The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER 3
Integrity

We found performance in this area to be very good, having major strengths.

There were high standards of conduct expected and delivered by the board and staff of TPS. The recruitment, induction and development of board members and staff were firmly based on the code of conduct for the organisation and obligations under charity law. We found very good systems, policies and procedures were in place to ensure smooth and secure running of the organisation which avoided the need for over involvement of board members in operational detail. The SWIA auditor and external auditors found that there were clear financial reporting structures. Sound systems were in place to enable the board to recognise potential risks to the organisation. The recruitment of staff reflected the organisation's commitment to its values and mission. We found staff to be professional and well trained.

There are high standards of conduct and probity

The Turning Point Scotland public website states that it " provides person centred services to adults with a range of complex needs. We learn from services and service users and seek to influence social policy". Board members of TPS had overall responsibility for upholding the integrity of the organisation. A board must oversee the activities of an organisation and make sure it achieves its overall mission, whilst protecting its assets. We found board members to be committed to the organisation and that they took these responsibilities very seriously.

There was good evidence of compliance with relevant charity legislation and statutes. TPS is registered with the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator and submitted annual accounts to them. It is also registered with the Inland Revenue as a charity. TPS is a legal company registered with Companies House, to which it also made annual submissions. TPS board members do not receive any remuneration for their contribution to the organisation, being unpaid volunteers. The board's remit and composition was appropriately guided by a clear Memorandum and Articles of Association. Other relevant policies also existed for the board, which included a whistle-blowing procedure, declaration of conflict of interest and a scheme of delegation.

All board members we met were very aware of their levels of responsibility and accountability to the organisation. They had all received training to ensure a knowledge base on governance and charitable organisations. Those we spoke to were positive about the level of induction they had received from TPS. There was a clear code of conduct for board members and all those we met were familiar with it. Furthermore, board members clearly articulated their roles and responsibilities to the review team. There were also clear procedures for managing potential conflicts of interest for board members. We were provided with good examples of situations where conflicts of interest may have arisen and how they had been effectively managed by the individual board members and the organisation.

We think the board recruitment process was thorough. Furthermore, newer board members recalled it being a positive experience. The time commitment, professionalism and responsibilities of board members were made clear. Procedures were in place to carry out disclosure and reference checks of prospective board members and there were appropriate procedures for the election of new board members.

The chair of the board had recently introduced 'board annual review and development' ( BARD) meetings. These were designed to ensure each board member underwent an annual review, during which their contributions to the board, personal development and responsibilities over the past year were reviewed. These meetings were conducted by the chair. The chair's performance is reviewed by the vice chair. Board members we met thought this was an appropriate initiative and had been helpful. We were told of examples where areas for improvement or development had been raised at these meetings and how action plans had been developed as a consequence. We found this level of board scrutiny and self reflection to be positive. We also think it provided the necessary path for addressing any disciplinary or conduct issues that could arise with respect to board members.

Appropriate internal controls exist

The board's committee structure allowed for a separate consideration of organisational risks matters, outside full board meetings. The audit committee was established in September 2005. Prior to the establishment of the audit committee a finance report went to the chair and vice chair each month. The remit of the audit committee went beyond financial matters and included the auditing of all processes, which included the risk management process. It was clear from the remit that the audit committee did not 'own' risks; rather it had responsibility for reviewing and recommending matters to the board for approval.

There was a range of financial processes in place, with clear levels of delegated responsibility to managers. There was a scheme of delegation which made clear what the CE could authorise in terms of expenditure, levels of authority and specific decision making powers. The CE was required to report to the board on these delegations. In our review of board papers, we found good evidence of this in practice. The scheme of delegation also listed what key functions could not be delegated to managers from the board; for example, agreeing or ratifying all policies and decisions on matters which might create significant risk to the organisation, financial or otherwise. Board members, staff and auditors expressed good satisfaction with these processes.

TPS had recently developed a system to alert the board and managers of potential financial problems within services following an experience of its withdrawing from a large contract. The process and actions leading to the termination of this contract are detailed in chapter six: critical decision making. The policy operated in two stages. The board was informed of all services operating at a deficit in the first instance. Staff were required to explain this deficit. If it was determined that the deficit was non-resolvable, the service would become known as 'financially failing' and action plans for addressing these were required by the board. We found that key staff were familiar with this procedure and saw evidence of it in practice, at the board meeting we attended and in meetings with staff. TPS are to be commended that such a process was in place and that possible problems were considered at an early stage and were subject to ongoing scrutiny by the board. We noted that for each service operating with a deficit, there was a clear management plan covered by the organisation's reserves.

There was a clear code of conduct for TPS staff. Almost all (97%) of respondents to our staff survey agreed they are aware of the code of conduct for staff and it governed their practice. When we met with staff during the fieldwork, they were clear about the purpose of the organisation and all agreed with the code of conduct. Staff recalled how they had been asked about personal values during job interviews and how they had received training on organisational values during their inductions. Those staff involved in recruitment confirmed how the organisation placed a high level of importance on appointing staff who demonstrated respect for the core values of TPS. There were clear staff policies and procedures in place in relation to whistle blowing, equality, and harassment. Staff we met were familiar with these polices and what action to take should they be concerned about any of these areas.

External stakeholders we met told us they had confidence in TPS staff and found them to be well trained. Stakeholders told us that they were confident in the quality of staff employed and that the organisation would respond quickly to areas of concern. Some noted concerns about high levels of sickness and indicated this was something, as purchasers, they watched carefully and took into consideration when reviewing services. The board and senior management acknowledged that absence rates had been too high and provided us with clear evidence of how this had recently been addressed.

The board was given information on new contracts and tenders which were being submitted. Tenders were discussed and agreement reached on whether these should be pursued - not all bids were given board support. For example, the board decided that extending its services to young people was not compatible with the existing range of provision.

Most local authority staff we spoke to were positive about the quality of the services delivered. However discussion with some stakeholders gave a mixed picture on the organisation's ability to compete for future tenders. TPS had a system for reviewing unsuccessful tenders as part of its development schedule. Furthermore, reasons for unsuccessful tenders were regularly reported back to the board.

A risk management process and comprehensive risk register were in place. The financial risks involved in tendering exercises were considered at the time of application. Financial risks were well monitored and external auditors considered that the board gave well thought out responses to risk and any issues raised by them. An internal audit process has been developed to increase scrutiny of local services. These internal audits included a review of petty cash, invoices, expenses, cheque requisitions, back up paperwork and journals. The SWIA auditor on this review team agreed that financial risks and processes were well monitored by TPS.

A risk register had been developed to reflect the risks for the organisation. The board received monthly updates of all risks and a formal report at all board meetings. However, some board members commented that particularly in relation to health and safety that more information was sometimes required to better inform decisions. We noted that the board received health and safety reports at every board meeting as a standing item. The organisation had established a health and safety committee that had received comments similar to the ones found by this review. This committee had been looking at ways to improve the information provided to the board and it was due to produce a report outlining how this would be achieved shortly after the conclusion of this review.

There were also appropriate levels of management of health and safety of staff. For example, there was a lone working policy. Staff had access to mobile phones and personal alarms if the job required visits to service users' homes. Staff commented that there were good risk assessment processes in place.

We found good processes in the management of risk for service users. One stakeholder described the organisation as leading the way in financial management of service users' affairs. Another local authority described how the organisation took on a case where considerable risks were identified and worked in partnership to meet the individual's needs. Complaints were dealt with appropriately and providers were kept informed of progress and outcomes.

« Previous | Contents | Next »