Members survey findings

The graphs in section 3 (not assessible) shown in this report show how Members responded to each question, in terms of percentage breakdown, across all Committees. Most Members sit on multiple committees, hence the number of overall responses is greater than the number of Members assigned to Committee work.

Reporting to committee

There is a high level of agreement among Members regarding the overall quality, clarity, and content of papers being submitted to committees. Members strongly agree that papers are clear in terms of what the ask is of them. There is agreement, albeit less strong, that papers adequately reflect equalities, human rights and community impacts.

Free text responses from Members regarding the quality of reports to committees highlighted the following areas of strength, and areas where future improvement activity could be focussed:

• The volume of reports at Committee meetings is regarded as being high
• Late paper submission causes difficulties and is quite common
• Some papers are written in a style more suited to executive rather than non-executive audiences

Comments from Members specific to committees are summarised below:

Complaints and Conduct Committee

• There is greater transparency and data disaggregation in papers to some Committees, supporting accountability

Legal Committee

• More information about how lessons learned from settlements could be provided

Resources Committee

• Business cases are often too lengthy, detailed and repetitive
• Benefits tracking reports require simplification, with more focus on illustrating benefit realisation from IBC to delivery
• Change requests should come to Committee earlier
• Optimism-bias is present in papers, especially where supplier delivery times, skilled staff availability and procurement capacity is concerned

Audit, Risk and Assurance Committee

• Regarding risk, clearer information is required by Members relating to what actions are being taken (and by whom) to bring risks within risk appetite levels, along with the expected time for achieving this

Priorities and progress - There is majority agreement among Members that the work of committees, and the work plans particularly, align strongly to key areas of strategic focus, namely public interest priorities, and clear regard for issues relating to organisational culture and capacity and capability. Members are also in agreement that committees have the means to track and monitor work in progress and fulfilment of actions raised, although this is an area where some Members are less sure.

3.7 Free text responses from Members regarding committee’s strategic focus, alignment to priorities, and monitoring of ongoing work and action implementation highlight the following areas of strength, and areas where future improvement activity could be focussed:

General Comments

• There can be considerable slippage in timescales for implementing actions and although explanations for delay are valid and actions are not lost, the regularity of slippage does not instil confidence when overseeing action plans with planned delivery timescales
• The work of the SPA team is invaluable in terms of following up on decisions and ensuring they are implemented
• At times I think we are too understanding of the apparent pressures on Police Scotland executives and accept a lower quality of response than we would expect
• In spite of asking about capacity and capability this has been difficult to have a coherent narrative about this
• It sometimes feels very slow... I have twice in the last year or so felt I had to be very direct about my frustration at the lack of progress

Committee-Specific Comments

Legal Committee

• not clear how much action is being taken to address issues much earlier to avoid further claims/ settlements

Resources Committee

• still too much slippage in delivery

Audit, Risk and Assurance Committee

• too many actions from audit recommendations are not delivered on time

3.8 Members and overall operation – All Members agreed that they provide genuine challenge, seek assurances, and that they have the right balance of skills, knowledge and experience. The majority of Members also have confidence in relation to agreeing position on specific issues and in decision making.

3.9 A small number of free text responses were given by Members regarding their own effectiveness in influencing committee operations:

• There was a comment that the Legal Committee could do benefit from having more legal expertise on committee to be able to provide challenge.
• There was also a comment that the Resources Committee benefits from having the Chairs of the People Committee and Forensics Committee present for consideration of areas of mutual interest.

3.10 Governance Support and Remit - Members all agree that the committees receive appropriate advice on taking certain agenda items in private, that minutes of meetings are of a high standard, and there is a very high level of agreement that the remit of the various committees is fit for purpose.

3.11 A small number of free text responses were given by Members regarding the issue of taking some items in private session. A view was expressed by more than one Member that Police Scotland and SPA officials appear to take an overly cautious approach to discussing some matters in an open/public forum.

3.12 Terms of Reference - All Members indicated that the Committee(s) they sit on are fully discharging their responsibilities in line with its terms of reference with the exception of one Member of the Resources Committee.

3.13 Overall, the Committee Effectiveness results across all Committees are extremely positive in terms of what Members have provided as feedback.

3.14 General areas where improvement could take place focus on:

• Reducing the volume of papers and improving submission time punctuality
• A stronger focus on equalities, human rights and community impacts
• Overly detailed reports aimed at Executive audiences, often too lengthy and containing much repetition
• Optimism-bias at the outset of action plans in terms of delivery timescales
• Slow pace of implementing actions with high levels of slippage being common
• A tendency to be overly cautious about discussing some matters in public forum