Appendix 1

Strategic Risk Register – 6 December 2010

Summary

 Breakdown by Risk Ranking – 29 risks noted

 6 High Risk
 12 High/Medium Risk
 3 Medium Risk
 8 Medium/Low

 Breakdown by Risk Category

 6 Legislative & Regulatory

 4 External
 5 Major Projects
 5 Partnerships
 5 Financial
 3 Contingency
 1 Internal

 No new risks added or removed. Scores remain unchanged.

 The New Marlowe Theatre Project and the Beaney Redevelopment are the
highest rated risks.

Review & Commentary

The council's risk profile remains unchanged from the previous quarter with no new
risks or changes in risk scoring.

This is not unexpected as the last quarter covered the summer period and the
preceding quarters had already seen many changes in the composition of the risk
register.

Within the individual risk register entries there have however been a number of
updates notably for the Marlowe and the Beaney Projects. The last quarterly review
identified increasing concerns over delays due to archaeological investigations on
both sites and unexpected additional building costs in particular for the Beaney.
These concerns continue.

Looking to the future, the outcome of government's Comprehensive Spending

Review is likely to impact on several of the risks listed as well as possibly introducing
some new areas of concern. It is perhaps too early to fully gauge the impact of the
CPR although the Director of Finance has updated the Budget Management risk to
outline some of the risk issues. It is reasonable to expect that the changes to housing
benefit and social housing funding will impact on the Housing Demand and
Homelessness risk in the future.
 Strategic Risk Register – December 2010
Risks Scores & Ranking

Risk Likelihood Impact Score Last Qrt

Very High – None
None
High Risk (16 To 20)
New Marlowe Theatre 4 5 20 20
Beaney Redevelopment 4 5 20 20
Budget Management 4 4 16 16
Building Maintenance Funding 4 4 16 16
Horsebridge Centre 4 4 16 16
Active Life 4 4 16 16
High/Medium (12 to 15)
Coastal & River Flooding 3 5 15 15

Safeguarding Children 3 5 15 15
Herne Bay High School New Sport Facilities 3 4 12 12
Traffic Congestion 3 4 12 12
Business Continuity (General) 3 4 12 12
Housing Demand 4 3 12 12
Information Management 4 3 12 12
Land Charges 4 3 12 12
Football Hub Project 3 4 12 12
Shared Landlord Services Project 3 4 12 12
CHARM (Housing Repairs) 3 4 12 12
Supporting People 4 3 12 12
 Strategic Risk Register – December 2010
Risks Scores & Ranking Continued

Risk Likelihood Impact Score Last Qrt

Medium (9 to 11)
Coastal Regeneration 3 3 9 9
Management Skills & Staff Development 3 3 9 9
Fraud & Corruption 3 3 9 9
Medium/Low (6 to 8)
Business Continuity (ITC Services) 2 4 8 8
Shared Services 2 4 8 8
Banking Crisis & UK Public Finances 4 2 8 8
Anti-Social Behaviour 2 3 6 6
Equalities and Discrimination Legislation 2 3 6 6
New International Financial Reporting Standards 3 2 6 6
Food Safety Inspections 2 3 6 6
Capita Housing Rent IT System 2 3 6 6
Low (1 to 5) - None
None
 Likelihood

Score - 1 Score - 2 Score - 3 Score - 4 Score - 5

Highly Unlikely Unlikely Possible Very Likely Definite
Previous experience
Previous experience at this
discounts this risk as being The council has in past The council has The council is experiencing
and other similar
likely to occur but other experienced problems in experienced problems in problems in this area or
organisations makes this
organisations have this area but not in last three this area in the last three expects to in the next 12
outcome highly unlikely to
experienced problems in years. years. months.
occur.
this area.
Some controls are in place
There are effective, tested
There are controls in placed and generally work but there Controls may be in place
and verifiable controls in
that whilst not tested appear have been occasions when but are generally ignored or No controls are in place.
place that prevent
to be effective. they have failed and ineffective.
occurrence of this risk.
problems have arisen.

Impact

Score - 1 Score - 2 Score - 3 Score - 4 Score - 5

Negligible Low Medium High Very High
The financial impact would The financial impact would
The financial impact would
Little or no financial impact result be losses or loss result be losses or loss The financial impact would
be losses or loss income of
(less than £5,000). income of no greater than income of no greater than be greater than £500,000.
no greater than £25,000.
£100,000. £500,000.

Some temporary disruption Severe service disruption

Council services are not
disrupted.
Regular disruption to the Severe disruption to the
to the activities of one on a departmental level or
activities for one or more activities of all council
council service but not regular disruption affecting
council service. departments.
beyond this. more than one department.

It may cost more or there

No impact on the delivery of A number of corporate
may be delay in delivery Many corporate objectives Unable to deliver most
the council's corporate objectives would be delayed
one of the council's delayed or not delivered. objectives.
objectives. or not delivered.
corporate objectives.

Some loss of confidence A disastrous loss of

A general loss of confidence A major loss of confidence
No loss of confidence and and trust in the council felt confidence and trust in the
and trust in the council and trust in the council
trust in the council. by a certain group or within council both locally and
within the local community. within the local community.
a small geographical area. nationally.
Risk Category Definitions
The purpose of categorising risks is to give a general overview of range and type of risks the council is managing. Strategic risks by their nature
can often be placed into several different categories, but to simply this risk on this register are placed into their most relevant category.

1. Financial Risks

Significant risks related to budget management and financial controls.

2. Contingency Risks

Risks with a high impact but low probability e.g. business continuity.

3. External Risks

Risks where the local community would largely feel the impact.

4. Internal Risks

Risks that impact largely on internal service delivery and risks associated with the development of new services.

5. Legislative & Regulatory Compliance

Risks that arising from the introduction of new legislation, regulation and directives.

6. Major Projects

Risks that impact upon the council‟s major projects.

7. Officer & Member Capacity

The council‟s ability to deliver good quality services is related to the abilities of its officer and members. These list the risks that could impact on
officer and member capacity and damage performance.

8. Partnerships

Risks arising from the council‟s key partnerships and contracts.

 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

1. Funding Shortfall – The  Funding Agreements –

risk that funding targets are KCC grant and loan
not achieved and the agreements signed and
funding shortfall will need to sealed. First £1 million of
be paid for via contingency. KCC grant banked.

2. Project Delay –The risk of  Fundraising - Fundraising

delay and additional costs Campaign target has been
due to construction reduced from £6m to £4.1m
problems, archaeology and the capital budget
delay and/or unforeseen revised. Review carried out
ground conditions. by MT. The fundraising
Remaining risks to the campaign has £1.5 million
project include the risk of left to raise.
archaeological finds during
drainage works and  Project Delay –
flooding in the existing Programme float was
Major Projects Head of Culture basement. included to cover
& unforeseen events and
New Marlowe Enterprise 3. Cost Overruns – Risk that 5 – Very archaeological
Theatre costs may overrun as a
4 – Possible
High 20 discoveries. Building work
Janice result of additional is currently 14-weeks in
McGuinness contractor claims and delay, but the project
change controls during the remains on track to re-
build period. Increasing open as planned in
risk that additional September 2011.
expenditure will be required
post Practical Completion  Contingency Budget – Set
and during the client fit out up to cover essential
period. additional work - Change
control and approvals
4. Community Relations – procedure in place. Change
Loss of goodwill with local Controls regularly reported
residents and businesses to Executive. Construction
arising from inconvenience risks reducing but client fit
arising from construction. out risks increasing.

5. Interim Audience Loss -  Communication Plan –

The closure of the theatre, developed to ensure
the loss of business and neighbours and other
attracting back audiences stakeholders are kept
 once completed.
6. Corporate Capacity - The
project is a major time
commitment for key officers
in planning and managing
the project.
7. Future Running Costs –
Once the project is
completed the annual
running costs of the theatre
will increase but it is
anticipated that income will
rise by the same extent.
informed (e.g.
neighbourhood forums) and
have a channel for comment
during construction phase.
Complaints have reduced.
 Project Manager -
Appointed to focus on
Marlowe & Beaney
developments.
 Business Plan - The plan
has been finalised, outlining
future subsidy levels without
needing an additional
increase for running costs.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

 CCC Funding - CCC has

1. Cost overruns and delays committed capital funding of
caused by Archaeology – over £1 million to project and
Archaeological dig has also agreed to underwrite
extended until end of May £600,000 of any funding gap.
causing delay to
programme and additional  KCC Funding - KCC are
project costs. Further contributing over £1.25 million
archaeological finds may funding and have
be discovered during underwritten a further £1.4
drainage works. Further million gap.
costs overruns and delays
likely following the  Heritage Lottery Funding -
discovery of structural HLF are contributing
defects in the existing roof £6,515,000.
and High St façade. Risk
that contingency will be  SEEDA Funding – SEEDA
Major Projects
Head of Culture insufficient to cover funding funding of £950,000 obtained
& gap. towards purchase of
Beaney Institute
Enterprise surrounding property.
Redevelopment
Project
2. Funding Shortfall -
4 - Possible 5 – Very High 20
Janice Current private fundraising  Private Fundraising –
McGuinness target of £2 million, with Private fundraising campaign
Canterbury City Council being led by Museums team.
responsible for £600,000 of Funding has been received
this target. through Interreg.

3. Cost overruns – Wates

have been appointed the  Cost overruns – final
main contractor and a contract price and
contract price agreed. programme have been
Price was subject to agreed. Contingency
variations following the account set up to cover
delays caused by essential additional work -
archaeology. Further risk Change control and
that deferment costs will be approvals procedure in
added for unforeseen place. Change Controls to
issues with the existing be regularly reported to
building. Executive

4. Project Delay -
 Programme has been
delayed and additional
costs incurred due to  Community Forum - Joint
archaeology and other Beaney/Marlowe community
enabling works. Target forum established to
completion date revised to improve communication
Spring 2012. between council, developers
and residents.
5. Community Relations -
Issues affecting neighbouring
properties may require some
compensation payment,
particularly Right to Light
issues. Communication with
neighbours during
construction period key to
ensuring no loss to Council
reputation.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

Following the financial and  The council‟s executive has

economic crisis, public recognised the financial
sector finances are in a difficulty and management
very poor state and team and the Finance sub
indications are that local group of the Executive have
authorities need to plan developed proposals to take
now for sharp cutbacks in account of these pressures.
government funding.
 The approved 4-year budget
District councils are is balanced for 2010/11.
expected to feel this There will be close budget
particularly badly as monitoring during the year to
education and health identify variances as soon as
budgets are expected to be possible. Current in year
ring fenced. reductions in government
funding can be dealt with.
The new Government has
Financial announced a further £60bn  There is a recognition that
Director savings will be required the 4 year budget will need
Budget Of Finance and a public finance audit to be revised to reflect the
Management is to be undertaken.
4 - Probable 4 - High 16 new governments budget
Jim McDonald priorities and planning for
In addition Council Tax that has begun.
capping levels are likely to
be reduced.  Staff budgets were cut by
5% for 2009/10. A senior
1. Capital Funding - management restructure has
Inadequate provision for been undertaken and
capital commitments on savings from that will accrue
buildings, equipment or in 2010/11. Restrictions on
infrastructure. recruitment are being
reapplied.
2. External Economic
Pressures - Notably the  The condensed efficiency
'credit crunch' on review programme has
investment risk and general delivered the required 5%
inflationary pressures. staff and 2.5% service cost
savings.
3. Council Income - Income
receipts from parking,  A new round of customer
property, land charges and focussed reviews and the
 investments are lower than
previously experienced and
show little sign of recovery.
4. Marlowe Redevelopment -
This is the single biggest
capital project in the
council's history. It will have
a significant impact on the
budget not just in the
construction phase but
ongoing running costs, if it
is not managed
successfully.
5. Capital Programme – was
reliant upon 4 - year
programme of capital
receipts from disposals at a
time when the property
market is falling and
planned sales are stalling.
Borrowing has been
undertaken pending a
revival in the property
market.
6. Prudential Borrowing –
There may be restrictions
introduced to control local
authority borrowing which
would impact on the
council‟s ability to complete
the 4 year capital
programme.
shared services programme
are expected to provide
further savings in budgets.
 The recession may have
lowered incomes but has
also resulted in keener
prices for some contracts.
 Pensions costs and the
unknown impact of the
national free fares scheme
are risks to future years
plans, although responsibility
for concessionary fares will
transfer to the county in April
2011.
 The council has followed
conventional local authority
practice for funding major
renewals and that is
provision is made in the
capital programme. Whilst
this has worked so far the
council may find it more
difficult in future as capital
resources reduce.
 Improved procurement of
contracted services.
 Income budgets particularly
for car parks, property rents,
planning fees, building control
fees and land charges will be
monitored closely as will fuel
and premises expenditure
budgets.
 See Marlowe Re-
Development Project risk
entry for how risk controls
are being applied.
 Where values being
provided by advisers for
current disposals are in line
with expectations sales will
proceed, in other cases the
council will retain assets and
look to borrow on a short-
term basis until the market
recovers. The position will
be monitored closely and
programme revised
accordingly.

 Borrowing for the 2010/11

and 2011/12 major schemes
has been undertaken
already, in case capital
borrowing controls are
introduced later.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

 The building maintenance

fund was re-introduced in
2006/07. It was hoped that
in time under spends on
Potential risks impacting on
the fund would build up a
the long-term funding of
reserve to act as a cushion
maintenance of council
against unforeseen urgent
owned or operated
repairs. Expenditure in
buildings.
2008/09 was within the
budget and a small
1. Ongoing Investment –
reserve has been
There is a risk of
achieved. However, there
deterioration if there is a
is still a „bow wave‟ of
Financial lack of ongoing re-
Head of Property maintenance to be
investment in operational
& addressed (see below).
Building properties.
Engineering 4 – Very
Maintenance
Funding 2. Historic Buildings -
Likely
4 - High 16  Growth bid in 2009/10 to
Malcolm bring fund into balance
Council property portfolio
Burgess accepted, but granted over
includes a number of large,
longer 4-year period so
ageing and in some cases
repairs are being deferred
historic buildings. Many of
to keep fund in credit.
these have long-term
maintenance requirements.
 Growth bid for capital in
2011/12 to address major
3. Energy Costs - Price
works needing immediate
volatility and generally
attention.
rising energy costs remain
a major concern.
 Energy saving measures
are being introduced
during normal replacement
cycles to reduce costs.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description
1. Reputation - Poor
performance will reflect
directly upon the council.
2. Financial - Heavily reliant on
annual council grant that the
Trust maintains is insufficient
to meet their net costs. Not
Partnerships Head of
resilient to changes in income
Community
and costs. Despite the
Horsebridge Arts Development
business plan and interest
&
Community
&
Open Spaces
free loan, the financial stability
of the business is still in
Centre
question - particularly due to
Suzi Wakeham
the increased energy costs
and an inability to establish
reserves.
3. Partnership - Failing to
establish common goals,
effective communication and
build trust.
Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls
 Year 1 consultancy study
report makes a number of
recommendations regarding
council‟s long-term options,
board role, management
structure, business
development and income
generation opportunities.
 The Horsebridge has
appointed a new director who
officially starts in January, but
is covering key duties in the
interim. The new Director is
working through the Yr 1
report in detail and progress
will be presented to Audit
Committee on the 29th
4 - Very
Likely
4 –High 16 November.
 Active Life involved in running
„back room‟ functions for the
centre. Merger idea has
been rejected at this stage,
but joint procurement being
taken forward to generate
efficiency savings.
 Meeting took place between
HoS, chair and manager –
agreed HoS would facilitate
workshop with board
members. Chair and
manager confirmed that
Horsebridge cash flow for
2010/11 is fine.
.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description
Active Life Ltd manages the
council's sport and leisure
facilities. Many corporate plan
objectives are dependant in
the successful management
of these facilities, which
makes this one of the
council's key partnerships.
The key risks are: -
1. Reputation - Poor
performance would damage
confidence in the Active Life
Partnerships
Head of Culture and the council.
& Bay High School/Herons,
Active Life
Enterprise 2. Financial - The under-
(Leisure
Centres)
capitalisation of the Trust
Janice makes it less resilient to cost
McGuinness and income changes. Active
Life may need to reduce
service to keep within budget.
3. Partnership - Maintaining a
good working relationship
between the Trust and the
Council is important to it
achieving its business aims.
4. Energy Costs – A major cost
component (e.g. swimming
pools). The Trust is financially
vulnerable to sudden and
unexpected increases in
energy prices.
Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls
 Performance monitored
through the funding
agreement. Council
increasing investment in
building maintenance to
improve quality of centres.
Long-term business plan
developed that outlines a
series of options about how
Active Life should operate,
including opportunities for
new commercial activities..
Revenue impact of Herne
4 - Very Whitstable Community
Likely
4 - High 16 College development and
Wincheap Soft Play being
factored into future
projections.
 Active Life has developed
their own efficiency plans in
order to reduce their costs.
 Leisure review
commissioned to review
long term council options for
leisure provision.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

1. Coastal Flooding - Large  Sea Defences - Coastal

parts of the district‟s Defences have been
shoreline are in flood risk improved over the years to
areas including Whitstable varying standards. The
and Herne Bay. The minimum is a 1 in 50 years
integrity of the sea event. There is an emergency
defences and other flood flooding plan, which is
defences are therefore vital invoked as appropriate.
for the local community. Continue to lobby through
Since 2008 the strategic Coastal Group and LGA for
management of sea continued involvement of
defences at national and district councils in national
regional level transferred to decision-making on sea
the Environment Agency. defence priorities.

2. Inland Flooding - The  Emergency Plan - There is

district has a risk of inland an emergency flooding plan
Contingency
flooding from rivers and and this operated well in
Head of Property
other watercourses. The previous incidents. Remedial
Coastal &
Environment Agency are works have been undertaken
& Engineering
River
responsible for main rivers,
Riparian owners are
3 - Possible 5 - Very High 15 in a number of areas. Regular
exercises of flood plans take
Flooding Malcolm
responsible for other place. Duty rota of engineers
Burgess
watercourses, however the to monitor weather conditions
Council has powers to and prepare emergency
undertake preventive work response. Take action on
to mitigate risks. points raised in Emergency
Planning and Business
3. Flash floods - Localised Continuity risk assessment
flash floods are difficult to
predict and there is very  New Residential
limited time to respond to Developments - Response
prevent flooding of to Ashford developments has
properties in extreme resulted in acceptance of
events. design parameters on
discharge flows and on site
4. Statutory Duties - The storage for new
council has a duty under developments to control
the Civil Contingencies Act discharge of water based on
to prepare for civil agricultural run-off.
emergencies. Flooding is a
realistic threat and one that
 the council would be  Shoreline Management
expected to be prepared Plan - Plan has been agreed
for. at Council. Overview and
Scrutiny and Executive have
5. The Flood & Water reviewed progress against
Management Bill – The Flood Scrutiny Review Action
new bill is based on Plan and good progress has
recommendations from the been made on those areas
Pitt Review and is expected within the council's control.
to give upper tier authorities
greater responsibility for
managing flood. Both the
county and districts will
need to work in partnership
in order to meet these
additional responsibilities.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

 Safeguarding policy in place.

Key corporate policies and
procedures amended to
reflect policy – including
recruitment, grievance and
disciplinary policies.

 All posts affected have been

identified and categorised.
Ongoing programme of
1. Legislative Changes - The
mandatory training is in place.
council now has greater
responsibilities and
 Internal publicity campaign
obligations to safeguard
delivered to raise awareness
children.
with staff and dedicated area
Legislative for safeguarding established
2. Embedding Child
& Head of on the intranet.
Protection - Without
Regulatory Community
comprehensive polices,
Development  Safeguarding requirements
procedures and training the
Safeguarding &
Promoting the
&
Open Spaces
safety and protection of
3 - Possible 5 - Very High 15 statement now included in
relevant contracts with third
children may be at risk.
Welfare of party providers.
Children Act Suzi Wakeham
3. Further Changes - Outcome
 Regular meetings held with
of Haringey Public Enquiry
key contacts from all relevant
could have further
services, to ensure all kept up
implications on how the
to date with legislation and
council works with children
training opportunities.

 Internal audit carried out on

corporate compliance to
safeguarding – obtained
„reasonable assurance‟.
Action plan being
implemented.

 Young workers policy being

reviewed as was
responsibility of on-site
personnel service, now EKHR
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

The project is in three

stages: -

1st stage – Relocation of

Pier Sports Hall to HBHS.

2nd Stage – Extension of

Herons Sports Centre.

3rd Stage – Pier

Redevelopment
Legal and funding
Agreement has been
arrangements in place for
reached between the
Herne Bay High School.
school, KCC and CCC for
Major Projects
Head of Culture the HBHS project to go
Herons refurbishment
& ahead.
Herne Bay High progressing
Enterprise
School –
New Sports
The risks to the council are
3 – Possible 4 - High 12
Janice now predominantly finance Both projects subject to
Facilities robust project
McGuinness orientated: -
management and change
1. Sport England Bid – The control mechanisms.
outcome of the £800K
Sport England bid is very
uncertain as the terms of
the agreement reached
with the school are now
less in line with Sport
England‟s criteria. Sport
England has its own
funding constraints.

2. Cost Overruns – To be
funded 50/50 between KCC
and CCC.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

Canterbury has an  Transport Action Plan -

acknowledged problem A2 slip road (on-slip road)
with congestion: - at Wincheap been
approved and construction
1. Quality of Life - Problems has begun.
with the road network have
a detrimental impact on the  Traffic Management and
local community and can Control System - Being
restrict economic installed in stages by KCC.
development. Active Traffic Management
approach piloted in
2. New Developments - Maidstone.
Increasing congestion due
to impact of additional cars  New Development
from the development of Impact Study - Study and
Brownfield sites and their review aims to address
associated high-density future parking needs
Head of housing - e.g. Tannery, through off-street and Park
External
Planning & Ride provision to
& 3. New Road Schemes - manage traffic congestion.
Traffic
Congestion
Regeneration Schemes like the A2
3 - Possible 4 - High 12 The Parking Strategy
junction improvements and recognises impact of
Ian Brown other desirable schemes developments upon
that would help alleviate parking demand.
congestion problems are a Modelling study in
KCC or Highways Agency progress. LDF process will
responsibility. CCC has require full assessment of
limited influence and some traffic/transport impact of
critical schemes may not future development.
progress.
 Park & Ride – Extension to
4. Recession - Downturn in Dover road Park & Ride site
economy will mean delays dependant on site
in implementing new acquisition.
developments.
Infrastructure
improvements through  New Traffic Model for
developments will be Canterbury - This will help
significantly delayed and assess and compare
income from s106 impact of different
agreements will reduce in development scenarios in
 the short term.
5. Park & Ride - Construction
of 4th Park & Ride site may
face opposition and lengthy
delay in implementation.
traffic in the city. This will
prompt a review of the
transport strategy to
ensure that future
development is
sustainable and will inform
options for the preparation
of the LDF. VISUM model
near completion.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

 Business Continuity Plan –

Plan has identified critical
The impact of a business services. All Business
continuity incident on the Continuity documentation to
delivery of council services be reviewed by services by
due to: - the end of 2009.

1. Loss of key building or office  Exercises - Tabletop

Contingency
Head of Housing space. emergency exercise held in
& March 2009, which included
Business
Continuity
Street Scene 2. Loss or lack of key staff. 3 - Possible 4 - High 12 business continuity elements.
Further exercises planned.
(General)
Larissa Laing 3. Loss of key equipment or
systems,  Standby Generator – The
generator is now functional.
4. Lack of fuel,
 Shared Working -
5. Loss of utilities, services, Collaboration with East Kent
supplier or contractor. authorities to develop plans to
increase resilience
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

 Homelessness strategy
There is high demand for
reviewed across East
affordable homes and a
Kent. Focus on
related risk of greater
reconnecting rough
homelessness / inadequate
sleepers and better
housing provision.
distribution of services.
Another impact of the
 Housing Strategy in place
recession is delay and
and monitored regularly.
cancellation of many new
Under review to ensure up-to-
housing schemes that
date response to current risk.
would have included an
New strategy to be in place in
affordable housing
2011.
provision.
Head of Housing
&  Liaising with CLG, RSL‟s
1. National & Regional
Street Scene and developers to find
Factors - Housing demand
opportunities to re-start the
External is related to national and
Larissa Laing housing market and develop
regional housing planning
4 - Very family homes. Council build
Housing
Demand
Head of
policy as well as market
factors. All South East
Likely
3 - Medium 12 scheme being progressed.
Planning
authorities are facing
&  Strategic Housing Market
increased difficulties with
Regeneration Assessment completed. This
this risk.
will inform key strategies
Ian Brown and interventions.
2. Recession - The downturn
in the housing market will
 Secured CLG funds to
make it very difficult to
extend free legal advice in
meet housing targets. This
County Court for defendants
could have an impact on
in mortgage repossession
overcrowding levels and
cases to prevent
the size of the Housing
homelessness.
register.
 Working with partners to
3. Social Impact - Economic
monitor impact of the
pressures lead to greater
recession on homelessness,
family breakdown and
co-ordinate responses and
domestic violence.
implement mortgage rescue
scheme. Thus far there is no
 noticeable increase in
homeless presentations.

 Reviewing hostels in
2009/10 to assess how to
provide the accommodation
and associated support
services.

 Council participates in the

mortgage rescue scheme.

 Local Improvement
Programme initiative with
Homes and Communities
Agency. Will address
priorities across East Kent
and potentially deliver new
investment to address
housing and regeneration
priorities.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

The secure and correct

 Information Security Policy
management of personal
–Full version on the intranet
data is important to the
and publicised. Policy now
public, especially in light of
included in annual PDA
a series of high profile
process by requiring
failures in both the public
employee declaration as
and private sectors.
having read and accepted it.
1. Information Security -
 Acceptable Use Policy -
Several concerns raised
currently under review
shared passwords, PC left
logged in and the security of
 Mini-Data Quality Audits –
council buildings.
Audits carried out in
September 2009 to check
2. Records Management -
that data quality is being
Records management
Legislative maintained.
Head of Legal could be improved. The
&
& council's vulnerability has
Regulatory  Records Management – All
Democratic been seen in some recent
Information
Services FOI Act and DP Act
3 - Possible 4 - High 12 bar one of retention
schedules now complete and
requests.
Management a programme of reviews is
Mark Ellender
underway. Records Centre is
3. Use of Investigatory
implementing a new database
Powers – Public concerns
to improve the efficiency of
over how councils use
the modern archive.
powers under RIPA and
impact on the privacy of the
 Audit Committee – Presently
individual.
use of RIPA powers reviewed
quarterly by the Audit
4. Freedom of
Committee. The RIPA policy
Information/Data Protection
reviewed by the Committee
requests – ensuring proper
once per year.
processes are in place
regarding publication or
 FOI – Dedicated officer
release of information
appointed to handle requests
within regulated timescales
which have increased by 40%
of 20 and 40 days
to 439 in 2009/10.
respectively.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

1. Regulatory Changes - The

Government proposes
deregulating some aspects of
the service and prevents
"profit-making" from local
searches. This would have an
impact upon the budget of up
to £200,000 per annum.
Latest consultation proposing
that cost recovery will need to
be in place from 09/10 with
audit of fees/costs the
following year.
2. Fixed Fees - Local
Legislative Authorities are obliged by
& Head of statute to provide data at a
Regulatory Planning fixed fee of £11 to local
& private sector search
Land Charges Regeneration companies for certain
services. The fee level does
Ian Brown not cover internal costs. Still
no indication when
Government is likely to
change fees.
3. HIPS - Introduction of HIPS
has meant that a number of
conveyances have signed 1-2
year deals with personal
search companies because
they are more price
competitive (see 2 above)
Huge increase in numbers of
personal searches as a
result.
 LGA has put pressure on
Government to explain
inequalities of current system.
Local Land Charges services
only to seek cost recovery
from December 2008
averaged over 3 years.
 Robust response made to
current Government
consultation with Canterbury
4 - Very being offered as a case
Likely
3 - Medium 12 study.
 LGA are continuing to press
the Ministry of Justice for a
resolution. Our charges are
set at as reasonable a level
as possible to mitigate the
possibility of legal challenge.
Some datasets are published
to the website allowing
access without charge.

4. Recession - Downturn in
housing market is still
seriously impacting upon
number of searches received
5. Further Incomes Losses
– The Information
Commissioner has taken
the view (July 09) that
personal searchers are
entitled to view information
without charge under
Environmental Information
Regulations. Some
Personal Search
companies have notified us
that they intend to reclaim
fees already collected.
Various bodies have sought
legal opinions on the
matter, which remains
unsettled. Personal Search
companies are issuing legal
challenges to individual
councils.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

Corporate Project team

managing process.
Staged approach to project to
allow for potential
reconfiguration of scheme
dependent on external
funding and potential partner
expectation.
1. Capacity - pressure upon
Cross-departmental working
staff and resources to deliver
group in place to spread
high council priority.
Head of Culture workload. Budget allocated
Major Projects for external support.
&
Enterprise 2. Funding – project delivery
Football Hub
Project reliant on external funding.
3 - Possible 4 - High 12
Janice Managed through Core
McGuiness Officer Group. Robust project
3. Partnership working – planning process with
project delivery reliant on approval at key stages.
partnership support.
Option to deliver on Simon
Langton Boys School site
now being considered.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

The council is working with

Dover, Thanet, and Shepway  Project team formed from
to create a shared service participating authorities.
that would deliver housing
landlord services to all the  Regular updates to Chief
authorities. Executives and Leaders.

Key risks include: -  Business case prepared to

model general fund and HRA
1. Irreconcilable expectations impacts.
between different
authorities.  Tenant support confirmed.

2. Unrealistic efficiency  Interim Acting MD recruited to

Major Projects savings. support project.
Strategic
Director
Shared Landlord
Services Project
3. Knock on impact on other
central services within each
3 - Possible 4 - High 12  TSA have commented
favourably on early drafts of
Velia Coffey
authority. the Section 27 application.

4. Lack of tenant support.  Councils have agreed the

second stage decisions and
5. If project does not succeed budget and resources to
– future of shared service support next stage are in
and impact on individual place.
housing services.
 Each council has nominated
6. The withdrawal of one of its Shadow Board member,
the remaining participating approved next phase of
authorities. project costs, approved set
up of East Kent ALMO and
7. Section 27 approval Section 27 submission to the
declined Tenant Services Authority.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

The CHARM 2 (Housing

Repairs & Maintenance)
contract is one of the
council's key contracts and
partnerships.

The contract has recently

been re-tendered.
 Contract Management –
Strong contract management
Risks now relate to the
arrangements have been
operation of the new
developed under the previous
Partnerships contractor: -
Head of Housing contract and these will
CHARM
&
Street Scene
1. Demand – Housing repairs
3 – Possible 4 – High 12 continue including fortnightly
meetings with contractors to
(Housing is a demand led service
discuss service.
Repairs) and therefore overall costs
Larissa Laing
Contract can vary and potentially be
 Inspection Regimes &
higher than expected.
Planned Maintenance -
However this risk is
Reduces the need for high-
mitigated by a fixed price
cost responsive maintenance.
contract so the risk only
covers works outside the
contract

2. Contract Management –
Services issues are not
communicated and
effectively addressed.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

Funding for the „Supporting

People‟ programme has one
year left of certainty.

There is uncertainty over

whether funding will be
extended.

If funding is not continued the

council will need to consider
what parts of the programme
it would choose to fund itself
e.g. Lifeline Services.

There is now a capping of  A review of the community

External Head of Housing
Lifeline monitoring charges alarm service is underway
&
that may impact on the to find efficiencies in
Supporting
People
Street Scene
council‟s ability to deliver
4 - Likely 3 - Medium 12 running costs and to re-
community alarm services in design services around
Larissa Laing
the same way as now. users‟ needs.

Funding for the Home

Improvement Agencies is
also under review.

The largest risk is proposed

changes to the funding of the
Enhanced care service. This
risk is being mitigated by
discussions with Kent Adult
Social Services regarding
how we will be providing care
and support in enhanced
care schemes.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

 Herne Bay Central

Development Area –The
Area Action Plan has been
agreed and Dennes have
been appointed the
development partner. Master
plan to be completed end of
2010. The project is
expected to begin in 2011.

 Local Development
Head of
Major Projects The vulnerability of coastal Framework – Includes
Planning
parts of the district to proposals to help stimulate
&
Coastal
Regeneration
Regeneration
economic downturns and
competition from other
3 - Possible 3 - Medium 9 economic activity in coastal
areas.
commercial centres.
Ian Brown
 Town Centre Management
Activity – A number of
schemes and activities are
planned to promote both
Whitstable and Herne Bay.

 Partnership Working –
Promoting regeneration
through work with KCC,
Tourism South East and local
business groups.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

 Training for Managers

and Staff – Senior
Management have
identified a range of skills
1. Managers – The
that will be needed for the
awareness amongst some
future and training will be
managers of employment
organised during 2010/11.
law, internal staff
This will commence with a
procedures and other staff
significant change
management issues could
management programme
be improved.
 Online Training - The online
2. Skills - The extent and
Internal training provider has been
volume of activity and pace
Director changed and those courses
of change poses a risk to
Management Of Finance are now more accessible.
Skills & Staff
staff if resources and
capability does not match
3 - Possible 3 - Medium 9 Use on online training has
Development Jim McDonald been promoted
demands e.g. project
management skills.
 Job Evaluation – An
equal pay audit was
3. Fairness - Pay inequalities
undertaken and found that
between different divisions
the pay scheme did not
are becoming more
lead to pay inequalities.
pronounced.
Management Team had
commissioned work to
4. New skills needed for new
review the job evaluation
financial environment.
scheme; however this is
on hold pending other
priorities and the HR
Shared Services project.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

 Executive and
Management controls
including Council
Constitution, Members
handbook, Standards
Board, Financial
Regulations, Contract
Standing Orders,
The risk of fraud and
strategies and procedures,
corruption arising due to: -
performance management
system to give early
1. Non-compliance with internal
warning of problems.
financial controls.
 Internal Audit coverage of
2. Failure to promote an anti-
key systems and those
Financial fraud culture.
Director identified from a detailed
Of Finance risk assessment of
Fraud &
Corruption
3. Price Fixing in Construction
sector (OFT investigation)
3 - Possible 3 - Medium 9 systems vulnerable to
Jim McDonald fraud and corruption.
4. Recent high profile public
 Promotion of anti-fraud
fraud cases and allegations at
and corruption and
both national and local level.
whistleblowing policy and
monitoring of codes of
5. Increased risk of fraud and
conduct. Robust
irregularity from impact of
procurement processes to
recession
minimise risk of cartels
based on OFT/OGC guide
"Making Competition Work
for You".

 Specific audit work aimed

at fraud detection will be
undertaken in 2009/2010.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

 ICT Disaster Recovery -

Service contracted with ICM
in partnership along with 6
other councils. Contract
The risk of an IT related signed Oct 2009. Testing
business continuity event provided for in support 2 day
occurring and causing on + 2 days off-site. VMware
disruption to the council's IT technology implemented as
systems and general ability to part of server consolidation
function. provides enhanced recovery
solutions. Tested during
1. Network Failure - Risk of implementation.
loss of a network or single  ICT Business Continuity
Contingency
ICT Computer network components. Plan - Computer Services
Services Manager has reviewed and
Business
Continuity
Manager 2. Hardware Failure – Loss of
one or more servers causing
2 - Unlikely 4 - High 8 updated ICT Disaster Plan.
(ICT Service) Stored on remote server.
Timo Bayford loss of data. Recently updated.

3. Security - virus attack via  Security - Security protocols

firewall, email or external and anti virus solutions in
media. place and updated regularly,
including secure public
4. Environmental Failure - fire, access to services. Recently
power loss, servers updated for GCSx code of
overheating. Connection

 Fire Prevention - Range of

alarms in place to alert
central control plus new
generator, fire protection and
air conditioning systems.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

The delivery of council

services through shared
working arrangements has
been strongly promoted at
a national and local level
as a means of delivering
improved efficiencies and
resilience. The successful
implementation of shared
services has been given
further importance with
 Governance - East Kent
anticipated cuts in central
Joint Arrangements
funding for local
Committee to oversee new
government.
projects.
The potential risks are: -
Partnerships  Communication – Liaison
between communication
1. Service Delivery –
Shared Services Chief officers in different councils to
Expected efficiencies and
Agenda Executive
financial savings may not
2 – Possible 4 - High 8 co-ordinate information to
staff.
be achieved or only
achieved with further
 Individual Project Teams –
reductions in service
Project teams present
delivery.
business case for agreement
between the council‟s
2. Technical & Cultural
involved. Business case is
Compatibility – Bringing
considered by collectively and
services together may
by individual authorities.
initially bring diseconomies
of scale and reduced
services levels, as
compatibility issues are
resolved.

3. Project Cost/ Staff

Capacity – Setting up new
arrangements can be time-
consuming and costly.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description
The banking and financial
system crisis in Autumn
2008 has presented a
number of risks.
1. Icelandic Banks - the
council had deposits
directly with one Icelandic
bank (Glitnir) and one UK
subsidiary of an Icelandic
bank (Heritable) totalling £6
million. The collapse of the
Icelandic banking sector
has put a proportion of
these deposits at risk. The
extent of this risk will
depend on the outcome of
Financial
court cases to determine
whether UK local authority
Banking Crisis &
Director deposits are classed as
UK Public
Finances
Of Finance Preferred creditors. The
extent of the financial
(including
Jim McDonald collapse and the number of
Icelandic Banks)
UK depositors who stand to
lose funds means that a
swift resolution is unlikely.
2. Wider Impact - The “price”
of dealing with the crisis
has meant that UK interest
rates are at the lowest
levels ever and the size of
public sector debt is very
high which is putting the
UK‟s sovereign credit rating
at risk, although the recent
national budget has had a
positive effect on the
sovereign credit rating.
There are risks that at
some point inflation will rise
Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls
 Heritable - The Heritable
administrators have made
three dividend payments and
further payments are
expected. A total re-payment
of around 85 pence in the
pound is anticipated.
 Glitnir – The local authorities‟
case is being co-ordinated by
the Local Government
Association and they have
engaged UK and Icelandic
legal teams to seek preferred
creditor status in the Icelandic
courts. Test cases have
been prepared and hearings
will take place later this year.
4 _ Very
Likely
2 -Low 8  Treasury Management
Policy - Reviewed regularly
and reported quarterly to
committee. Monies are
deposited with financial
institutions with F1 rating or
better. If UK rating is
downgraded the treasury
management strategy will be
reviewed.
 VAT Reimbursement -
Although we anticipate that
the council will receive a
substantial proportion of the
money back, provisions
have been made in case of
the need for partial write off
from the £2.9 million
returned in the HM Customs
& Excise claim.
rapidly and that it will take
longer to come out of
recession.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

1. Crime ‘Hotspots’ - The

district generally benefits
from low levels of crime but
 Safer Community
there are pockets of crime
Partnership – The council
and general anti-social
has developed a number of
External behaviour.
Head of Housing initiatives in conjunction with
& the police, PCSOs and
Anti-Social
Behaviour
Street Scene
2. Low Level Crime - Public
perception of the level of
2 - Possible 3 - Medium 6 community groups to deal
with anti-social behaviour.
crime can often differ to the
Larissa Laing The partnership plan has
actual level. This is often
been agreed.
informed by the public
experience of low level
crime and anti-social
behaviour e.g. vandalism.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

 Equalities & Inclusion

Policy – Updated in 2005
currently being reviewed
following introduction of new
Equalities Act 2010 and
introduction of new codes of
practice in March 2011.

 DDA Compliance – Access

audits complete for all council
buildings. Audits complete for
1. Poor Decision-Making –
Active Life buildings. Now
Failure to take into account
working on action plans.
equality and diversity
Adaptations made to Military
issues may result in the
Road office.
council making poor
decisions.
Legislative  Corporate Equalities &
& Access Group – Chaired by
Head of Policy 2. Unfair Treatment –
Regulatory the Head of Housing,
& Council may directly or
Community Safety and
Equalities &
Improvement indirectly discriminate. 2 - Unlikely 3 - Medium 6 Environmental Services and
Discrimination meets monthly to coordinate
Mark Bursnell 3. Loss of Public
Legislation council response to new
Confidence – Public lose
Equalities Act 2011and
confidence in the council to
corporate equality action
act fairly.
planning.
4. Legal Compliance –
 Equality Framework for
Failing to comply with UK
Local Government – Council
equalities law.
commitment to obtain
„Achieving‟ level.
Assessment for new
framework due to take place
in 2011.

 Customer Access Review

Process –Process now
underway. Training
programme and phase one of
process due to complete by
early 2011.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls
Financial Advisory Network
used for updates and briefing
notes.
New reporting standards are
being introduced for the final
Head of Finance and staff
accounts in 2010/11. This
have attended training
also requires shadow
workshops.
accounts to be prepared for
2009/10.
Property Services advised of
Legislative changes.
1. Implementing these new
&
standards will impact on the
Regulatory Contractor employed to
capacity of both Financial
Head of Finance review leases and produce
Services & Property Services
International
Financial Ian Cooke
as they incorporate the new
3 - Possible 2 - Low 6 shadow balance sheet at 31
changes. The new standards March 2009.
Reporting
will create additional
Standards Head of Finance and staff will
administration and reduce
capacity for other projects. have to attend further training
in 2010 and 2011 and
2. Failure to comply with the extensive further studying of
new standards will directly the new SORP (Statement of
impact on Use of Resources Recommended Practice) to
scores and problems with the take account of the many
accounts being signed off. further changes required by
2011.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

The council is required to

carry out food safety
inspections on all catering
premises.

There is an ongoing
inspection backlog. This is
due to: -
 The number of inspections
completed within time
 Changes in the Code of
remains above average
Practice have increased
(60%) but backlog has
inspection requirements.
stabilised.
 New inspections need to be
 Primary responsibility for
carried out when a
hygiene standards remains
premises opens or changes
with the premises. Several
hands. The district has a
Legislative initiatives are planned to
high turnover of catering
& promote food safety.
Head of Housing businesses. It has become
Regulatory
& apparent that just as
Food Safety
Street Scene premises are closing due to
2 - Unlikely 3 - Medium 6  There is a new regime for low
risk premises that will free up
the recession, people
Inspections time.
Larissa Laing investing their redundancy
money into a new business
 A new EHO post was created
are opening new ones. This
and filled from 17 August
creates an additional
2009. This has helped
demand for inspections.
reduce the back log.
However, a Technical Office
 There is a separate and
(food) was made redundant in
intensive inspection regime
March 2010 due to cost
for shellfish premises. This
saving requirements.
also reduces resources
available for other food
inspections.

The risks are: -

1. FSA Intervention - If
completed inspections fall
below 50% the Food
Standards Agency would
 audit the food service and
could intervene and take
over the inspections,
recharging the council.

2. Public Safety - There is an

increased risk of a serious
incident of food poisoning.
 Risk Risk Owner Risk Description Likelihood Impact Risk Rating Risk Controls

A piece of software, which

runs overnight to keep the
Capita Housing System up
to date with information, is
not functioning correctly. Support – Strategic
Support staff are working
The system is unavailable hard to reduce the impact
to Housing and Contact by running income file
Centre staff for significant manually
parts of the week.
ICT – Housing working
The risks arising from this closely with ICT to try to
are: overcome the core
problem
1. Financial Information –
Rent payments, housing Capita – In contact with
benefit adjustments, Capita to assess whether
Financial Head of Housing supporting people the council can migrate
& payments are not up to from its own software to a
Capita Housing Street Scene date or accurate. Capita product.
Rent IT System
2 - Unlikely 3 - Medium 6
Larissa Laing General rent account Income – In contact with
information e.g. the the Income Manager and
financial week number, the Income Section to
amount of rent to debit to check that income
individual rent accounts etc. accounts and rent
is out of date or inaccurate. accounts are reconciling.

Financial information is not Communication –

available to enable Keeping all Community
reconciliation of the income Services and Contact
management system. Centre staff regularly
informed of the situation
Regular reports to Finance, as it develops.
Housing Benefits and
Housing Options cannot be
provided.

Direct debits are more

difficult to manage.
2. Customer Focus -
Banding information for
applicants to the Housing
Register is not up to date.

The supply of information to

Housing Benefits to enable
them to process
applications is
compromised. This may
affect the council‟s ability to
calculate housing benefit.

New rent payment cards

and rent statements are not
being produced.

The production of standard

letters is affected,
particularly bulk arrears
letters in which rent
balances cannot be trusted.

Customers cannot be
provided with current
information or balances on
request.