Decision

1. 1

The Committee received a report of the Chief Operating Officer providing:

·       An updated overview of the purpose and ambition of Future Sheffield for the city.

·       A summary of the scale, impact and complexity of the programme.

·       An update on progress across the four Target Operating Model layers.

The report explained that Future Sheffield is the Council’s whole-organisation transformation programme. It aims to make the Council work better for Sheffield by improving access to services, strengthening prevention, using digital and data more effectively, supporting staff with clearer ways of working, and making better use of money, people, buildings, contracts and partnerships. The report  should be read alongside the Medium-Term Financial Strategy report, which contains the detailed financial position and considered earlier in this meeting.

1. 2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Strategy and Resources Policy Committee:-

(a) notes the current progress of the Future Sheffield transformation programme and its role in delivering the Council’s Target Operating Model, Council Plan and Medium-Term Financial Strategy;

(b) notes that Future Sheffield is moving from design into implementation, with continued focus required on delivery, benefits realisation, risk management, learning during delivery, and the capacity needed to deliver change safely and effectively;

(c) notes that Strategy and Resources Policy Committee retains overall strategic oversight of Future Sheffield and its alignment with the Council Plan and MTFS;

(d) notes that Finance and Performance Policy Committee has a distinct role in financial and performance oversight, including in-year budget monitoring, savings assurance, delivery confidence and financial risk;

(e) notes that other Policy Committees will continue to have an appropriate role in relation to Future Sheffield activity within their respective service and policy areas, so that service-specific design, delivery, risks and implications are considered through the right governance route; and

(f) notes the continued importance of clear officer and Member oversight as Future Sheffield moves into implementation, including reporting through the relevant Policy Committees, all-Member briefings, officer governance through the Future Sheffield Board and continued oversight of agreed savings, risks, benefits and mitigations.

1. 3

Reasons for Decision

1. 3.1

The report provides an update on the Future Sheffield transformation programme as it moves into implementation.

Future Sheffield remains essential to delivering:

• The Council’s Target Operating Model.

• Improved outcomes for residents and communities.

• A better working environment for staff.

• More joined-up and efficient services.

• Long-term financial sustainability.

The case for Future Sheffield is clear: the Council cannot meet rising demand, improve outcomes for residents or secure financial sustainability by working as it has before. The programme has built strong foundations, but the next phase will require clear priorities, strong leadership, continued oversight, active learning during delivery and sufficient capacity to turn design into lasting change to deliver the best for Sheffield.

1. 4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

1. 4.1

Alternative Option 1: Do nothing

The Council could choose not to implement the Target Operating Model and Future Sheffield transformation programme. This option is rejected because it would not address rising demand, financial pressure, duplication, inefficiency or inconsistent customer experience. Not continuing with the programme would limit the Council’s ability to work better with communities and partners across Sheffield and not provide the level of services required for residents.

1. 4.2

Alternative Option 2: Service-by-service improvement

The Council could allow individual services to develop separate improvement plans as the main organising approach for transformation. This option is rejected as the overarching model because it would not deliver the One Council approach required and would risk maintaining duplication, hand-offs and fragmented experiences for residents and partners. This does not mean that a service lens is inappropriate. There will be circumstances where looking carefully at an individual service, statutory function or operational pathway is necessary and important. The distinction is that service-level work should sit within the wider Target Operating Model and whole-council approach, rather than becoming a set of disconnected service-by-service changes.

1. 4.3

Alternative Option 3: Savings-only approach

The Council could focus only on short-term savings. This option is rejected because it would not address the root causes of demand and inefficiency and would risk undermining long-term service quality and financial sustainability.