of work for all partner organisations in terms of communicating the changes that were taking place, and it was suggested that this could be scoped out at the proposed CPP training day in May 2020; and
• the Chair emphasised the need for those partners who had not yet responded to the request for information to populate the Asset Register to do so as soon as possible.

The Board:

i.    NOTED the updated Terms of Reference at Appendix 1 of the report;
ii.    NOTED the developments to explore interest in the position of Independent Chair for the Partnership;
iii.    NOTED the initial work of the Partnership Coordinating Group and that, from June 2020, reports on performance would be made to the CPP Board;
iv.    AGREED the Risk Register set out at Appendices 2A and 2B of the report;
v.    AGREED the proposal for Community Engagement training and that the costs for this would be met through the money identified by partners for partnership activity including the small grants budget;
vi.    NOTED the arrangements for the small grants budget which would commence from April 2020, and that updates on outcomes would be presented to the Board; and
vii.    AGREED that partners who had not yet responded to the request for information to populate the Asset Register do so as soon as possible.

6.    Highland Armed Forces and Veterans’ Community Covenant Partnership

There had been circulated Report No CPB/02/20 by Dot Ferguson, Senior Ward Manager, Highland Council.

During discussion, the following issues were raised:

• Inverness had a strong military tradition and the Community Partnership had been working with Unforgotten Forces and a variety of other organisations with military connections.  A number of proposals were being developed and it was hoped that, when the NHS Highland Community Links Worker came into post, it would be possible to improve documentation and signposting to services for Armed Forces personnel;
• the work of Jo Lenihan, Armed Forces Covenant Development Officer, was commended, and the loss of the post was disappointing;
• attention was drawn to the Armed Forces Covenant website (https://www.armedforcescovenant.gov.uk/get-involved/) which provided information on how organisations could potentially support the Covenant;
• it was helpful to see the map showing the location of military veterans in Highland;
• it was suggested that the CPP Development Subgroup consider how stronger links could be made with the Highland Armed Forces community and whether there were opportunities for Armed Forces representation on CPP groups;
• there was a large cohort of Armed Forces personnel in Inverness, with over 450 young people from military families attending school in the area, and locality plans leads had been asked to recognise that and consider how to incorporate and develop services for people with military connections, many of whom were transient due to the nature of the work;
• from a Scottish Fire and Rescue Service perspective, there were recruitment issues in respect of a number of retained fire stations and it was suggested that, with improved communication, former Armed Forces personnel could potentially become retained or full-time firefighters;
• from a Police Scotland perspective, a national structure was in place that linked in to the various Armed Forces regiments at a strategic level and included recruitment mechanisms.  However, they were happy to be involved in local initiatives; and
• the Chief Executive, High Life Highland, highlighted that High Life Highland offered a 50% discount on High Life membership to military families and reservists, and he asked that this be promoted by partners wherever possible.

The Board:

i.    NOTED the report and welcomed the actions set out in Priority 2 of the Action Plan (Appendix 3 of Appendix B: Armed Forces Covenant Project Highland and Moray – End of Project Report);
ii.    AGREED that consideration be given to how stronger links could be made with the Highland Armed Forces community at a strategic level and whether there were opportunities for Armed Forces representation on CPP groups;
iii.    AGREED that, if they had not already done so, individual partner organisations consider signing their own commitment with The Defence Employer Recognition Scheme which encouraged employers to support defence and inspired others to do the same; and
iv.    NOTED that High Life Highland offered a 50% discount on High Life membership for military families and reservists, and AGREED that this be promoted by partners wherever possible.

7.    Highland Culture Strategic Board

The Highland Culture Strategic Board (HCSB) was part of the overall Highland Community Planning Partnership.  The Board was responsible for developing a joint strategic approach to cultural development in the Highlands.  A review of the HCSB had been undertaken in 2018 and a new direction agreed at a meeting of the Board in May 2019.  This had included agreement to create an officer Working Group which would take an operational approach to cultural development, including developing proposals to utilise the remaining Place Partnership funding of £147,357.  The Working Group would work with the wider cultural sector to take this forward.  High Life Highland would facilitate this on behalf of the Partnership.
 
The Board had not met since May 2019 and, as the parent body, the Community Planning Board was therefore asked to agree the minutes of the May meeting, as circulated, to enable the officer Working Group to move forward to:

• take action to develop an approach to the remaining Place Partnership fund;
• undertake scoping work to understand the wider cultural landscape;
• develop a supported regional network; and
• consider potential themes/areas for development by the Partnership. 

During discussion, the Chief Executive, High Life Highland, added that the Place Partnership funding referred to was Creative Scotland funding that had not been drawn down.  The cultural sector was keen to use it to promote culture across Highland and Creative Scotland would like this to be facilitated by High Life Highland.  It was suggested that a pragmatic approach would be to delegate authority to the Working Group to approve projects and draw down grant funding as appropriate, facilitated by High Life Highland and subject to consensus being reached between Creative Scotland and the sector, and report back to the Board.

On the point being raised, it was confirmed that the Council had originally contributed Place Partnership funding but it had been spent a number of years ago.  There was no requirement to match fund.

The Board AGREED:

i.    the Minutes of the Highland Culture Strategic Board on 2 May 2019; and
ii.    to delegate authority to the Working Group to approve projects and draw down grant funding as appropriate, facilitated by High Life Highland and subject to consensus being reached between Creative Scotland and the sector, and report back to the Board.

8.    Date of Next Meeting

The Chair explained that the Board Administrator had circulated an email confirming the Board dates for the remainder of the year, the next meeting having been scheduled to take place at 10.00 am on Friday 12 June 2020.

The venue was to be confirmed and, given that the revised Board membership would be considerably smaller, it was suggested there might be scope to use partners’ meeting rooms.  However, it was recognised that there was merit in using neutral venues.

The Chief Executive, High Life Highland, confirmed that he was happy to make facilities available to the Board, and the Chair undertook to give the matter further consideration.

In addition, the Chair drew attention to the Board’s new Terms of Reference which indicated that two exceptional meetings would be scheduled in April and October at the discretion of the Chair.  The views of partners having been sought, it was suggested that there was no requirement for an additional meeting in April but it would be helpful to arrange a Development Day in October to give a sense of how work was progressing and what other areas the CPP needed to focus on.

The Board:

i.    NOTED the date of the next meeting, and that further consideration would be given to the venue; and
ii.    AGREED that, in addition to the Board meetings that had been scheduled, a Development Day be arranged in October 2020.

The meeting ended at 11.10 am.