Leisure Contract Task and Finish Group
To receive a verbal update on the inquiry from the Chair, Councillor Alistair Morwood.
Minutes:
Overview and Scrutiny Task Group – Council’s Leisure Contract
Councillor Morwood, Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Task Group – Council’s Leisure Contract provided members of the Committee with a verbal update on the progress of the review.
In total four meetings had taken place since it was formed in June 2017.
At the first meeting, the Task Group scoped the review and identified the objectives and the desired outcome.
The second meeting focused on the delivery of the current management arrangements of the council’s leisure facilities by Active Nation. A joint presentation by the Head of Early Intervention and Support and the Health and Wellbeing Manger provided the task group with information on the council’s leisure contract which included –
· staffing and financial arrangements;
· the timeline for the contract;
· current performance;
· challenges and options;
· leisure management options available.
Members of the Task Group were also information that a consultant was to be appointed to provide different options that the council may wish to consider when the current contract expires.
At the third meeting, representatives from Action Nation delivered a presentation which focused on the work the charity had done in Chorley and national initiatives they wanted to introduce to the borough. The presentation also considered -
· costs, reports and structures
· measuring and reporting performance
· challenges (staffing and retention)
· national trends
· a future vision of a leisure service which encompassed a health and wellbeing package that went beyond improving fitness.
At this meeting, the Task Group also welcomed the Philip Gooden, Service Manager from Lancashire Care Foundation Trust who was invited to discuss his vision as to the type of services that could be offered at the council’s leisure facilities. There was an agreement that there was a national trend to deliver some health services/groups outside of the formal setting of doctors’ surgeries and hospitals. It was considered that holding informal surgeries/classes/drop-in sessions in the local community would encourage those people in hard to reach groups to take an active responsibility in their health and wellbeing.
The types of sessions that could be offered did not need to be limited to those relating to exercise. It was reported that sessions related to mental health would be particularly beneficial in an informal environment, particularly drop-in sessions.
The Task Group welcomed officers from the council’s human resources and legal section who produced a report which provided theoretical information and implications for 5 possible options of the future leisure service model.
The 5 leisure model options discussed were –
· Invite other leisure providers to tender for the contract under the current operating provision and objectives;
· Bring the provision back in-house and deliver under the current operating provision and objectives ;
· Invite other providers to tender for the contract under a new operating provision with objectives in-line with early intervention principles and outcome based performance;
· Bring the provision back in-house and design a model which targets the health needs of the residents of Chorley and was linked to the council’s ambition for future operating models of partnership and collaborative approaches;
· Remain with existing services provided.
It was reported that any change to the current leisure provision could increase a risk in relation to staffing, as transferring to a new model would require skills matching.
Members of the Task Group had been informed that Pulse Regeneration had been appointed consultant to undertake a full review, which was expected to last approximately 6 weeks.
The next review meeting had been confirmed as 22 November. At this meeting the task group was expected to receive a report from the consultant containing proposals (including costings) relating to the 5 leisure models detailed above. Following which, it was deemed that members of the Task Group would be better placed to put forward their recommendations for the Executive Cabinet’s consideration.
AGREED – That the verbal update be noted.