rook, phil j. - whatdotheyknow

Rook, Phil J.

From:Sent:To:Subject:Attachments:

Russell Thompson <[email protected]>14 October 2014 14:09Webb, Sally-Ann; Andy Sharp; Phil Hornsby; Rook, Phil J.Notes on Pan DorsetPan Dorset LATC Legal Governance.docx

Hello all,

Please find attached Sally Ann's notes amended and expanded for the meeting with Directors on Thursday,

ifthere are any amendments, please track change and send back to Sally Ann and myself

kind regards

~ussell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: www.candhs.com

email: [email protected]

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone inpartnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please callyour organisations IT Helpdesk.Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

1

Rook, Phil J.

From:Sent:To:

Russell Thompson <[email protected]>15 October 2014 16:17Driscoll, Catherine; Jan Thurgood; Jane Portman; Rook, Phil J.; Phil Hornsby; AndySharp; Tim Martin; Webb, Sally-Ann

Cc:Subject:Attachments:

Briefing paper for Pan Dorset LATC Mtg Thurs 16thPan Dorset LATC Legal Governance final.docx; Better Together LATC final.ppt

Hello all,

Please find attached two documents:

l jpresentation used in Monday's workshop to explore the governance arrangements for a Pan Dorset LATC

2) The agreed outcomes from that workshop. these will form the basis of discussion for the meetingtomorrow in Poole at 11.30.

kind regards

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: www.candhs.comtelephone:email: [email protected]

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone inpartnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 200910910052.) In case of problems, please call

(. ).yourorganisations IT Helpdesk.. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored andlor recorded for legal purposes.

1

Rook, Phil J.

From:Sent:To:Cc:Subject:

Phil Hornsby <[email protected]>22 October 2014 14:36'RussellThompson'; Andy SharpRook,Phil J.RE:FBCfor PanDorset

Hi All,I'm away all next week but will try and find some time to read the FBCwhen it lands.

Thanks

Phil

Phil HornsbyService Unit HeadCommissioning and Improvement - People Services

\ if: 01202 261030,: [email protected] of Poole ICivic Centre IPoole BH15 2RU

From: RussellThompson [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: 22 October 2014 09:44To: Andy SrarpCc: Phil Rook.; Phil HornsbySubject: Re: FBCfor PanDorset

Hi Andy,

Friday may be a stretch as I have kept part of the weekend free for this.

How about me sending it Sunday sometime for you to look at it Monday?

cheers


On 22 October 2014 09:12, Andy Sharp <[email protected]> wrote:Hi Russell,

If you let me have the draft on Friday I will have a read through and let you have a view on the assumptions. We will

1

need to agree things as a group but I'm sure we can do that by email in the first instance.

Thanks,

Andy

Sent from my Windows Phone

From: Russell ThompsonSent: 22/10/2014 09:05To: Andy Sharp; Phil Rook.; Phil HornsbySubject: Re:FBCfor PanDorset

Hi Andy, Phil and Phil

I am working through it all this week, so will have identified any gaps by Friday.

More likely that I will have made some assumptions to fill gaps that need agreement before everybody hasthe first draft.

Would you three be able to review the assumptions and agree/amend?

kind regards

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: www.candhs.comtelephone: temail: [email protected]

On 20 October 2014 12:16,Andy Sharp <[email protected]> wrote:Hi Russell,

Is there anything you need from myself or the rest of the project group to support the work on the FBCfollowing ourmeetings last week?

Thanks,

Andy


**********************************************************************This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential andintended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom theyare addressed. If you have received this email in error please notifythe systemmanager.

2

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been checked

for the presence of computer viruses.

**********************************************************************

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com

DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally privileged andprotected in law and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. The copyrightin all documentation is the property of the Borough of Poole and this email and any documentation must notbe copied or used other than as strictly necessary for the purpose of this email, without prior written consentwhich may be subject to conditions. Any view or opinions presented are solely those ofthe author and donot necessarily represent those of the Borough of Poole. The Borough of Poole reserves the right to inspect)ncoming and outgoing emails. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender by returnand confirm that its contents have been destroyed. Telephone enquiries should be directed to the Boroughswitchboard on 01202 633633.'This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone inpartnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please callyour organisations IT Helpdesk.Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

3

Rook, Phil J.


Webb, Sally-Ann24 October 2014 09:25'RussellThompson'Print, Ben;Rook, Phil J.RE:Better Together literature for PanDorset

Hi RussellHere is a link to the Better Together pageson Dorsetforyou website

https://www.dorsetforyou.coml411954

You should find the BusinessPlanand the Story So Fardocument which may help.Pleaselet me know if you need anything else.RegardsSally-AnnWebbProgramme Manager.Better Together Partnership'\

tel: 01305 228555

From: RussellThompson [mailto:russell.thompson@candhs,com]Sent: 24 October 2014 09:17To: Webb, Sally-AnnCc: Print, Ben; Rook, PhilJ.Subject: Fwd: Better Together literature for PanDorset

Hi Sally,

Any luck with some background literature on "Better Together"?

kind regards

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: www.candhs.comtelephone;. =email: [email protected]

---------- Forwarded message ----------From: Russell Thompson <[email protected]>Date: 20 October 2014 12:28Subject: Better Together literature for Pan DorsetTo: Sally-Ann Webb <[email protected]>

Hi Sally-Ann

Thank you for the notes oflast week's meeting.

I would like to include in the Appendices of the High Level BC a narrative that details the accepted benefitsof the better together programme.

Do you have somewhere a paper that details the aims and benefits of the programme? Maybe something thatwas written at its inception?

I am at my desk all day today, so if you want some more clarification please call the mobile number below.

kind regards


2

Rook, Phil J.


Lacey,Gill28 October 2014 08:32Capron, HarryElliott, Tony; Reid,LynneM.; Cutler, Natasha;Rook,Phil J.; Webb, Sally-AnnFW:PanDorset LATCproposal

Hi Harry

Just to confirm that I received approval to the Exemption in respect ofthe proposed LATCwork referred below thismorning.

Thanks

Gillian LaceyContracts ManagerCommissioning & Improvement,~dult & Community ServicesDirectorate

Tel: 01305 224594Blackberry:e-mail: [email protected]

From: Lacey,GillSent: 30 September 201417:49To: Capron, HarryCc: Elliott, Tony; Reid, Lynne M.; Cutler, Natasha; Rook, Phil J.; Webb, Sally-AnnSubject: RE: PanDorset LATCproposal

Thanks Harry. "II let you know when we get the necessaryapproval.

! ,Gillian Lacey\ ,}tontracts Manager

Commissioning & ImprovementAdult & Community ServicesDirectorate

1


From: Capron, HarrySent: 30 2014 17:36

Cc: Elliott, Tony; Reid, Lynne M.; Cutler, Natasha; Rook, Phil J.; Webb, Sally-AnnSubject: Re: PanDorset LATCproposal

Thanks Gill

The rationale is: provider already working on business cases for Dorset and Boumemouth so able to reducetime for preparing the joint case for Boumemouth Poole and Dorset due to familiarity with detail of servicesand stakeholders. This joint piece of work will be funded by Better Together as partnership activity. Hencecost and expertise able to be maximised.Is this ok?Harry

On 30 Sep 2014, at 17:29, "Lacey, Gill" <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello Harry

I'll have to do another Exemption to include this work but it shouldn't be a problem astheaccumulated sum we've spent with this provider is under EUthreshold(so sits within the Council'sContract Procedure Rules).

Just for clarity, pleasecan I askwhy this provider would be the most appropriate so that I can usethis for the Exemption.

Many thanks

Gillian LaceyContracts ManagerCommissioning & ImprovementAdult & Community ServicesDirectorate


From: Capron, HarrySent: 30 September 2014 15:52To: Elliott, TonyCc: Lacey,Gill; Reid, LynneM.; Cutler, Natasha; Rook, Phil J.; Webb, Sally-AnnSubject: Re: PanDorset LATCproposal

Hi GillI'm not sure if this will be a problem or not Phil mentioned that we have alreadycommissioned Health and Care solutions for a number of days for Dorset business case. Theyare best placed to take on this work pan Dorset but wondered if exemption is required. Sorrynot sure on value of work so far.RegardsHarry

On 30 Sep 2014, at 13:46, "Elliott, Tony" <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi all.

Apologies for the previous blank email!

Gill,

2

We spoke about the contract position last week. Harry suggests that this will breachthe contract value, considering the work already carried out by DC&HS on theDorset LATe. Please let me know the further information you require.

Natasha,

In Lynne's absence are you able to arrange a Purchase Order? If not Carol (Cake)might be able to do it. It should be assigned to Cost Centre 100022. Any problemslet me know and we will find another way.

Thanks.

Tony

............................................................................Tony ElliottAccountant (Adult & Community Servicesand Better Together Programme)Corporate ResourcesDirect Dial- (01305) 224565email - [email protected]

From: Capron, HarrySent: 30 September 2014 12:34To: Elliott, Tony; Webb, Sally-AnnCc: Rook, Phil J.Subject: Fwd: PanDorset LATCproposal

Can you arrange purchase order please?

You may need to check with Phil about contract position as Dorset CC mayhave reached a ceiling on the value.

Going through Better Together may count separately but I would be surprisedif that was the case.Sally -Ann can you monitor use of days as agreed with Andy Sharp.ThanksHarry

Begin forwarded message:

From: Russell Thompson <[email protected]>Date: 25 September 2014 14:27:26 BSTTo: "Capron, Harry" <[email protected]>Cc: Jon Manzoni <[email protected]>, Mike Walsh<[email protected]>, Sally-Ann Webb<[email protected]>Subject: Re: Pan Dorset LATC proposal

Hi Harry,

Thank you for the update.

3

We will commit to starting next week and start developing theworkshop content.

I would be grateful if, by the end of next week, you couldorganise a purchase order, or an e-mail confirming thecommissioning of the work as per our proposal.

kind regards

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: www.candhs.comte1ephone:.email: [email protected]

On 25 September 201409:52, Capron, Harry<[email protected]> wrote:

Good morning

Harry Capron hasaskedme to explain that the Financesub-groupearlier this week was cancelled and he is having to seekapproval viaemail. Harry has received no objections to date.

Kind regards

Lynne

LynneReid

Admin Officer

Better Together - Transformation Programme

[email protected]

~: 01305224313 or 7104313

4

From: Russell Thompson [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: 10 September 201413:11To: Capron, HarryCc: Jon Manzoni; Mike WalshSubject: Pan Dorset LATC proposal

Hello Harry,

As we discussed the other week, I have attached our CHSproposal for the high level business case for the Pan DorsetLATC.

If you have any questions or need clarification, please do nothesitate to contact me.

I am due down in Dorchester on Monday 15th September foran overview committee at lOam, so maybe we could catch upthen if you want.

kind regards

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)

Director Care and Health Solutions Ltd

Director Thompson Meredith Associates Ltd

. __:W__:_::_eb=site:www.candhs.com

telephone:


5

"This e-mail is intended for the named addressee(s) only andmay contain information about individuals or other sensitiveinformation and should be handled accordingly. Unless you arethe named addressee (or authorised to receive it for theaddressee) you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyoneelse. If you have received this email in error, kindly disregardthe content ofthe message and notify the sender immediately.Please be aware that all email may be subject to recordingand/or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation."

6

Rook, Phil J.

From:Sent:To:Cc:Subject:Attachments:

Andy Sharp <[email protected]>28 October 2014 09:33RussellThompsonJanePortman; Phil Hornsby; Rook, PhilJ.;Sally-AnnWebbFW:Firstdraft PanDorset LATCBCPanDorset BusCase VO.9.docx

Hi Russell,

Thanks for sending this through, I've now had a chance to read it and it seemsto hit the right buttons from theperspective of structure, I do have a few concerns and questions though pleasethat we either need to discuss orperhaps can be picked up by adjustments to the draft:

• I think we need to be clear that we are considering the possibility of new businessbeing delivered by newstaff on different terms and conditions

• I can't see (sorry if I missed it) reference to harmonising terms and conditions for the three staff groups, thisneeds to be explicit and up front

• On page7 there is reference to BBCand BoPjoining an already established DCCLATC,I think both myselfand Phil Hwere clear at our meeting that this isn't an option, can this be amended please

• On page 12 in the staffing structure I'm not at all comfortable with the figures quoted, they seem far toohigh, I would have assumedAD level for DCCrate to be used for the MD (I'm guessing£90K+) and the FDatmore like (£80+), I might be wrong but I can't seeour members accepting a salary structure starting at£120K for the MD

• Could you clarify the staffing cost apportionment for the board on page 14 please, is this suggesting BCCwould have to pay £90K on top of our existing costs associated with our current management structure?

• Not sure where best to place this but I didn't see any reference to actuarial strain associated with pension,who is covering the cost of this pleaseas it could run into the hundreds of thousands?

• The finance tables have me lost I'm afraid, they need to be expressed in a single form if possible, I wouldalso like some clarification on the costings, there is reference to the 1%contract reduction but this isn'treflected in the figures on page 25

• Profit levels seem to be different in parts of the paper could this be clarified please, at one point it talksabout £12M income and in another it suggestsan £8.3M benefit over five years across the three LAsbut inthe profit and loss the net position appears to be much lower and only just making a million at year 5, thatwould only give BBCan income of £187,000 from profit share compared to £300,000 at year five if we weregoing BBConly - have I misunderstood this?

• There is reference to competitive processaround support serviceswith a cost of £100,000 to the LATC,Ithought we were looking at a closed competition between the servicessupporting BBCand the DCCservices?Canthis not be achieved?

1

Many thanks,

Andy

Andrew Sharp,ServiceDirector, Adult SocialCare

Tel: 01202 458707Mobile'l i[email protected]

BuHding a Better Bournemouth

From: Russell Thompson [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: 26 October 2014 19:55To: Andy Sharp; Phil Rook.; Phil HornsbyCc: Jon ManzoniSubject: First draft Pan Dorset LATC BC

Hi All,

First draft attached.

Exec summary and amendments to be done by the end of this week

kind regards

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: www.candhs.com


This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.c1oudservice.For more information please visit http://www.symantecc1oud.com


2

Rook, Phil J.


Phil Hornsby <[email protected]>31 October 2014 07:08Russell ThompsonAndy Sharp; Jane Portman; Rook, Phil J.; Sally-Ann Webb; Jonathan O'ConnellRe: First draft Pan Dorset LATC BC

Hi Russell,I'm on leave this week and have only had the chance to quickly read through. Afraid I'm in no position tocomment until early next week but think Andy's comments make sense and Phil' points about staff andpensions also mirror my own thoughts.

Thanks

Phil

Phil Hornsby. lead of Commissioning & Improvement - People Services..Borough of Poole, Civic Centre, BH15 2RU

Tel: 01202 261030Email: [email protected]

Sent from my iPad

On 30 Oct 2014, at 10:39, Russell Thompson <[email protected]>wrote:

Hello All,

I will be responding to Andy's comments etc later this morning.

I will return his emailed comments with my responses which will be either confirmation thatI have amended the BC or I will offer additional comments and views.

I would be grateful that anyone else who has comments that they wish me to take account of,please send them over today so that I have a full set of views to be able to respond to.

kind regards

Russell Thompson BA (Hons). ._.~.._. Director.Care.and.Health.Solutions Ltd .

Director Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: www.candhs.comtelephone:email: [email protected]

1

On 28 October 201409:33, Andy Sharp <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Russell,

Thanks for sending this through, I've now had a chance to read it and it seemsto hit the rightbuttons from the perspective of structure, I do have a few concerns and questions though pleasethat we either need to discussor perhaps can be picked up by adjustments to the draft:

• I think we need to be clear that we are considering the possibility of new businessbeingdelivered by new staff on different terms and conditions

• I can't see (sorry if I missed it) reference to harmonising terms and conditions for the three staffgroups, this needs to be explicit and up front

• On page7 there is reference to BBCand BoPjoining an already established DCCLATC,I thinkboth myself and Phil Hwere clear at our meeting that this isn't an option, can this be amendedplease

• On page 12 in the staffing structure I'm not at all comfortable with the figures quoted, theyseem far too high, I would have assumedAD level for DCCrate to be used for the MD (I'm guessing£90K+)and the FDat more like (£80+), I might be wrong but I can't see our members accepting asalary structure starting at £120K for the MD

• Could you clarify the staffing cost apportionment for the board on page 14 please, is thissuggesting BCCwould have to pay £90Kon top of our existing costs associated with our currentmanagement structure?

• Not sure where best to place this but I didn't seeany reference to actuarial strain associatedwith pension, who is covering the cost of this pleaseas it could run into the hundreds ofthousands?

• The finance tables have me lost I'm afraid, they need to be expressed in a single form ifpossible, I would also like some clarification on the costings, there is reference to the 1%contractreduction but this isn't reflected in the figures on page 25

• Profit levels seem to be different in parts of the paper could this be clarified please, at onepoint it talks about £12M income and in another it suggestsan £8.3M benefit over five years acrossthe three LAsbut in the profit and lossthe net position appears to be much lower and only justmaking a million at year 5, that would only give BBCan income of £187,000 from profit sharecompared to £300,000 at year five if we were going BBConly - have I misunderstood this?

• There is reference to competitive processaround support serviceswith a cost of £100,000 tothe LATC,I thought we were looking at a closed competition between the servicessupporting BBC

__ --'a"'-'ndthe DCCservices?Canthis not be achieved?

Many thanks,

2

Andy

Andrew Sharp,

Service Director, Adult Social Care

Bournemouth Borough Council

Tel: 01202 458707

Mobile:

[email protected]

<image001.jpg>

From: RussellThompson [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: 26 October 2014 19:55To: Andy Sharp; Phil Rook.; Phil HornsbyCc: Jon ManzoniSubject: First draft Pan Dorset LATCBC

Hi All,



kind regards

------------------'--------_._----

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)

3

Director Care and Health Solutions Ltd

Director Thompson Meredith Associates Ltd

Website: www.candhs.com

telephone


This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com

**********************************************************************This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential andintended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom theyare addressed. If you have received this email in error please notifythe systemmanager.



**********************************************************************

DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally privileged andprotected in law and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. The copyrightin all documentation is the property of the Borough of Poole and this email and any documentation must notbe copied or used other than as strictly necessary for the purpose of this email, without prior written consentwhich may be subject to conditions. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and donot necessarily represent those of the Borough of Poole. The Borough of Poole reserves the right to inspectincoming and outgoing emails. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender by returnand confirm that its contents have been destroyed. Telephone enquiries should be directed to the Boroughswitchboard on 01202 633633.'This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone inpartnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call

________ypur organisations IT Helpd_e_sk_.-----,_Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored aridlor recorde(ff{)fiegal purposes.-------

4

Rook, Phil J.


Russell Thompson <[email protected]>31 October 2014 10:43Andy Sharp; Rook, Phil J.; Phil Hornsby; Webb, Sally-AnnJon ManzoniAmended Pan Dorset BCPan Dorset Bus Case V1.0.docx; Responses to Pan Dorset LATC BCVersion 0.9.docx

Hello All,

I have revised the attached BC to reflect the comments from you all.

i have increased the turnover ambitions to reflect the synergies of the PDL and that has increased the netbenefit to be shared.

I have deliberately not completed the Exec Summary, this 'iwill do when the full version is much closer toacceptance.

{have copied your e-mailed comments on to a word document (attachd) and I have added my commentsand actions.

We have a meeting set up for next Wednesday so I would appreciate final comments and amendments etcby COP Monday next week so that I can start the Exec Summary for the meeting next week.

Please pass on to your respective Directors as you feel appropriate.

have a good weekend


~ This email was scanne~_Qythe Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone inpartnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 200910910052.) In case of problems, please callyour organisations IT Helpdesk.Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored andlor recorded for legal purposes.

1

Rook, Phil J.


Russell Thompson <[email protected]>01 November 2014 18:39Andy Sharp; Rook, Phil J.; Phil HornsbyJon ManzoniFwd: First draft Pan Dorset LATC BCPan Dorset Bus Case VO.9.docx

Hello All,

I have realised that the section on the sharing of the net benefits (Sect 6.1.5) is too simplistic and needsreworking, which I will do tomorrow, and send on when ready.

kind regards

·····~_ussellThompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: www.candhs.comtelephone:email: [email protected]

---------- Forwarded message ----------From: Russell Thompson <[email protected]>Date: 26 October 201419:54Subject: First draft Pan Dorset LATC BCTo: Andy Sharp <[email protected]>, "Phil Rook." <[email protected]>, PhilHornsby <[email protected]>

Jon Manzoni <[email protected]>

Hi All,



kind regards

-~---~ Russeutl1ompson-BA THonsr---·----Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: www.candhs.comtelephoneemail: [email protected]

1


2

Rook, Phil J.


Russell Thompson <[email protected]>02 November 2014 17:28Andy Sharp; Rook, Phil J.; Phil HornsbyJon Manzoni; Webb, Sally-AnnAmended Pan Dorset LATC BCPan Dorset Bus Case Vl.l.docx

Hello All

Please find attached the latest version of the PDL Bus Case.

This includes the promised amendments in relation to sharing of the financial benefits. in section 6.1.5.

kind regards

"\Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: www.candhs.comtelephone:email: [email protected]


1

Rook, Phil J.

Subject:

Webb, Sally-Ann06 November 2014 09:05'Andy Sharp ([email protected])'; Rook,Phil J.; 'Phil Hornsby';'[email protected]'; Cutler, NatashaRE:PanDorset LATC

From:Sent:To:

Dear AllPhil is unable to rearrange for 20th so we'll need to make this the following week. I'm organising a booked call withAndy for an update on the evaluation meeting and will get a messageto you about this.Still welcome comments on next stage etc.

Natasha - can you try and book mtg for following week please.thanksSally-AnnWebbProgramme ManagerBetter Together PartnershipTel: 01305 228555

From: Webb, Sally-AnnSent: 05 November 2014 15:37To: 'Andy Sharp ([email protected]),; Rook, Phil J.; 'Phil Hornsby'; '[email protected]'Subject: PanDorset LATe

Hi everyoneI've had a quick look at dates following Bmth evaluation panel 18 Nov.Dates are limited bearing in mind requirements to have any amendments to the businesscase in time for yourreporting deadlines. Everyoneexcept Phil H can make 11 - Ipm Thurs 20 Nov somewhere in Bmth probably (beforeProg Bd that pm). Phil HSorry to be a nuisance but is there any chance you can rearrange things to come alongplease as there is no other time that suits people that week.

A couple of things and questions we need to think about which probably need including in the businesscaseare• how the next stage (implementation) will be funded• the level of resources required. Russelldo you have any indicative info on this please?• how it will be project managed? eg using Better Together PMO and using H& Csolutions expertise in the

implementation.• how the next stage will be commissioned and procurement considerations

At our next meeting we probably also need to think about communications and an engagement strategy, what eachpartner will need to do and what can be done centrally.

Grateful for your thoughts.

RegardsWebb

Programme ManagerBetter Together PartnershipTel: 01305 228555

1

Rook, Phil J.


Russell Thompson <[email protected]>06 November 2014 18:18Anna Fresolone; Jo Collis-Heavens; Rook, Phil J.Andy Sharp; Phil HornsbyComparative pay rates

Hello all,

In a recent pan Dorset LATC meeting it was decided that we needed to be able to understand theimplications of harmonising pay rates in the Pan Dorset LATC (PDL).

So as a straw poll we decided to look at the pay rates for the following:-

Newly qualified day services support worker- hourly rate and annual leave entitlement (ignoring statutorydays)

\Jewly qualified reablement worker - hourly rate and annual holiday entitlement.

We are asking about newly qualified so that the rates are not distorted by experience and seniority whichwould push the rate up and undermine the comparison.

If you need clarification please e-mail questions to all of us , and I will reply to all.

Could do with the answer tomorrow (Friday)

Sorry

kind regards

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions Ltd

{ )irector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: www.candhs.comtelephone:email: [email protected]

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone inpartnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please callyour organisations IT Helpdesk.Q2!11Q!yg!(;(lJ:L()!1~~t(l_!h~Q§i_~(lYQ~ (ll.!!21B(l!i£(llJY_12gg~~l!l:()gi!()r_~~(lI1~lg~E~~()_~_~_~~J()El~_g_(;l!J~)':l!P()~~_s:

1

Rook, Phil J.


Russell Thompson <[email protected]>06 November 2014 19:23Rook, Phil J.new PDL NumbersSummary Financials PDL vO.3.xlsx

Hi Phil,

As you are the only accountant in the three wise men I have sent you the workings and the results of thechanges which are:-

MD down to £lOOksalaryFD down to £80kBDD down to £70k

Contract prices for BBC and BoP down by 1% year on year from year 3"'\bcc contract price down by 1% from year 3

call me anytime when you see these for a review

speak tomorrow

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: www.candhs.comtelephone>email: [email protected]


1

Rook, Phil J.


Russell Thompson <[email protected]>07 November 2014 07:12Webb, Sally-AnnAndy Sharp ([email protected]); Rook, Phil J.; Phil HornsbyRe: Pan Dorset LATC

Hello All,

My comments to Sally-Ann's questions are below

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions Ltd

I yirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite:www.candhs.comtelephone:email: [email protected]

On 5 November 2014 15:37,Webb, Sally-Ann <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi everyone

I've had a quick look at dates following Bmth evaluation panel 18Nov.

Dates are limited bearing in mind requirements to have any amendments to the business case in time foryour reporting deadlines. Everyone except Phil H can make 11 - 1pm Thurs 20 Nov somewhere in Bmthnrobably (before Prog Bd that pm). Phil H Sorry to be a nuisance but is there any chance you can rearrangellings to come along please as there is no other time that suits people that week.

A couple of things and questions we need to think about which probably need including in the business caseare

• how the next stage (implementation) will be funded

Typically each authority would have to fund its own implementation costs for its own single LATC. Sotheoretically BBC and BoP would pay their share of their implementation costs. There is a possibility that

~~~~~~_,~~.theJegaLan(Lothedssues_D£theiripartite_.agre.ements_will.l.ld_.1akeJllQ_re_Jimeand.ex,J2~J1is(Lth~Jla sillg1L~_~,__ ~__~__LATC would, so there would be additional joint costs. These may be attributable and fundable by BetterTogether

• the level of resources required. Russell do you have any indicative info on this please?

1

DCC have 4 days support and advice and one day project management per week from CHS, I would thinkthe same would be needed ifBoumemouth and Poole were integrated simultaneously. IfBBC start withDCC in July and Poole follow later then 4 days per week should be enough. For Poole on their own 2 daysplus project management of 1 day if it is required

• how it will be project managed? eg using Better Together PMO and using H & C solutions expertisein the implementation.

I would see the BT PMO supporting the implementations and reporting back to the BT Board. We wouldbe delighted to be invited to support the implementation

• how the next stage will be commissioned and procurement considerations

This is not my area

At our next meeting we probably also need to think about communications and an engagement strategy,what each partner will need to do and what can be done centrally.

Grateful for your thoughts.

Regards

Sally-Ann Webb

Programme Manager

Better Together Partnership

Tel: 01305 228555

"This e-mail is intended for the named addressee(s) only and may contain information about individuals orother sensitive information and should be handled accordingly. Unless you are the named addressee (orauthorised to receive it for the addressee) you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If youhave received this email in error, kindly disregard the content of the message and notify the senderimmediately. Please be aware that all email may be subject to recording and/or monitoring in accordancewith relevant legislation."

~~-~---~Tliis·effim:rWasscann:eaD)nliInJovemment-Secure-tfftral1enfITti=virus-geTVice·-supphediJyVodaforre-irr-~--""-·"partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please callyour organisations IT Helpdesk.Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

2

Rook, Phil J.


Russell Thompson <[email protected]>07 November 2014 07:36Phil HornsbyWebb, Sally-Ann; Andy Sharp ([email protected]); Rook, Phil J.Re: LATe notes

Thanks Phil,

I will action these comments and amendments today.

I expect a new version with amended numbers as we agreed to be available either COP today or over theweekend.

kind regards

'1 _

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: www.candhs.com


On 7 November 2014 07:30, Phil Hornsby <[email protected]> wrote:Hi Russell, et aI,Having reviewed the BC fully I would make the following comments/suggestions in addition to thosediscussed and agreed when we met on Wednesday:

. Reneralcomment of the need to use BoP throughout the document rather than PBC please

PI0 - bullet point on Partnerships gives example of LATC providing back office functions to third sectorwhen we are proposing that back office functions will be provided by DCC or Mouchel. Suggest we removethe example or insert a different one.

Consistency of figures used - p14 turnover stated as 'over £38m', p15 states turnover 'over £40m', p41 'as a£36.6 million business' - we need to land on a figure and stick with it throughout the document as this is thekind of thing some members will focus on if they think there is a lack of consistency.

1

P13 - penultimate para - add Poole on second line.

P 16 - 4.2.4 - last para - not sure this is correct as we are saying there will be 2 support services but thenrefer to Poole providing support services. Shouldn't this reflect that either Dorset or Mouchel will providethis under the POL?

P20 - 3rd bullet point - voting rights - last sentence says shareholding would be equal amongst threeauthorities when this is not the case.

P22 - 5.4 - 3rd bullet points - add 'outcomes and'.to 'outputs expected of services'

P39 -Pathways to care - not a good example to use as it does not reflect the actual position we will be inregarding reablement services - suggest removing.

Sorry but having to rush the email. Overall I think this is a good piece of work and helpful.

Thanks

Phil

Phil HornsbyHead of Commissioning & Improvement - People ServicesBorough of Poole, Civic Centre, BH15 2RU

Tel: 01202 261030Email: [email protected]

Sent from my iPad

On 6 Nov 2014, at 16:53,Webb, Sally-Ann <[email protected]>wrote:

Please find notes attached from the meeting yesterday.

"This e-mail is intended for the named addressee(s) only and may contain information aboutindividuals or other sensitive information and should be handled accordingly. Unless you arethe named addressee (or authorised to receive it for the addressee) you may not copy or useit, or disclose it to anyone else. If you have received this email in error, kindly disregard thecontent of the message and notify the sender immediately. Please be aware that all email maybe subject to recording and/or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation."<Notes 11 July 2014.doc>

DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally privileged andprotected in law and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. The copyrightin all documentation is the property of the Borough of Poole and this email and any documentation must notbe copied or used other than as strictly necessary for the purpose of this email, without prior written consentwhich may be subject to conditions. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and donot necessarily represent those of the Borough of Poole. The Borough of Poole reserves the right to inspectincoming and outgoing emails. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender by returnand confirm that its contents have been destroyed. Telephone enquiries should be directed to the Boroughswitchboard on 01202 633633.'


2

Rook, Phil J.


Russell Thompson <[email protected]>07 November 2014 07:57Phil HornsbyWebb, Sally-Ann; Andy Sharp ([email protected]); Rook, Phil J.Re: LATC notes

Hi Phil,

My comments and actions on your e-mail are below, further comments and suggestions would be welcome

kind regards

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions Ltd\>irectorThompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite:www.candhs.comtelephone:email: [email protected]

On 7 November 201407:30, Phil Hornsby <[email protected]> wrote:Hi Russell, et al,Having reviewed the BC fully I would make the following comments/suggestions in addition to thosediscussed and agreed when we met on Wednesday:

General comment of the need to use BoP throughout the document rather than PBC please WILL DO

PI0 - bullet point on Partnerships gives example of LATC providing back office functions to third sectorwhen we are proposing that back office functions will be provided by DCC or Mouchel. Suggest we remove

I, }le example or insert a different one. DONE

Consistency of figures used - p14 turnover stated as 'over £38m', p15 states turnover 'over £40m', p41 'as a£36.6 million business' - we need to land on a figure and stick with it throughout the document as this is thekind of thing some members will focus on if they think there is a lack of consistency. WILL DO WITHFINAL NUMBERS

P13 - penultimate para - add Poole on second line. DONE

P 16 - 4.2.4 - last para - not sure this is correct as we are saying there will be 2 support services but thenrefer to Poole providing support services. Shouldn't this reflect that either Dorset or Mouchel will provide

. .~~..Jhis...und_eIJ:lle_PJ2L?.AME_N.J)_EQ .~ .. .. .__._.._~ _._ _ _..__. __ .__ _._..__.._.._ ~_..

P20 - 3rd bullet point - voting rights - last sentence says shareholding would be equal amongst threeauthorities when this is not the case. NOT CHANGED AS WE ARE PROPOSING THAT THE ACTUALSHARES IN THE PDL ARE THE SAME FOR EACH AUTHORITY. THE SHAREHOLDERS'AGREEMENT WILL REGULATE THE VOTING RIGHTS AND POWERS, NOT THESHAREHOLDING. OTHERWISE EVERY TIME WE CHANGED THE VOTING %S WE WOULD

1

HAVE TO TRANSFER SOME SHARES FROM ONE AUTHORITY TO ANOTHER TO REFLECT THE%S.

P22 - 5.4 - 3rd bullet points - add 'outcomes and'.to 'outputs expected of services' DONE

P39 -Pathways to care - not a good example to use as it does not reflect the actual position we will be inregarding reablement services - suggest removing. I WOULD PREFER TO REVISE THE PARABECAUSE THIS SUBJECT IS HIGH ON PEOPLES AGENDA AT THE MOMENT AND I THINK ITSHOULD BE MENTIONED SOMEHOW.

SO PLEASE SEND ME SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS/REVISIONS TODAY


Thanks

Phil

Phil HornsbyHead of Commissioning & Improvement - People ServicesBorough of Poole, Civic Centre, BH15 2RU

Tel: 01202261030Email: [email protected]

Sent frommy iPad

On 6 Nov 2014, at 16:53,Webb, Sally-Ann <[email protected]>wrote:


"This e-mail is intended for the named addressee(s) only and may contain information aboutindividuals or other sensitive information and should be handled accordingly. Unless youare the named addressee (or authorised to receive it for the addressee) you may not copy oruse it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you have received this email in error, kindly disregardthe content of the message and notify the sender immediately. Please be aware that all emailmay be subject to recording and/or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation."<Notes 11 July 2014.doc>

DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally privileged andprotected in law and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. The

.~_~._.--COp¥rightin.alLdocumentatiOll.isthe_PIQP.er:ty__oJthe.Borough oi.pocle andJhi$ email and a11Y__ .~_.~ __._ .....~_documentation must not be copied or used other than as strictly necessary for the purpose of this email,without prior written consent which may be subject to conditions. Any view or opinions presented aresolely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Borough of Poole. The Borough ofPoole reserves the right to inspect incoming and outgoing emails. If you have received this email in error

2

please contact the sender by return and confirm that its contents have been destroyed. Telephone enquiriesshould be directed to the Borough switchboard on 01202 633633.'


3

Rook. Phil J.


Elliott, Tony07 November 2014 11:38'RussellThompson' ([email protected])Rook,Phil J.; Garrett,AlisonFW:Comparative pay ratesPanDorset LATC- Comparitive PayRatesDCC.xlsx

Hi Russell,

Pleasesee attached asfirst draft. I have not included Admin, Casualsor Kitchen staff. Let me know if you needthese too?Reablement - Community Support Workers have 3 types of contract:

A Contract - AM only, starting @scpllBContract - PM only, starting @scp12CContract - Both of above, so are paid scp11 for AM working & scp12 for PMworking

"egards

Tony

............................................................................Tony ElliottAccountant (Adult & Community Servicesand Better Together Programme)Corporate ResourcesDirect Dial- (01305) 224565email - [email protected]

From: Rook, Phil J.Sent: 07 November 2014 08:59To: Elliott, Tony; Garrett, AlisonSubject: FW: Comparative pay rates

"'leasecomplete11

Phil RookGroup FinanceManager - Adult and Community Servicesand Public HealthChief Executive'sDepartmentDorset County CouncilDirect Dial: (01305) 225131

From: RussellThompson [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: 06 November 2014 18:18To: Anna Fresolone; Jo Collis-Heavens;Rook, Phil J.Cc: Andy Sharp; Phil HornsbySubject: Comparative pay rates

Hello all,

In a recent pan Dorset LATC meeting it was decided that we needed to be able to understand theimplications of harmonising pay rates in the Pan Dorset LATC (PDL).

1

So as a straw poll we decided to look at the pay rates for the following:-

Newly qualified day services support worker- hourly rate and annual leave entitlement (ignoring statutorydays)

Newly qualified reablement worker - hourly rate and annual holiday entitlement.

Weare asking about newly qualified so that the rates are not distorted by experience and seniority whichwould push the rate up and undermine the comparison.

If you need clarification please e-mail questions to all of us , and I will reply to all.

Could do with the answer tomorrow (Friday)

Sorry

kind regards

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite:telephone;email: [email protected]

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone inpartnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please callyour organisations ITHelpdesk.Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

2

Rook, Phil J.


Phil Hornsby < [email protected]>07 November 2014 14:26'Russell Thompson'Webb, Sally-Ann; Andy Sharp ([email protected]); Rook, Phil J.RE:LATC notes

Hi Russell,Thanks for coming back so quickly and for explaining the shares element, which I hadn'tunderstood properly before now.

On the pathways to care para, I've looked at how it might be re-worded but I'm unable to write it ina way that doesn't complete destroy what you are trying to portray. The reality is there will still be2 reablement services (the POL one and Poole's) and it is difficult to revise the para to reflect thisand still hold it up as a good example.

Sorry, but I can't agree to this remaining in in its current form.! '%

fhanks

Phil

Phil HornsbyService Unit HeadCommissioning and Improvement - People ServicesT: 01202261030e: [email protected] of Poole ICivic Centre IPoole BH15 2RU

From: ...RusseIiThompson [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: 07 November 2014 07:57To: Phil HornsbyCc: Webb, Sally-Ann; Andy Sharp ([email protected]); Rook, Phil J.Subject: Re: LATe notes

Phil,

My comments and actions on your e-mail are below, further comments and suggestions would be welcome

kind regards

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates Ltd

telephone~9email: [email protected]

1

On 7 November 2014 07:30, Phil Hornsby <[email protected]> wrote:Hi Russell, et aI,Having reviewed the BC fully I would make the following comments/suggestions in addition to thosediscussed and agreed when we met on Wednesday:

General comment of the need to use BoP throughout the document rather than PBC please WILL DO

PI0 - bullet point on Partnerships gives example of LATC providing back office functions to third sectorwhen we are proposing that back office functions will be provided by DCC or Mouchel. Suggest we removethe example or insert a different one. DONE

Consistency of figures used - p14 turnover stated as 'over £38m', pIS states turnover 'over £40m', p41 'as a£36.6 million business' - we need to land on a figure and stick with it throughout the document as this is thekind of thing some members will focus on ifthey think there is a lack of consistency. WILL DO WITHFINAL NUMBERS

P13 - penultimate para - add Poole on second line. DONE

P 16 - 4.2.4 - last para - not sure this is correct as we are saying there will be 2 support services but thenrefer to Poole providing support services. Shouldn't this reflect that either Dorset or Mouchel will providethis under the PDL? AMENDED

P20 - 3rd bullet point - voting rights - last sentence says shareholding would be equal amongst threeauthorities when this is not the case. NOT CHANGED AS WE ARE PROPOSING THAT THE ACTUALSHARES IN THE PDL ARE THE SAME FOR EACH AUTHORITY. THE SHAREHOLDERS'AGREEMENT WILL REGULATE THE VOTING RIGHTS AND POWERS, NOT THESHAREHOLDING. OTHERWISE EVERY TIME WE CHANGED THE VOTING %S WE WOULDHAVE TO TRANSFER SOME SHARES FROM ONE AUTHORITY TO ANOTHER TO REFLECT THE%S.

P22 - 5.4 - 3rd bullet points - add 'outcomes and'.to 'outputs expected of services' DONE

P39 -Pathways to care - not a good example to use as it does not reflect the actual position we will be inregarding reablement services - suggest removing. I WOULD PREFER TO REVISE THE PARABECAUSE THIS SUBJECT IS HIGH ON PEOPLES AGENDA AT THE MOMENT AND I THINK ITSHOULD BE MENTIONED SOMEHOW.

SO PLEASE SEND ME SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS/REVISIONS TODAY


Thanks

Phil

Phil HornsbyHead of Commissioning & Improvement - People ServicesBorough of Poole, Civic Centre, BHl5 2RU

Tel: 01202 2610302

: Email: [email protected]

Sent from my iPad

On 6 Nov 2014, at 16:53, Webb, Sally-Ann <[email protected]> wrote:


"This e-mail is intended for the named addressee(s) only and may contain information aboutindividuals or other sensitive information and should be handled accordingly. Unless youare the named addressee (or authorised to receive it for the addressee) you may not copy oruse it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you have received this email in error, kindly disregardthe content of the message and notify the sender immediately. Please be aware that all emailmay be subject to recording andlor monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation."

<Notes 11 July 2014.doc>'pIS CLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally privileged and

I protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Thecopyright in all documentation is the property of the Borough of Poole and this email and anydocumentation must not be copied or used other than as strictly necessary for the purpose of this email,without prior written consent which may be subject to conditions. Any view or opinions presented are

I solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Borough of Poole. The Borough ofPoole reserves the right to inspect incoming and outgoing emails. If you have received this email in errorplease contact the sender by return and confirm that its contents have been destroyed. Telephone enquiriesshould be directed to the Borough switchboard on 01202 633633.'

DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally privileged andprotected in law and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. The copyrightinaIldocumenfationislhepropenyoflhe··BOfolighof·Pooleandthisemailandany··uocumentationmustnotbe copied or used other than as strictly necessary for the purpose of this email, without prior written consentwhich may be subject to conditions. Any view or opinions presented are solely those ofthe author and donot necessarily represent those of the Borough of Poole. The Borough of Poole reserves the right to inspect

( jcoming and outgoing emails. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender by return. {nd confirm that its contents have been destroyed. Telephone enquiries should be directed to the Boroughswitchboard on 01202 633633.'This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone inpartnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 200910910052.) In case of problems, please callyour organisations IT Helpdesk.Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored andlor recorded for legal purposes.

3

Rook, Phil J.


Russell Thompson <[email protected]>09 November 2014 18:41Andy Sharp; Rook, Phil J.; Phil Hornsby; Webb, Sally-Ann; Jon ManzoniPan Dorset LATCPan Dorset Bus Case V1.3.docx; PDL Board and Support Svs Costs l.l.xls; SummaryFinancials PDLvO.3.xlsx

Hello All,

please find latest version with exec summary.

track changes are on, but I suggest you tum it off for reviewing the exec summary.

have not changed the pathways paragraph that Phil H has asked to revise.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.'o)

Kindregards


This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone inpartnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call

(. Jour organisations IT Helpdesk.Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored andlor recorded for legal purposes.

1

Rook, Phil J.


RussellThompson <[email protected]>21 November 2014 15:37Andy Sharp;Rook,Phil J.; Phil Hornsby;Webb, Sally-AnnRe:Evaluation issuesPanDorset BusCase V1.5.docx

Follow Up Flag:Flag Status:

Follow upFlagged

Hi Andy and All

My comments and suggestions are below against your questions.

I have also attached a version 1.5with track changes as per my comments below.

Unless Ireceive additional requests for changes over the weekend, or changes to my amendments from'\iday, this version will be reviewed at our next meeting on Wed 26th.

y

kind regards

Russell Thompson BA (Hons)Director Care and Health Solutions LtdDirector Thompson Meredith Associates LtdWebsite: wtelephone:

.... ~._~mail:[email protected]_

21 November 201410:47, Andy Sharp <[email protected]> wrote:Hi Russell,

We had our evaluation of the two FBCsthis week and have been unable to reach a final decision based on a numberof questions that our Members require clarification on. Someof the issuesrelate to information that they wantedsome further detail on around the modelling.

Would you be able to let me have a response to the following questions by lOpm on Tuesday please aswe will bemeeting again to conclude the evaluation at this point:

Are we able to state in the FBCfor both models that Ts and Csfor new staff will be at market rate rather thancouncil rates and that accessto the LGPSwill not be provided.TntheBourrieinouthandpanDorserFBC·s~thebusifiess·caseisNOTpredicatedonllew·staffbeingolldifferent Ts & Cs for new services. So new staff recruited for existing services will be on same TUPE Ts &Cs. However, the FBCs do not explicitly prevent the LATCs from starting new services with new staff onnew Ts &Cs. So if the Exec team of the LATC puts forward a Bus Case for a new service with new Ts &Cs, the Exec Shareholder Group would be presented with the option and then vote on it, like it would forany other opportunity. This would not be a reserved matter, so a simple majority would win the day.

1

So far, the reserved matter is the changing of existing staffs Ts and Cs.

Are we able to give an estimate of unit cost charge to self funders for both models in order to test competitiveposition in the market?The short answer is No. we have not done this comparison for the following reasons:1)The competition in the market place does not provide the quality of care that is provided by the Councilservices. Part of the marketing strategy would be position the Co as a high quality provider that does notcompete with the lower end of the market, thus commanding a higher price.2) Some services do not have direct competition in the market place - such as Reablement making thecomparison difficult3)The unit cost calculation if it included the support services and rent costs would be expensive compared tothe market, even for like for like services. If the company took the view that the Council contracts paid forall or most of the fixed overheads, the new business could be costed on a marginal basis, making the unitcost significantly lower. This decision is one for the new exec team and the ESG when the new incomestrategies have been formulated and the best markets identified.

Canwe explicitly state that in the PanDorset model that an external tender for support serviceswon't be requiredand the company can restrict the consideration to Bournemouth and Dorset support services?This is a specific procurement question that needs expert advice. Can you ask for advice from yourprocurement team, and I will ask Phil Rook to do the same? Unless we can agree that it is possible, I suggestthe best we can do is change the wording in sections 4.2.4 and 6.1.2 to reflect the fact that we will follow alJ·relevant procurement rules to provide the best outcome for the PDL. I HAVE MADE THIS CHANGE .

Canwe clarify the mechanism for dealing with any financial lossmade by the pan Dorset company?The mechanism is the same as for the sharing of profits. I HAVE AMENDED SECTION 6.1.4

Canthe Bournemouth profit and loss figures be checked pleaseas the contract taper figures don't appear to becorrect?I will check the single Boumemouth model and amend it to show a reduced contract price, then reissue theBoumemouth only FBC to yourself.

Many thanks,

Andy


**********************************************************************This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential andintended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom theyare addressed. If you have received this email in error please notifythe system manager.



**********************************************************************

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone inpartnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009109/0052.) In case of problems, please call

2

your organisations IT Helpdesk.Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

3

Rook, Phil J.

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Holtom, Sandy L.25 November 2014 09:47Rook, Phil J.VERYURGENT: LATe

Phil

Please see emails below. Please can you let me know about the response.

Many thanks

Sandy HoltomPA to Director for Adult and Community Servicesl~el01305 224317J

From: Kathy Bartlett [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: 25 November 2014 09:40To: Holtom, Sandy L.Subject: FW: LATe

Hi Sandy

Please see below - can you please let me know whether we will received a response to this request by 10.00 a.m.

this morning?

Thanks.

Kathy BartlettPA to Jane Portman, Executive Director Adults & Children and Deputy Chief Executive

Building a Better Bournemouth

Bournemouth Borough CouncilRoom 44a, First FloorTown HallBourne AvenueBournemouthBH26DY

Tel: 01202456104

DCFollow us on social mediabournemouth.gov.uk

1

From: Kathy BartlettSent: 21 November 2014 08:55To: 'Rook, Phil J.'; '[email protected]'Subject: FW: LATC

From: Kathy Bartlett On Behalf Of Jane PortmanSent: 21 November 2014 08:50To: Driscoll, catherine; '[email protected]'Cc: Jan Thurgood; 'Phil Hornsby'; Andy SharpSubject: LATC

Dear Catherine and Phil

Thank you both very much for your extensive time yesterday to discussthe preliminary outcomes of BournemouthBorough Council's evaluation panel regarding the Pan-Dorset LATCproposals. I am very appreciative of your timeand due considerations of the issuesI have been asked to raisewith you by our Elected Members. Aswe agreed, Inow formally request a response by 10 am on Tuesday to the following two questions, following discussionswithyour Elected Members.

1. To what extent is Dorset County Council committed to a commercial approach to be adopted by the PanDorset LATCspecifically in relation to income generation through pro-actively seeking new businessopportunities in order to maximise profit to the benefit of all parties? It is very important to Bournemouth'sElectedMembers to know that Dorset County Council share the ambitions of Bournemouth Borough Councilto have a pro-active approach to commercial trading and income generation.

2. Bournemouth Borough Council's ElectedMembers find the draft proposals regarding the governance ofPan-Dorset LATCunacceptable. Specifically, the proposals are

• membership of the ExecutiveShareholder Group (ESG)being a 5:3:2 split [D:B:P]• the chair of the ESGhasa vote in the event of a tied vote.

Our strongly preferred model is a 2:2:2 split, to better reflect a partnership relationship towards the jointLATC,which would build on and consolidate our very successfulpartnership arrangements regarding PublicHealth. Bournemouth's ElectedMembers would have much confidence in supporting the Pan-Dorset LATCif this were to be the proposed governance arrangements.

I am grateful that you have agreed to provide a formal response to these issuesby our agreed deadline, which willenable Bournemouth Borough Council's evaluation panel to conclude their work on Tuesday. Officers will thenprepare their recommendations to go before our Health and Adult SocialCareOverview and Scrutiny Panelwhichmeets on 4 December, which will consider the proposals and present their recommendations to the Council'sCabinet meeting on 17 December for a final decision.

Once again, thank you in advance for your due consideration of these issues.

With best wishes

Jane PortmanExecutive Director - Adults & ChildrenDeputy Chief Executive

2

Building a Better Bournemouth

Tel: 01202456104

DCFollow us on social mediabournemouth.gov.uk

3

rook, phil j. - whatdotheyknow

Documents