210813 DraftPerformanceCttee_Minutes

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PER­FORM­ANCE COM­MIT­TEE MEET­ING of THE CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY held via Lifes­ize on 13 August 2021 at 3.00pm

PRESENT Wil­li­am Mun­ro (Chair) Peter Argyle Janet Hunter Doug McAdam Xan­der McDade – Joined half way through meet­ing Anne Rae Mac­don­ald Wil­lie McKenna

In Attend­ance: Dav­id Camer­on, Dir­ect­or of Cor­por­ate Ser­vices Grant Moir, CEO Kate Christie, Head of Organ­isa­tion­al Devel­op­ment Vicky Walk­er, Gov­ernance and Report­ing Man­ager Mar­garet Smith, PA to CEO and Convener

Apo­lo­gies: Danie Ral­ph, Fin­ance Manager

Wel­come and Apologies

1. The Con­vener wel­comed every­one to the first meet­ing of Per­form­ance Committee.

Declar­a­tion of Interests

1. No Interests were declared

Mat­ters Arising

1. There were no mat­ters arising.

Elec­tion of Com­mit­tee Vice-Chair (Oral Presentation)

1. The Chair intro­duced the sub­ject which asked the Com­mit­tee to dis­cuss and agree the Elec­tion of a Vice Chair.
2. The Per­form­ance Com­mit­tee dis­cussed the sub­ject and made the fol­low­ing com­ments and obser­va­tions: a) Doug McAdam was nom­in­ated for the pos­i­tion of Vice Chair by Anne Rae Mac­don­ald. b) Janet Hunter seconded the nomination.
3. The Chair con­cluded that: a) As there were no oth­er nom­in­a­tions Doug McAdam be appoin­ted as Vice Chair of the Com­mit­tee. b) Doug McAdam accep­ted the role.
4. The Per­form­ance Com­mit­tee approved the Elec­tion of Doug McAdam as Vice Chair of the Com­mit­tee. The Chair exten­ded the Com­mit­tees con­grat­u­la­tions to DMcA on his appointment
5. Action: i. Doug McAdam was appoin­ted as Vice Chair.

Com­mit­tee Terms of Ref­er­ence (Paper 1)

1. Dav­id Camer­on, Dir­ect­or of Cor­por­ate Ser­vices, intro­duced the paper which asked the Com­mit­tee to: a) Con­sider the Terms of Ref­er­ence for the Per­form­ance Com­mit­tee and to dis­cuss the work of the Com­mit­tee over the com­ing year; and b) Con­sider what inform­a­tion or sup­port the Com­mit­tee might find use­ful to aid them in their work.
2. The Per­form­ance Com­mit­tee dis­cussed the paper and made the fol­low­ing com­ments and obser­va­tions: a) DMCA – asked about Staff in attend­ance at the meet­ing. Should the Heads of Depart­ments for areas being dis­cussed be at meet­ings as a mat­ter of course? b) DC con­firmed that should there be a need for Staff mem­bers to sup­port dis­cus­sions they would be invited to spe­cif­ic meet­ings. This was expec­ted to be in spe­cif­ic, excep­tion­al cir­cum­stances as papers from pro­ject and pro­gramme boards should be clear and the role of the Com­mit­tee was not to re-exam­ine or repeat the gov­ernance work already under­taken by these boards. Rather the Com­mit­tee would con­sider the rami­fic­a­tions and impacts on the Author­ity. Staff

should only be there if there is a need to assist the Com­mit­tee on spe­cif­ic points of significance.

c) Committee role – should there be parameters around questions raised by the Board. No more specific parameters expected to be required as ToR broad enough to cover performance areas which are delegated to Committee by the Board.
d) Commitment to review effectiveness of Committee structure at end of year. Generic section of all ToR for Committees outlines the necessity of respective Committees to keep an eye on their effectiveness.
e) Committee will have formed its own work plan so how to control any additional work which comes to the Committee. SMT would advise Board and Committee on staff capacity which may impact work that can be undertaken by Committee. Members/Senior Officers need to keep an eye on this.
f) Specific responsibilities – Committee to ensure that performance levels are met by programme staff. Forward looking aspect of design of programme outcomes and monitoring arrangements covered in ToR Point C. Performance objectives also covered in this area. Committee would check to see that a clear pathway is established by Senior Officers in design of programmes / projects to be clear what success will look like.
g) Nature of work of the Committee similar to Audit and Risk Committee so ToR very similar of the Committee in reviewing effectiveness of systems and reporting in place, and of tracking outcomes and achievements, which would be done in parallel to A&R Committee.
h) Need to be careful that Committees do not end up duplicating work being done by staff and Boards within the projects and programmes while Committee need to be satisfied that the work is being done properly.
i) DC asked to clarify "not looking to replicate the work of the Programme Board". DC pointed out that Programme Boards are to deliver the key funding objectives of the Programme to the satisfaction of the programme and external funders. Committee role is to look at activity and to seek assurance that the intended outcomes had been achieved and to take a cross reference from those activities to ensure on behalf of the CNPA that the delivery is not posing any unexpected issues to the Authority and that there are no risks which will impact the Authority and also that objectives and outcomes are being met.
j) Projects staff would do quarterly reports which would be taken to the Committee to allow members to ensure that they are content, on behalf of the Authority and its expectations, with the direction of work being done.
k) Committee can review their performance after the first two meetings to ensure that they are on the right track.
l) Is there a direct line between the Programme Board and the Performance Committee to iron out any issues which might take place? No, there is no direct governance link. Performance Committee is a Park Authority focused

Com­mit­tee. Any risks they might want looked at should be dis­cussed with Seni­or Officers who can then route appro­pri­ate action requests into the rel­ev­ant Pro­gramme Boards and teams.

m) Dialogue with Programme Board Partners – no specific dialogue around Committees. Committee is an evolution of the Park Authority governance arrangements and therefore not a significant change of circumstances for the projects and programmes which are already operating within the umbrella of the Authority.

XM joined the meeting.

n) Considered that the Committee Remit had much more purpose now that it was understood that it should concentrate on performance in respect of the Authority over all the Programme Projects. Makes the role more manageable.

1. The Chair con­cluded that: a) The role of the com­mit­tee would become clear­er as meet­ings were held. b) Staff attend­ing – list was not con­clus­ive as staff would attend as and when required. c) Committee’s role would be to cross check any con­sequences for Author­ity. d) There is clar­ity on set­ting object­ives of the Com­mit­tee e) Committee’s object­ives would be reviewed after first two meetings. .
2. The Per­form­ance Com­mit­tee approved the Terms of Ref­er­ence for the Per­form­ance Com­mit­tee with no actions.
3. Action: i. None.

Sched­ule of Busi­ness for Year Ahead (Oral Presentation)

1. Dav­id Camer­on, Dir­ect­or of Cor­por­ate Ser­vices intro­duced the sub­ject which looked to agree a sched­ule of busi­ness for the year ahead.
2. The Per­form­ance Com­mit­tee dis­cussed the Sched­ule and made the fol­low­ing com­ments and obser­va­tions: a) The sched­ule of busi­ness – Com­mit­tee would map against the report­ing of the Key pro­grammes to be covered as part of the busi­ness. b) 29^th Oct meet­ing would expect to get an update of:

i. Her­it­age Hori­zons programme

    ii. Cairngorms Caper Project
    iii. Cairngorms LEADER Programme
    iv. Badenoch Great Place Project – may come to October meeting but if not will go to next meeting.
c) Heritage Horizons and Cairngorms Caper Project would be standing items for each meetings.
d) Glenlivet and Tomintoul Project had already been finalised so would not come to Committee.
e) Peatlands Restoration Programme – should this be included? DC to look into taking this to the Committee particularly with regard to delivery of intended areas of restoration and will add into the schedule.
f) Referrals to the Committee from the Board will require to be worked into the schedule.
g) Timing of schedule will need to be monitored. Key / time critical issues can be picked up by way of an extra meeting being set up outwith the normal schedule of meetings.
h) Park Board schedule is to be between Committees so this will allow for any items to be referred by Board prior to preparation of agenda items/papers for Committees.
i) JH asked how the Committees framework would look like in terms of the output of the Committee.
j) DC replied that there was a Dashboard which CNPA Board received twice a year which showed the status of delivery of the corporate objectives. This Corporate Performance Dashboard could be used as a reporting tool. DC to look to take this forward and to see how best to summarise the workings/outcomes of the Committee.
k) Specific Responsibilities in Section C of ToR – could this duplicate the work of the Resources Committee? Resources Committee will look at budgets and assess deployment of financial resources towards the Programmes. Performance Committee will look at overall way that resources are deployed and whether the Committee feel that resources could be better used. Performance Committee role therefore more of a qualitative process than a quantitive one.
l) Member requested an update on Heritage Horizons Project – GM updated the Committee. Inception meeting will be held on 19th Aug. Once feedback and approval of NHLF had been received then update will be given to Project Board. NHLF will allocate a Business Manager and mentor to CNPA. Performance Committee will be used as a sounding board and to help with problem solving. GM will send an email to Performance Committee after the meeting to update them.

1. The Chair con­cluded that: a) Indic­a­tion of what to expect for future after first two meet­ings had taken place. b) Clar­ity on dif­fer­ence between Com­mit­tees had been out­lined. c) DC to look at way in which the decisions of the Com­mit­tee would be repor­ted to CNPA Board.
2. The Per­form­ance Com­mit­tee approved the Sched­ule of Busi­ness for the Year Ahead with the fol­low­ing actions:
3. Action: i. DC to look at the cur­rent Per­form­ance Dash­board to see if it can be used as a report­ing tool going forward.

AOCB

1. No oth­er business.

Date of Next Meeting

1. The next meet­ing of the Per­form­ance Com­mit­tee 29 Octo­ber 2021 via Lifes­ize (all Com­mit­tees to be held on the same day so will remain via Lifesize)
2. Request for the Com­mit­tee meet­ings to be rotated so that Per­form­ance Com­mit­tee did not always come last in the day. This to be dis­cussed at next Gov­ernance Com­mit­tee meeting.
3. The meet­ing fin­ished at 15:50 hours.